EDMW got dietitian or nutritionist?

[entry-level]

If you cannot comprehend a basic fact that evidences precedes mechanisms in scientific studies, i doubt about your critical thinking skills. You see again, you claim something is rubbish and cannot prove your point, further establishing the fact your are at the bottom of the debate pyramid.

You cannot extrapolate biochemistry or physiological pathways to actually causing diseases or benefits to the whole organism: human.

Example: Omega 6

Omega 6 is pro inflammatory because omega 6 is converted into arachnidonic acid which is then converted into other pro inflammatory eicosanoids like prostagladins.

Does this means omega 6 causes inflammation since there is a cellular mechanism to do so?

Omega 6 also gets converted into anti-inflammatory molecules like epoxyeicosatrienoic acid.

So does this means omega 6 prevents inflammation now since there is a cellular mechanism to do so?

You cannot tell until you do a control study on human. Not by extrapolation.

To add on:
Human man are the only meat eating animals that has seminal vesicles, all other animals who has seminal vesicles are vegetarians. What happens if a mother eats a lot of meat? the baby grows in a very estrogenic environment and the male baby will have smaller penis and testicles. Some will even develop penis hypospadia or

To add on, human sailors once feared a disease call Scurvy.

This is because human cannot produce vitamin C endogenously. This means we must obtain our source of vitamin C from our food - vegetables or fruits.

This makes human very much dependent on plant food source for our health.

Animals like Dogs or Tiger can make their own vitamin C. To think we are in the same category as them is not evidence based.

 

[entry-level]

When you have cancer, you can listen to the doctors and go thru chemo and drugs to kill everything. Hoping that you still survive.

Thanks the the link. However, I think you can't appreciate the cohort study. Did you read the methodology?

Yes i understand this study very well.

I can understand not many people understand epidemiology study well as it is a complex subject.

To simplify, epidemiology study got its limitations, just like most research. However, this does not discount the result of epidemiology Study just like it does not discount the result of any other good research which also has their own sets of limitations.

In case you are not aware, it is through epidemiology study that we found out smoking causes cancer and CVD.

 

[entry-level]

I have been emphasizing this point many times.

I think some lazy people are adopting keto or carnivore because they don't want to move more. So the easiest way is to demonize complex carbs without exercising.

It’s a whole package actually.

We shouldn’t be using a tunnel vision to view lifespan or healthspan.

 

[audiovideo]

edmw bbfa ah gart anything deep fried, sweet and salty shiok means healthy

 

[rogze79]

Yes i understand this study very well.

I can understand not many people understand epidemiology study well as it is a complex subject.

To simplify, epidemiology study got its limitations, just like most research. However, this does not discount the result of epidemiology Study just like it does not discount the result of any other good research which also has their own sets of limitations.

In case you are not aware, it is through epidemiology study that we found out smoking causes cancer and CVD.

Methods​

Diet was assessed by validated food-frequency questionnaires and updated every four years.

How can a good scientist takes these results seriously? At the core, one do not have accurate data to begin with.

Filling up ffq every 4 years? We can ask everyone what they ate last month, do you think you can get answers?

 

[Checkyrmed]

So which study shows complex carbs causing chronically elevated insulin levels ?

@Checkyrmed

That repeated question completely misses the point. Chronic insulin elevation is not caused by a single food or meal but by repeated dietary patterns over years. Diets high in carbohydrates, even complex carbs, especially when paired with excess omega-6 fats, drive persistently elevated insulin. Large cohort studies and meta-analyses consistently show that high-glycemic or high-carbohydrate diets are linked to higher fasting insulin, insulin resistance, and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring clearly demonstrates repeated blood sugar spikes on a high-carb diet, while low-carb diets produce almost no spikes at all.

Randomized controlled trials show that lowering carbohydrate intake reduces fasting insulin and improves insulin sensitivity even without weight loss. Modern diets, loaded with carbs, seed oils, and processed foods, keep insulin elevated decades before blood glucose rises.

