Death by McDonalds

No comment needed, right?

More about the free updates that people get.

More

left
Low carb bread: Another fairy tale bites the dust 189
Long-Term Study on the Paleo Diet: The Results 55
More Salt Is OK According to New Study 33
A New Toy Measuring Blood Ketones 150
“Butter Better than Vegetable Oils” 36
The Dreamfields Pasta Fraud Finally Results in an 8 Million Dollar Fine! 38
Doctors Warn: “Sugar Is the New Tobacco” 34
Should You Eat Less Salt – Or More? 30
Reversing Diabetes After a Visit to the Emergency Room 38
Is It Dangerous to Eat Meat Before Age 65? 48
New Study: Is Today’s Wheat Bad for You? 56
WSJ: “The Dubious Science Behind the Anti-Fat Crusade” 41
right

47 Comments

Top Comment

  1. Eric's-Rose
    Hi,

    First of all....WOW, that's quite a heated debate going on there!

    I think that both the Doc and Mark are great...they have the courage to publically share their own journeys and ideas, try to show people the benefits of Paleo/Primal and that eating and excersising well is key to great overall health and importantly, happiness.

    Whether people are 80/20, 100% or just a bit Paleo..or even have an occasional potato and..OMG...might still like to carry on towards good health, just shouldn't matter.

    If people are trying Paleo/Primal/the occasional Potato, there is just one thing of upmost importance; we all care about our health a great deal and are ON THE SAME SIDE dude!

    Keep up whatever good work you are personally doing, judge others a little less, smile and be happy that people are so passionate about health - its really not that common in the western world! ;)

    Read more →

All Comments

  1. Confused
    Hi Dr:

    Sorry, I'm confused by this. Paleo isn't low-carb; lots of paleo people eat potatoes. It's probably the majority position now, to eat potatoes and rice both. On Paleohacks you'll see more and more people also adding back small amounts of sugar, often in the form of orange juice, honey, or maple syrup.

    The only problem with the picture above would be the canola oil in which McDonald's fries made, altho' McDonald's swears it's trans-fat free. Still those folks who are doing Mark Sisson Primal could definitely eat them on their designated "cheat day" under his 80/20 rule.

    Now that you've kind of made the switch from an more Atkins type of plan to a real Paleo plan, why would potatoes be "Death?"

  2. Justin B
    @Mr/Ms Confused:
    When did Dr Eenfeldt say he was pure paleo? Just 2 posts back, he mentioned how, if you ask him, dairy's alright for LCHF, which is what he still seems to advocate, LCHF. I doubt he's very concerned with what people on Paleohacks are doing.

    Not to mention, most fast food fries are coated in wheat before frying. Not to mention, paleo people don't advocate fast food.

  3. I've ate MacDonalds without fries as part of my LCHFingness hasn't stopped me from losing weight.
  4. Maggan A
    "why would potatoes be "Death?""

    I dont know about the part of the world you come from Confused - but in my part of the world we call french fries "raped potatoes"....

    Like your nic though CONFUSED.. it says it all!

  5. Confused,
    Paleo is always lower carb compared to a standard American diet. It's certainly low carb compared to McDonalds.

    If you see nothing wrong with a giant pile of processed glycemic load, á la McDonalds, then you do seem "Confused". And anyone at Paleohacks who thinks it's fine is likely confused too.

  6. FrankG
    There may (or may not) be an increasing number of those who follow a paleo way of eating, who now include some potatoes, sweet potatoes and/or rice in their diet -- although I'm not sure how anyone can feel sure enough to suggest that they are in the "majority"... based on what survey? -- but does that really equate to eating an huge serving of McDonald French Fires... with (I notice) a mound of ketchup and, presumably, a large soda? Yes all very paleo I'm sure ;-)

    Confused is a perfect nickname for someone who is trying to spread confusion and dissent, perhaps someone who is in the habit of hiding behind aliases to spread her venom... or if not her then one of her cronies -- oh another "C" word!

    As an aside I'd add that when eating LCHF I really find no need to have a "designated cheat day"... that would suggest that I think there is something abnormal or false about the way I eat the rest of the time -- which I don't.

  7. Justin B
    Frank,
    The "cheat day", as put by Mark Sisson, isn't really about fixing mistakes you're making the rest of the week. He said that its because "you should live a little", but more importantly, so that newbies don't think that because they cheated once, that they shouldn't even bother trying to get back on the wagon. I don't really agree with the "a little bit of poison wont harm you" theory, but "Confused" is saying that because Mark Sisson advocates cheat days, that McDonalds fries are healthy/primal, which is a non sequitur.
  8. FrankG
    Justin B, thanks for the explanation but I "live a lot" every day so, I don't see any need to cheat. ;-)

    My diet is tasty, satisfying, varied and does not require the kind of discipline often seen with more traditional diets; such as weighing and measuring everything into precise portions.

