Nuts are things you could grow that contain good fats with omega-3s. Purslane, a green, is also a source of omega-3s. Sunflower oil has a pretty good fat profile (still more omega-6 than olive oil, but less than corn and soybean oil).
Nuts might be the hardest thing to grow at home as you would need space and would have to fight off the squirrels. Pick a type that suits your climate (examples, hazelnuts in Oregon, pecans in Georgia, hickory nuts in Indiana).
The problem is the fat profile of modern domestic animals vs. the wild animals our ancestors ate. Fat from domestic animals is high in saturated acids. Fat from wild animals has plenty monosaturated fats and is high in omega-3 fatty acids. The closest we could come these days to a real 'paleo diet' would be very lean meats with plenty of olive oil and nuts plus plenty of fatty fish like salmon and sardines. (Polyunsaturated vegetable fats are high in omega-6 fatty acids, no real help.) The October issue of Discover touches on this in a feature article titled 'The Inuit Paradox.'
Side comment #1: Quite alarmingly, this morning's newspaper front page warned of dioxin contamination if wild game. So even wild game isn't what it used to be.
Side comment #2: I have kind of a problem with the whole low-carb thing. Limiting high-glycemic foods is sensible. Avoiding highly processed foods is sensible. Eating a lot of meat from grain-fed, confined animals and the wrong sorts of fats isn't. Someone close to me went on the original Atkins diet. He developed kidney stones and ended up not so much later with inoperable cancer. Soured me on the concept.
Bill, do you realize how hysterically funny your post is?!
Bill wrote: | | a.. Such diets may produce short-term weight loss through | dehydration.
Geez, I've lost 55 pounds of water so far! LMAO!
b.. Weight loss may also occur through caloric | restriction resulting from the fact that the diets are relatively | unpalatable.
Yup, bacon,eggs, cheese, steaks, and vegetables are so much more unpalatable that dry toast and rice cakes!
*wiping eyes* Stop! My sides hurt too much from laughing!
c.. The high fat content may be harmful to the | cardiovascular system in the long run.
Heeheeheeheheehee. My total cholesterol dropped from 232 to 187, blood pressure to 120/70, and tricglycerides from 635 to 217 on Atkins. Which is supposed to hurt my CV systemmore: the lower blood pressure, the low ercholesterol or the lower triglycerides>?? ROFLMAO!
| d.. Any improvement in blood cholesterol levels and insulin | management would be due to weight loss, not the change in composition.
Um, isn't that the point?
| e.. A very high-protein diet is especially risky for patients with | diabetes because it can speed the progression of diabetic kidney | disease [8].
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one! Let's see, I have to take no medication for my T2 diabetes because its';s controlled completely with my low-carb diet. My blood glucose is consistently normal. High blood sugars cause kidney disease. Guess you lose this one too!
|
formatting link
're the quack. Get educated.
Oh wait. My guess is that you're either PETA or PCRM, both with a vested interest in not wanting people to eat meat. Bet that doesn't slant your point of view, does it?
In a way I feel sorry for you, because you are so misinformed and stupid enough to promote the tired old Lies that no one listens to any more. Maybe you could switch careers and find some nice snake oil to sell?
|| Side comment #2: || I have kind of a problem with the whole low-carb thing. Limiting || high-glycemic || foods is sensible. Avoiding highly processed foods is sensible. || Eating a lot || of meat from grain-fed, confined animals and the wrong sorts of fats || isn't. || Someone close to me went on the original Atkins diet. He developed || kidney || stones and ended up not so much later with inoperable cancer. || Soured me || on the concept.
Side comment #1: Why do you assume that low-carbers eat a lot of meat?
Side comment #2: what makes you think that your friend got kidney stones and ended up not o much later with inoperable cancer as a result of low carb?
Side comment #3: if you're soured on the concept, it because you're a simpleton.
Yeah, but geez, how much bacon and eggs and steak can you eat? At least throw some fish and chicken in there. I have red meat once a week and that's plenty fine.