Asking for a single study where complex carbs alone cause chronic hyperinsulinemia ignores reality. Decades of metabolic damage take years to reverse and may never be fully repaired. It is the combination of frequent carb intake, high omega-6, and modern lifestyle factors that sustains hyperinsulinemia, not one isolated food.

 

[entry-level]

Methods​

Diet was assessed by validated food-frequency questionnaires and updated every four years.

How can a good scientist takes these results seriously? At the core, one do not have accurate data to begin with.

Filling up ffq every 4 years? We can ask everyone what they ate last month, do you think you can get answers?

Actually good scientist understand the need and usefulness and level of accuracy of food-frequency questionnaires on a large cohort study.

Your misunderstanding of food-frequency questionnaires is actually very common.

Most people cannot accurately remember what they exactly ate for dinner one week ago.

However, it will be wrong to jump to conclusion that food-frequency questionnaires are therefore inaccurate for scientific use. (You might want to read more into food-frequency questionnaires uses in research?)

Most people can actually - with relative accuracy - estimate the frequency of meat they consume over a week or a month.

There is a difference. And this difference is sufficient to produce data for research.

Like how often do you smoke per month? Vs how many sticks did you smoke 2 days ago? These 2 are very different questions with very different outcomes of accuracy.

Hope you understand why this large cohort study is actually a very useful study on red meat and its possible impact on health.

 

[entry-level]

That repeated question completely misses the point. Chronic insulin elevation is not caused by a single food or meal but by repeated dietary patterns over years. Diets high in carbohydrates, even complex carbs, especially when paired with excess omega-6 fats, drive persistently elevated insulin. Large cohort studies and meta-analyses consistently show that high-glycemic or high-carbohydrate diets are linked to higher fasting insulin, insulin resistance, and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring clearly demonstrates repeated blood sugar spikes on a high-carb diet, while low-carb diets produce almost no spikes at all.

Randomized controlled trials show that lowering carbohydrate intake reduces fasting insulin and improves insulin sensitivity even without weight loss. Modern diets, loaded with carbs, seed oils, and processed foods, keep insulin elevated decades before blood glucose rises.

Asking for a single study where complex carbs alone cause chronic hyperinsulinemia ignores reality. Decades of metabolic damage take years to reverse and may never be fully repaired. It is the combination of frequent carb intake, high omega-6, and modern lifestyle factors that sustains hyperinsulinemia, not one isolated food.

It’s is correct to state that chronic insulin elevation causes insulin resistance and can lead to T2D.

But it is not correct to say that glucose spikes from a high carb diet causes T2D.

In a healthy person, a high carb diet leads to a sharp but short glucose spike due to insulin. Once the glucose level drop back to normal, the insulin level decreases back to normal as well. Therefore, there is no chronic insulin elevation.

But if a healthy person consume multiple meals of high carb diet within a day and continue to do so for weeks and months, then yes, the body will constantly be exposed to glucose and insulin which is how you get chronic insulin elevation.

The key to avoiding T2D is to avoid high frequency, high excess amount of carb in our life.

We should not fear monger normal amount of carb or omega 6 or fat or protein intake.

 

[Checkyrmed]

It’s is correct to state that chronic insulin elevation causes insulin resistance and can lead to T2D.

But it is not correct to say that glucose spikes from a high carb diet causes T2D.

In a healthy person, a high carb diet leads to a sharp but short glucose spike due to insulin. Once the glucose level drop back to normal, the insulin level decreases back to normal as well. Therefore, there is no chronic insulin elevation.

But if a healthy person consume multiple meals of high carb diet within a day and continue to do so for weeks and months, then yes, the body will constantly be exposed to glucose and insulin which is how you get chronic insulin elevation.

The key to avoiding T2D is to avoid high frequency, high excess amount of carb in our life.

We should not fear monger normal amount of carb or omega 6 or fat or protein intake.

