Hacker News Reader

Comment by noondip | Hacker News Reader

The evidence for plant-based, low-fat vegan diets seems more convincing to me. Is there a paleo version of http://nutritionfacts.org - complete with direct links or citations to research supporting the proposed way to eat? I'm not trying to be snarky, but rather genuinely curious what scientific basis this diet really has. The article says we're wise to limit saturated fat intake and increase fibre intake, but isn't that antithetical to eating meat and animal products?

View on HN

If you like nutritionfacts.org, you may be interested to know Greger wrote a book which is well referenced:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Not-Die-Discover-Scientifically/dp...

Also, there was a recent article on Vox talking about why nutrition research is so hard to do:

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/14/10760622/nutrition-science-comp...

And if you have an Android phone, I created an app for the section of the book about the Daily Dozen foods you should be eating every day. Here is a link if you are interested: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.slavick.da...

> The evidence for plant-based, low-fat vegan diets seems more convincing to me.

There are several nutrients you can easily be undersupplied with if you're not watching out really carefully: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veganism#Nutrients

Those can be easily supplied by eating a small amount of meat and other animal products without loosing the benefits of a mostly plant based diet.

Everyone should be mindful about getting all the nutrients they need. Having said that, vegans miss 3 vitamins, regular meat-eaters miss 8.

>regular meat-eaters miss 8

huh?

If i eat everything that a vegan eats plus a serving of meat - how am i missing nutrients that the vegan is not?

or did you actually mean people who have poor eating habits? (who also happen to eat meat)

Parent is probably referring to nutrient deficiency in the general population, which is almost exclusively not vegan. As I recall, the deficiencies are calcium, iodine, vitamin C, vitamin E, fiber, folate, magnesium, and potassium. If you ate everything a vegan did, I'm willing to wager you would be full, and wouldn't be hungry for meat. I think the point is, the plant-based diet is less calorie dense, but more nutrient dense, so one is more likely to develop deficiencies from eating mostly animal products.

Lewis & Clark boatmen all suffered from terrible skin problems after a year eating only wild game. Their Indian guide who stewed up vegetables every evening was fine.

What is your source for this? It directly conflicts with Ambrose's book, which is perhaps the best-researched history of the trip.

Members of the Corps all had a meat ration of 5 lbs. a day (when available) for everyone, including native guides (none of whom was on the whole trip) and Sacagawea.

They would plan campsites to suit Sacagawea so she could get her 'potos' (sp?) which were the plants she cooked for herself?

Here are some references to skin problems:

https://franceshunter.wordpress.com/2012/07/02/scurvy-and-th...

I'm not aware of any one resource like that (though if you like that, you might find examine.com interesting; it's very neutral, and doesn't always hew to the beliefs of any one diet).

Here's one about saturated fat: http://examine.com/faq/is-saturated-fat-bad-for-me/

That said, paleo-ish writers like Chris Kresser do a good job of synthesizing academic papers that lead him to follow a paleo-ish diet. E.g., here's a bunch about red meat: http://chriskresser.com/the-truth-about-red-meat/

Low-fat diets aren't particularly good for you, as you can see by the current generation of unhealthy heart disease-having Americans dutifully following them.

If your macronutrient ratio is going to be high-carb, you at least need a strong culture of small portions like Asians do to keep a precise daily calorie target.

> Low-fat diets aren't particularly good for you, as you can see by the current generation of unhealthy heart disease-having Americans dutifully following them.

I'm not aware of any such cohort. Can you cite any examples of unhealthy low-fat diet populations? Perhaps you could explain what you mean by, "low fat". My own interpretation is fewer than 10% of calories from fat, mostly from unsaturated fat. (Polyunsaturated fat, of course, being the only essential fatty acid for humans, where as mono-unsaturated, saturated and trans fatty acids have no recommended daily amount, as they are unnecessary altogether.)

> If your macronutrient ratio is going to be high-carb, you at least need a strong culture of small portions like Asians do to keep a precise daily calorie target.

So the traditional ~2 billion Chinese people following a mostly plant-based, rice diet (before the advent of Western, high-fat, high-protein foods) were all restricting calories? I find that difficult to fathom.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com