Hacker News Reader

Comment by lukas099 | Hacker News Reader

> Since the first guidelines were published in 1980, we’ve been told to fear fat and instead consume about half of all calories as carbohydrates. The current guidelines recommend up to 10 percent of calories as added sugar and six servings of grains daily, including three as refined grains.

The guidelines don’t say you should eat sugar and refined grains. They say, if you eat them, you should really limit them to 10% of calories and half your grains at most.

They also don’t say to “fear fat”; that’s just completely made up. They do say to limit saturated fat but this is evidence-based, as are benefits of whole grains.

View on HN

I also think it’s telling that the guidelines for added sugar and saturated fats are exactly the same: limit them to no more than 10% of your calories. But the authors frame this completely differently when it’s about sat fat (“unfounded hostility”) than when it’s about added sugars (“guidelines recommend up to 10 percent“)

No, guidelines say that at least 50% of energy should come from carbohydrates. This ratio is exactly what the article is criticizing. And of course, carbs are converted to sugar in the end.

Carbohydrates from whole grains are different from added sugars and have completely different effects on the body.

This is not what the article tells, this is what you assume. I agree that they emphasize sugar and refined grains, but they also criticize high carbohydrates in general.

> Chronic high carbohydrate consumption — especially of refined grains and added sugars — drives obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other metabolic disorders.

I never denied that they are criticising the high carb recommendation, I'm just saying that is irrelevant to my original comment.

Well I think it’s quite relevant to your comment, because the fear of fat (hence their reduction) lead to the 50% carb recommendation.

I've read the guidelines. They don't say to "fear fat". They say to "limit foods and beverages higher in added sugars, saturated fat, and sodium, and limit alcoholic beverages." The 50% number comes from the fact that the guidelines recommend eating lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and non-red-meat protein foods.

Yes and exactly this recommendation is criticized in the linked article.

The result from a decrease in fat consumption is that the carbohydrates (or proteins) need to be increased. The energy needs to come from somewhere.

So you agree that noone is telling anyone to "fear fat".

Well I don’t think this is the case, typically people are told to eat low fat and high carb. And I agree to this sentiment, as long as your carbohydrate amount is high, it is better to avoid fat. However it seems to me that when reducing carbs way below 50%, to, let’s say, less than 5%, then it’s possible to increase fat.

The direct quote that I pasted is clearly criticizing the refined grains and added sugars recommendations as well as the 50% carb recommendation.

The article is making deliberate conflations for clickbait. Consuming whole food sources that lean higher on carbs won't lead to obesity. Vegetables are not calorie-dense and are packed with fiber, which is almost as satiating as protein. Whole grains have both protein and insoluble fiber. Fiber prevents insulin spikes.

You're not going to be at risk of metabolic syndrome with a diet composition akin to a traditional okinawan diet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com