That reasoning oversimplifies how metabolism and insulin work. Even in a “healthy” person, repeated glucose spikes from high-carb meals throughout the day do not simply return insulin to baseline harmlessly. Continuous glucose monitoring shows that high-carb diets produce frequent spikes, keeping insulin elevated for much longer than assumed. Over months and years, this repeated hyperinsulinemia leads to insulin resistance decades before blood glucose becomes abnormal.

The hidden population with elevated insulin is extremely high. Most people have chronically elevated insulin but are never tested, and they continue consuming carbs on top of excessive omega-6 intake, silently driving metabolic stress.

A person can choose to consume lower-carb meals to avoid these insulin spikes entirely, protecting their metabolic health. Prevention of type 2 diabetes requires actively minimizing insulin surges, limiting omega-6 overload, and prioritizing fats and proteins that support metabolic balance. Ignoring these realities is dangerously misleading.

 

[rogze79]

Actually good scientist understand the need and usefulness and level of accuracy of food-frequency questionnaires on a large cohort study.

Your misunderstanding of food-frequency questionnaires is actually very common.

Most people cannot accurately remember what they exactly ate for dinner one week ago.

However, it will be wrong to jump to conclusion that food-frequency questionnaires are therefore inaccurate for scientific use. (You might want to read more into food-frequency questionnaires uses in research?)

Most people can actually - with relative accuracy - estimate the frequency of meat they consume over a week or a month.

There is a difference. And this difference is sufficient to produce data for research.

Like how often do you smoke per month? Vs how many sticks did you smoke 2 days ago? These 2 are very different questions with very different outcomes of accuracy.

Hope you understand why this large cohort study is actually a very useful study on red meat and its possible impact on health.

It is precisely the inaccuracy of data in such studies that led to the kind of policy guidelines we have today.

You just have to look at what was classified as unprocessed red meat.

Using of multivariate analysis? It's just pure statistical plays based on researchers judgement. How objective can it be? Not to mention the short comings of this technique.

Dun forget simple confounders such as healthy user bias and their estimation of food intake every 4 years.

How can such study be useful? When the researchers have to massage their ways to find associations.

 

[randyap]

Methods​

Diet was assessed by validated food-frequency questionnaires and updated every four years.

How can a good scientist takes these results seriously? At the core, one do not have accurate data to begin with.

Filling up ffq every 4 years? We can ask everyone what they ate last month, do you think you can get answers?

This is where you are totally lost on what epidemiology is about. The questionnaires are never intended to get perfect answers. They assist to spot a general trend with a big data to smoothen out the general accuracies. I guess you cannot wrap your head around this concept also. If you can't perhaps you can think about how is it the case that all the different studies, pointed to the same thing. If inaccurate they should be variations in the results in different studies.

 

[Mecisteus]

That repeated question completely misses the point. Chronic insulin elevation is not caused by a single food or meal but by repeated dietary patterns over years. Diets high in carbohydrates, even complex carbs, especially when paired with excess omega-6 fats, drive persistently elevated insulin. Large cohort studies and meta-analyses consistently show that high-glycemic or high-carbohydrate diets are linked to higher fasting insulin, insulin resistance, and increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring clearly demonstrates repeated blood sugar spikes on a high-carb diet, while low-carb diets produce almost no spikes at all.

Randomized controlled trials show that lowering carbohydrate intake reduces fasting insulin and improves insulin sensitivity even without weight loss. Modern diets, loaded with carbs, seed oils, and processed foods, keep insulin elevated decades before blood glucose rises.

Asking for a single study where complex carbs alone cause chronic hyperinsulinemia ignores reality. Decades of metabolic damage take years to reverse and may never be fully repaired. It is the combination of frequent carb intake, high omega-6, and modern lifestyle factors that sustains hyperinsulinemia, not one isolated food.

You are still stuck with the notion that all carbs are equal. And every carb behave exactly the same.

You purposely ignored the underlined bold ?