Funny, but there are plenty of people from around the world that eat diets high in carbohydrates that are not fat and have high life expectancies. It's not the carbs killing you, it's the amount of calories you eat. Eat less and you lose weight. Simple equation.
Thanks for the information. Sunflowers are pretty, everyone likes their seeds, so, planting them in the front yard is a no brainer.
I would LOVE to plant nuts. But, the damn squirrels make it impossible. It is extremely unfortunate.
You know, I actually have about 165 lbs of pasture fed lamb in my freezer, bought on auction for $0.88 per lb. That lamb is, hopefully, richer in omega-3s fatty acids. Otherwise, I agree with you 100%.
Scary stuff! My only question about this inoperable cancer, it usually takes years for cancer to appear and develop. Are you sure that he did not have cancer before?
I rarely eat bacon and steak and certainly eat less red meat than you and I've been LCing for 3 years.
|| ||| that dry toast and rice cakes! ||| *wiping eyes* Stop! My sides hurt too much from laughing! || || Funny, but there are plenty of people from around the world that eat || diets high in carbohydrates that are not fat and have high life || expectancies. It's not the carbs killing you, it's the amount of || calories you eat. Eat less and you lose weight. Simple equation.
That is exactly what LC allows most people to do, eat less and lose weight. Many people who eat diets high in carbs have BG swings that stimulate appetite. Many of those people are very overweight and will stay that way if the continue on a high carb diet.
Simple equations are all that folks with simple minds can handle. The real world is often not so simple.
Blah,Blah,Blah, You don't get it at all. It is the release of insulin that makes us fat. If the insulin release is not there or controlled by a low carb diet then you will not store the fat you take in. Simple as that.. Jennifer S.
Sidebar: My niece started a low carb diet early this year and coupled it with stopping smoking . . . no one can tell me that decision can be a bad one!
snipped-for-privacy@spammerno.com writes:
While that might be true with a few people, it is certainly not true of everyone. I know of many "fat" people who are anything but lazy. Unfortunately, our society often equates heavy with fat and the two are not the same thing at all.
I need to only look at my own grandmother who for years hovered around 160 pounds, at 5'4" . . . anyone who would say she was lazy is a fool. She worked in the fields along side my grandfather, maintained a huge garden, keep beautiful flowers, sewed, crocheted, was a sports advocate, etc., hardly a person who even the most critical person would call lazy or looking for a panacea. Yet, she was not able to lose weight though her diet was not excessive in any area . . . it was simply her makeup. Pure and simple, that weight was where her body wanted to be, regardless of what she did. It happens.
For the record, her doctor was not the least bit concerned about her weight for she was healthy. Now before the critical among us jump on the bandwagon and discuss health problems related to being overweight . . . she celebrated her 95th birthday in August and is still as healthy as one can expect someone who has lived 95 years to be and, until two years ago, fully maintained a household!
The issue with health is not the amount of weight but rather whether it is healthy weight. A "normal" weight person can be very unhealthy while looking good to others.
If a person is physically active and has good muscle tone, which means exercises either by design or by life style regularly, he/she usually don't need special diets regardless of his/her weight. Apart from those folks who have organic issues (thyroid, genetic, etc.), the truth of the entire weight issue is how motivated the person is to lose weight. A person can lose weight and become healthier keeping exactly the same diet. Yes, he/she can. The first thing is to have the proper mind set. The next thing is to drink plenty of just plain water . . . you notice that diets mention water intake, there's a reason for that. Our bodies need that minimum of two quarts of water every day to metabolize properly. The next thing is exercise, not just once a day but throughout the day, the point being of getting the metabolism up early in the day and keeping it up throughout the day. Going to a gym and working out at 7 a.m. does only minimal good if the person goes home and takes a nap and is physically quiet the remainder of the day. Drinking water so the body can operate at proper metabolism, keeping physically active throughout the day to keep the metabolism up, and then following it with sensible eating will do the job for any person who wants to lose (and does not have organic issues as mentioned above). The third thing is, of course, the sensible eating. Keep away from the things that we know are not good for our bodies such as excessive sugars, fatty foods (and I mean *fatty* not just the type of food, chicken can have as much fat as a piece of marbled beef!).