    I eat when I am hungry, stop when I am satisfied and I enjoy my diet.

    I could not stick with a diet (simply what I eat) that required disciplines such as I mentioned above. I think that is why so many fail on traditional "diets" which are not sustainable and everyone recognises that they are just a short term weight-loss measure, to be temporarily endured.

    If my diet is not a temporary trial of endurance, but rather a sustainable way of life, then why on earth would I need a "cheat day" away from it?

  9. Maggan A
    FrankG

    "Confused is a perfect nickname for someone who is trying to spread confusion and dissent, perhaps someone who is in the habit of hiding behind aliases to spread her venom..."

    Any particular reason why you adress Confused as a "her"?

    But on the other hand - why not - I look forward to see the buzzz in the waspnest LOL :-D

  10. JAUS
    Some of us actually think for ourself instead of just listening to others. I disagree about many things with both Mark Sission and Doc. I don't really buy Mark's version of the paleo diet. Fruits was never a staple for our primal ancestors.
  11. I'm not sure where "Confused" got the idea this was a paleo blog.

    What part of LOW CARB high fat is unclear??? Whether a paleo diet allows potatoes or not, they don't fit into a low carb diet, unless you're the ADA (smirk).

    SOME (not all) people who follow a paleo diet feel it's OK to eat "safe" starches, but not everyone agrees. And even the proponents of safe starches agree that individuals who are insulin resistant/pre-diabetic/diabetic and who are seriously overweight should probably avoid the "safe" starches as well.

    Are McDonalds french fries a "safe" starch? Hardly.

  12. Maggan A
    Janknitz

    We just have to eccuse people like Confuced to be confused -because it is not so easy to understand for some..

    BtW can someone tell me about safe starch,,, have never heard about it... Im just a LCHF-eater who avoid any kind of starch... Are "safe starche" some kind of USA-people trying to escape the problem...?

  13. Charlie L
    That french fry skull probably won't spoil for a few years, making it even spookier!
  14. Yes, this is a low carb website, not paleo. I am seeing a kind of nastiness spreading in some of the paleo community (the episode with Dr Kruse being an example). I think I would like to separate myself from any label and just eat good whole foods with no wheat, sugar, potato or rice. I try to stay away from processed foods. I don't the term "cheat day" - as has been said it conjures up ideas that the rest of the time you are miserable or something. I am loving this way of eating but if I have something not entirely paleo then sure, I feel no guilt and move on which is kind of the idea behind the 80/20 rule. For myslef I think of it more as a 95/5 rule!!

    The kind of diet we can eat is an individual thing but if you are scoffing down McDonalds fries I'd hardly call that paleo! I myself am prediabetic and stay well clear of potato as it has a very bad effect on my blood sugar. Others can have potato and good on them - just don't get processed, industrialised rubbish like these fries!

  15. @ Maggan A - safe starch seems to be a new addition to the paleo diet for some. There has been lots of discussion on this especially from Jimmy Moore, which caused a great debate!

    If you are not diabetic or prediabetic then sure, a little starch may be OK for you. Safe starches are sweet potatoes (which I have) and a little rice. I've not heard that ordinary potatoes are included in this but if you don't have blood sugar problems I see no reason to not have them occasionally.

  16. Maggan A
    Lynda NZ

    Thanks for your answer - but why not just stay better safe than sorry and avoid all starches? I dont know about you all but I can do witout sweet potato (have accutally never tryed it) feel no need for toeing the line...

    But in the end of the day it depends on each and everyones personal situation - if you are slim and dont need to loose any weight - yes maybe you can allow yourself the little extras - but if you want to loose weigt - better stay away from it.

  17. @ Maggan - I find sweet potato (a little, maybe once a week) has no effect on my weight. It does not spike my blood sugar and that is the important thing. I do think that many people go overboard on lowering carbs. I have approx 20 to 50g of carb a day and that includes the odd bit of sweet potato, pumpkin, carrot, veges etc. I just eliminate wheat, potato, rice and sugar. Simple :)
  18. Maggan A
    Lynda NZ

    Good for you if it works for you - for me it would not work att all if I want to kontinue to loose weight.

    We are all different :-)

  19. I started incorporating "safe starches" into my diet several months ago. My blood sugar is under good control, I continue to lose weight and I'm gaining muscle mass. A 12 oz serving of (raw) potatoes is 50 grams of carbs. A 6 oz serving of white rice is about the same. I usually have a serving of rice or potatoes for lunch and dinner along with my usual hunk of protein. Total carbs for the day are still around 100 grams. Am I low carb? Does it even make sense to going lower than 100 grams when your brain needs at least that much every day? Why not take some of the burden of manufacturing glucose away from the liver by incorporating some in the diet?