A diet high in both carbohydrates and excess omega-6 fats can increase the risk of health issues like inflammation, weight gain, and cardiovascular problems, especially when omega-6s are from refined sources and the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is unbalanced. Excess carbs, particularly refined ones, and a high omega-6 intake can lead to an elevated, unbalanced omega-6/omega-3 ratio, which promotes pro-inflammatory responses, insulin resistance, and contributes to weight gain and disease.

It’s a whole package actually.

We shouldn’t be using a tunnel vision to view lifespan or healthspan.

Well I agree with you its the whole package.

My observations are people are less physically active looking at the people around me.

I think it's fair assumptions that humans can be lazy and like to take shortcuts.

Eating a well balanced diet + exercising OR
Eating keto, carnivore, LCHF + no exercise

The latter strategy is much easier to adopt when trying to fix any metabolic or chronic health issues.

 

[rogze79]

This is where you are totally lost on what epidemiology is about. The questionnaires are never intended to get perfect answers. They assist to spot a general trend with a big data to smoothen out the general accuracies. I guess you cannot wrap your head around this concept also. If you can't perhaps you can think about how is it the case that all the different studies, pointed to the same thing. If inaccurate they should be variations in the results in different studies.

You should just keep quiet if you do not know what you are saying. Nobody will ever doubt you are stupid.

 

[AlchemistJ19]

Good debate, but dun so sore la.

I recall having similar debate with my MLM friends. It's like who can Google more and who have more facts to counter. Actually everything got study to counter or support le. In the end I never buy any products but got some free samples instead.

 

[Raitei-Q]

This is again

Tons of research papers ranking avocado as a super fruit.

Now you have 1 special EDMW who tries to claim negative.

if i remember right people who are from LCHF type of diet do promote this fruit to be a super fruit to help hit daily fat needs

 

[Checkyrmed]

You are still stuck with the notion that all carbs are equal. And every carb behave exactly the same.

You purposely ignored the underlined bold ?

A diet high in both carbohydrates and excess omega-6 fats can increase the risk of health issues like inflammation, weight gain, and cardiovascular problems, especially when omega-6s are from refined sources and the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is unbalanced. Excess carbs, particularly refined ones, and a high omega-6 intake can lead to an elevated, unbalanced omega-6/omega-3 ratio, which promotes pro-inflammatory responses, insulin resistance, and contributes to weight gain and disease.


Well I agree with you its the whole package.

My observations are people are less physically active looking at the people around me.

I think it's fair assumptions that humans can be lazy and like to take shortcuts.

Eating a well balanced diet + exercising OR
Eating keto, carnivore, LCHF + no exercise

The latter strategy is much easier to adopt when trying to fix any metabolic or chronic health issues.

The argument that complex carbohydrates are harmless completely misses the reality of modern urban living. While complex carbs may have been suitable for tribal or ancestral diets, they are poorly suited for today’s city environment, where processed foods, high omega-6 intake, and environmental pollutants are the norm. Even “healthy” complex carbs contribute to repeated insulin spikes when combined with these factors, silently driving insulin resistance for decades before blood glucose levels rise.

Most people never get tested for insulin and continue consuming high-carb diets while already insulin resistant. Hidden hyperinsulinemia, coupled with excessive omega-6, chronic inflammation, and urban metabolic stress, accelerates obesity, dyslipidemia, and type 2 diabetes. Continuous glucose monitoring shows high-carb diets produce frequent blood sugar spikes, while low-carb, high-fat diets produce almost none. Exercise alone is not enough to offset these insulin spikes.

The most practical approach is to minimize complex carbohydrate intake in modern diets and choose foods that do not spike insulin, support higher HDL, and limit omega-6. LCHF is far more effective than a high-carb diet, whether complex or refined, at preventing chronic metabolic damage that can take decades to reverse.

 

[Raitei-Q]

You are still stuck with the notion that all carbs are equal. And every carb behave exactly the same.

You purposely ignored the underlined bold ?