It is a fact that *if* a person eats exactly the same thing in the same amounts and adds the water intake and exercise, that person *will* lose weight/tone and be healthier. It happens, naturally.
While I'm not a L.C. advocate, the premise behind it has good points. Staying away from excessive refined flour products (donuts, cookies, rolls, etc.) is not a bad thing . . . there are a lot of calories in that stuff and little food value. The important thing is that it has people thinking about what is going into their bodies.
If you really are concerned about your health and your weight, make everything you put in your mouth beneficial to your body; don't put it there only because it tastes good. If those who want to lose weight think of food like money and there is only a limited amount to intake like spending, they will begin to be more health conscious and are more likely to make life-style changes that will improve their health. It is the
*mind-set* more than the *diet* that does the trick.
Whether I agree with the current low-carb fad (and it is a fad and will fade as many others have), it is encouraging people to think about what they eat. Any time a person thinks about what they eat is one step closer to better health. Thinking, after all, is the first step to doing.
As for those who say it is alone what you put in your mouth that determines your weight, I say they are full of it. After my son died, I averaged less than 500 calories a day for nearly a year and lost not a single ounce! On the other side, when my children were young and I was very, very active with three healthy little boys to keep up with, I gained not an ounce, staying within 3 pounds of 105 for years, even though I ate more than most men working outdoors! (I'm 5'6") There are many factors that enter into weight and whether an individual will gain or lose, or just maintain.
My point is that regardless of what you eat, make it all good substantial (meaning with health benefits) food, drink a minimum of two quarts of water every day, keep physically active (take the stairs, not the elevator, walk not drive to the corner market, etc.) by looking at your life and seeing where you can add more physical movement.
Insulting the ideas of others as to what type of diet to utilize to lose weight is pointless and only demonstrates ignorance as well as a lack of common consideration. Personally, I would prefer to hear all arguments (meaning *debate* not attacking) about the diets because somewhere there is something of benefit to me.
Green beans, peppers, lettuces, zucchini (big plants), spaghetti squash (train it and trim it back it can send out 12 foot vines without stopping) or other squash, eggplant(not sure if you get enough heat in zone 5). Broccoli and to a lesser extent cauliflower(only develops one head then stops). I did kerby cucumbers and made my own pickle varieties. COrn takes a lot of space and my second batch of the season was eaten by bugs and a near total failure.
I can't imagine not growing tomatoes! I went on maintenance for the summer/fall harvest so I could enjoy anything I wanted from the garden. After all it may be carbs but a lot healthier than say... sugar cookies. Has worked well since I don't hesitate to eat grape-sized tomatoes from the vine in the garden or slice-&-salt tomatoes in the kitchen as an afternoon snack. I tried canteloupe and watermelon this year but I messed them up with spacing and I got two
3" canteloupes. :-( Next year I will do better.
DiGiTAL ViNYL (no email) Zone 6b/7, Westchester Co, NY,
Bill you're clueless. You know nothing about Low-carb diets. You just said theat every doctor in the united states advises every diabetic to use a scam of a diet. Diabetics are low-carbers. Low carbing is the control of insulin.
"Bill" wrote:
DiGiTAL ViNYL (no email) Zone 6b/7, Westchester Co, NY,
Thanks, a great list. I have a garden in the backyard also, where we grow some cabbage, tomatoes, sweet peppers, etc. The front yard, I think, should be for more decorative stuff, but, I like your watermelon and cantaloupe suggestion.
It's about stamping out misinformation for others how may benefit from accurate knowledge about low-carb diets. Many many people here have benefited greatly from LC diets....
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.