I was recently told by a friend that drinking too much water with meals would interfere with nutrient absorption by diluting your gastric juices. Of course, I’m not just going to take this at face value, but I have been unable to find any research on the topic.
Hey, I was at a gnc and saw a supplement called "alani nu fat burner". I wanted to get advice and see if it actually works. I have purchased other products that have worked for me such as muscle builders.
Edit: I purchased other products that have worked for me and so, I'm thinking based on results I might have luck with this
The ADA recommends a limit of 25 grams of added sugar per day for women and 38 grams for men.
I frequently see this explained as something similar to "sugar is digested very fast, causes a spike in insulin." If that was the reason, wouldn't the amount you can/should have vary based on if you eat it all at once, eat it spread over the day, eat with other foods (I imagine consuming 40g sugar with a giant meal would mean the sugar would take longer to absorb than just the sugar by itself), or eaten with a hypothetical 'shot' of fiber (I hear fruit is fine and not considered 'added sugar' because of the fiber included)?
I've heard the whole - 1 alcoholic drink every day is not as bad as 7 drinks one day each week. Is this not similar?
If the insulin spike isn't the problem, I'm still curious to know if eating the sugar over a period of time or with other food makes a difference.
Any vitamins, minerals, or micronutrients in general that are very good at improving the health of one's skin? This could be through clearing up acne, to reducing inflamation. I'm just concerned with the overall wellness of it and what can possibly be introduced into the diet in order to improve its health.
Not sure if this is allowed within the rules, but I'll give it a go.
There are lots of established so-called experts and nutrition enthusiasts who have come and gone. Some have been extremely influential, involved in studies and published well known books that have influenced others in the way they view nutrition.
Others, more recently have found an audience through scrutinizing older studies and providing new ways of thinking about nutrition.
There are also those that are firmly in one camp or another - either plant-based advocates who typically (but not always) encourage a higher carb, lower fat plant-based lifestyle.
There are others at the opposite end of the scale who encourage a low carb approach or even carnivorous diet.
Then there are the middle-grounders, ones who encourage a balanced or perhaps Mediterranean-style diet.
Some may even fall into the category of encouraging a 'fad diet'.
Names off the top of my head who fall into any of these categories - Ancel Keys, Michael Greger, Gary Taubes, John McDougall, Zoe Harcombe, Aseem Malhotra, T. Colin Campbell, Robert Atkins, Jason Fung, Eric Berg, Dean Ornish, Garth Davis etc. There are many more.
So who do you find the most credible? Preferably examples that don't have a heavy ethical-bias and that have credibility based on health, nutrition and science.
Personally, lately I've found Dr Zoe Harcombe to be very interesting and credible. She leans towards lower carb eating, but doesn't exclude carbs completely. I find her discussions on eating carbs and fats separately to be particularly interesting.
So who do you look up to or associate with the most? Preferably with reasoning.
I've been reading a lot recently about how consuming carbohydrates and fats together in a single meal is potentially the cause of inflammation and ultimately what's driving 'western' health issues including CVD.
To combat that, I've read from various sources and nutrition experts like Dr Zoe Harcombe that in an ideal world people would eat fats and carbohydrates in completely separate meals, ideally as far apart as possible. E.g. a meal 90-100% carbs at lunch, and a meal 90-100% fat for dinner.
Here are few other tidbits of info that potentially back this idea:
The Standard American Diet pretty much always involves meals that are moderate/high in carbs and fats and is well known for being associated with CVD and other diseases.
Every other species on the planet only consumes a single type of macro in a meal - even for omnivorous species. Humans are the only species that intentionally mix macro types to make up a meal (i.e. have both fats and carbs in a single meal sitting).
Advanced Glycation End-products (AGEs) are a thing. Essentially they are produced in the blood when fats and proteins come into contact with sugars. They cause inflammation and ageing. I'm aware that they are also found in foods pre-consumption (mostly animal products), but the main takeaway here is that eating foods high in carbs (sugars) and fats/proteins together increases the risk of high formation of AGEs in the blood.
The often-cited Okinawan population diet (as well as several other long lifespan populations) ate high carbohydrate and low fat, and often not in the same meal. Whilst this also suggests high carb/low fat eating may be beneficial for mortality, it also potentially suggests that not mixing macros heavily is beneficial.
This would also back up both low carb/ketogenic diets and high(er) carb/plant based ways of eating as both being optimal in terms of low inflammation (however this doesn't take into account vitamin and mineral needs in both ways of eating which make be lacking)
So what do you think? Does this concept/WOE have any legs? I'm aware that the Mediterranean Diet to some extent contradicts this.
Essentially the theory is to reduce inflammation as possible be reducing the impact on the body of digesting and biologically processing both fats and carbs at the same time and more strain compared to dealing with a single macro.