A diet high in both carbohydrates and excess omega-6 fats can increase the risk of health issues like inflammation, weight gain, and cardiovascular problems, especially when omega-6s are from refined sources and the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is unbalanced. Excess carbs, particularly refined ones, and a high omega-6 intake can lead to an elevated, unbalanced omega-6/omega-3 ratio, which promotes pro-inflammatory responses, insulin resistance, and contributes to weight gain and disease.


Well I agree with you its the whole package.

My observations are people are less physically active looking at the people around me.

I think it's fair assumptions that humans can be lazy and like to take shortcuts.

Eating a well balanced diet + exercising OR
Eating keto, carnivore, LCHF + no exercise

The latter strategy is much easier to adopt when trying to fix any metabolic or chronic health issues.

or just use the currently latest drug - semaglutide, dulaglutide, tirzepatide, etc

but i do like to add if one is at a stage where exercise is impossible and only diet is the only option, 1 can use the above mention drug as an addon to kick start the journey and momentum to start losing weight and stop once the first milestone is achieved ( i do recommend that a doctor is there to monitor the progress as well)

 

[Checkyrmed]

or just use the currently latest drug - semaglutide, dulaglutide, tirzepatide, etc

but i do like to add if one is at a stage where exercise is impossible and only diet is the only option, 1 can use the above mention drug as an addon to kick start the journey and momentum to start losing weight and stop once the first milestone is achieved ( i do recommend that a doctor is there to monitor the progress as well)

Relying on drugs like semaglutide, as a “shortcut” misses the root problem entirely. These medications do not fix the underlying insulin resistance caused by modern diets, excessive omega-6 intake, and frequent blood sugar spikes. They may help with short-term weight loss, but once the drugs are stopped, the underlying metabolic dysfunction remains, and weight regain is common.

Exercise is not always necessary to improve insulin sensitivity, but dietary choices are critical. Choosing foods that do not spike insulin, support higher HDL, and limit omega-6 intake is far more effective for long-term metabolic health. LCHF or low-carb strategies address the cause, not just the symptom. Drugs may temporarily mask the issue, but they are no substitute for correcting the dietary and lifestyle patterns that drive chronic insulin elevation and metabolic disease.

 

[Raitei-Q]

Relying on drugs like semaglutide, as a “shortcut” misses the root problem entirely. These medications do not fix the underlying insulin resistance caused by modern diets, excessive omega-6 intake, and frequent blood sugar spikes. They may help with short-term weight loss, but once the drugs are stopped, the underlying metabolic dysfunction remains, and weight regain is common.

Exercise is not always necessary to improve insulin sensitivity, but dietary choices are critical. Choosing foods that do not spike insulin, support higher HDL, and limit omega-6 intake is far more effective for long-term metabolic health. LCHF or low-carb strategies address the cause, not just the symptom. Drugs may temporarily mask the issue, but they are no substitute for correcting the dietary and lifestyle patterns that drive chronic insulin elevation and metabolic disease.

i think you totally miss the point but is ok.

since you never been in their shoes before, i wouldn't expect you to understand how is like to be in the stage as well as you only harp on to science the theory of it have no idea on how each individual life and environment is like as well.

giving a newbie such information is totally pointless as well, at the end of the day is all about taking in what is essential for one body to operate at a decent level ( for a start). Choosing food that match your needs as well as suited is important as there are food one is not suited for.
what is the point of following a diet that is not maintainable in the first place which would lead one to failure? not that failing isn't good if you use it as a lesson to improve on your next attempt

at the end of the day if you cannot avoid or remove these so call "poisonous food" then learn to reduce them, enjoy life a every once a well will not harm you that much if you already have a "cleaner" diet 80% of the time


exercise itself done right is more beneficial in one's quality of life as well as it addon to overall health, sleep is one of the most important factor as well.

 

[randyap]

You should just keep quiet if you do not know what you are saying. Nobody will ever doubt you are stupid.

Too difficult to comprehend for you, turned ad hominem. You sounds like u got hypertension.