    There's a big difference between a potato and refined carbs like sugar and white flour. A potato is a natural, nutrient-rich whole food and those others are processed garbage stripped of nutrition. I think it's unfortunate that the LCHF community lumps all of those in the same category. Besides that, I think they're spot on about most of the rest.

  20. Margaretrc
    @Confused, There is a lot in the picture above that is a problem. How about the giant glass of (most likely) soda? And even a Paleo person who does eat potatoes would probably not want such a huge quantity and would most certainly not want them fried in whatever McDonald's fries them in, be it canola or trans fat free vegetable oil. And those who follow a Paleo diet are most certainly not drinking orange juice. They may sweeten things with a bit of honey or maple syrup, but juice? No way.

    @ Maggan, I agree. I'm not diabetic or pre diabetic, but as a rule, I avoid all starches, "safe" or not. But that is my choice. Others who do not have a problem with carbohydrates may choose differently. But for anyone who is carbohydrate intolerant--i.e. diabetic, pre diabetic or overweight, there is really no such thing as a safe starch. Or an 80/20 rule or even 95/5 rule.

  21. Maggan A
    MIke deCock

    If you eat eggs, meat and god fat there is no need for potato. Why burden your "system" with useless "food" that it does not need?

  22. Eggs, meat and fat are all great. I have plenty of those but I thought the idea here is LOW carb/high fat, not ZERO carb/high fat.

    My diet incorporates about 1 lb of rice or potato per day and I'm still over 50% fat and under 100 grams of carbs per day. So is that still HCLF or do I get my badge revoked because I get the carbs from starches?

    The human "system" has a daily glucose requirement. Even the staunched low carb advocate recognizes that. Why place that burden on my liver and waste protein on the conversion to glucose when I can incorporate some in my diet? Safe starches are not "useless" as they will get used to feed the brain and red blood cells. Those certainly seem like useful things to me.

  23. Maggan A
    Mike deKock

    who has ever talked about zero carbs? there is a lot of carbs in the "above ground vegetables" that is "aloud" on LCHF.

    And by all means go on with your rice and potato diet if you like - but please dont lie and say to other people that you eat LCHF - because you dont.

  24. p01
    Potatoes are not primal, they are bags of glucose, selected and modified over hundreds of years to contain as much glucose as possible. Same with modern fruit. Wild tubers and wild fruit are primal although they are not highly regarded by those who have tried eating them.
  25. FrankG
    Glad you have found what works for you Mike. just so long as you respect that not all of us can tolerate 100g carbs from starch per day.

    As for "burden on the liver"... where the heck did you get that idea from?

    What if you were to get 100g carbs per day from leafy green vegetables.. would that put a burden on your liver? Or do you think that the more accessible or refined the glucose, the better it is for you?

    Perhaps you should satisfy all your nutritional needs through an intravenous drip, no need to burden your digestive system unduly eh ;-)

  26. Maggan,
    I think the term "safe starches" was coined by Paul Jaminet, author of the Perfect Health Diet. He feels that certain starches are "safe" in that they don't contain the anti-nutrients of other starches. Among, them, as already pointed out, are sweet potato, winter squashes, and white rice. Even Jaminet agrees that they are not "safe" for everybody and may have a deleterious effect on people with insulin resistance issues. But for people who are not insulin resistant, he beleives that they should be included in the diet. A lot of people do tolerate these "safe" starches, it's lucky if you're one of them.

    I think that there is a rift between the paleo and low carb communities. The paleo communities seem to be distancing themselves from low carb. Some claims are being made that very low carb diets cause hypothyroidism, although I haven't seen peer reviewed studies to demonstrate that theory. Some paleo experts are recommending more carbohydrates in the form of "safe" starches (and it seems to be expanding to honey, maple syrup, and other "natural" sweeteners, too).

    My personal feeling is that many of the people drawn to the paleo approach are younger and fitter in the first place. Perhaps their metabolisms are in better shape because of this and they can tolerate more carbs in the form of safe starches than those of us who are older and more metabolically "deranged" (is that not the perfect description for people like me--over fifty, highly insulin resistant, and menopausal!!!! That's me, I'm deranged!).

    The naughtier side of me (I'm deranged, so I can be a little naughty) thinks that the younger and fitter paleo group doesn't want to be lumped in the same category as us fat old ladies (and men) on low carb, and if it takes starches to differentiate themselves, then so be it. LOL!!! Let them eat all McDonald french fries they want, not me! (Most self-respecting people I know who are paleo wouldn't touch them either).

    P.S. Mike--my food tracker says 1 lb of cooked white rice is about 130 grams of carbs all by itself. That does seem to put you out of the low carb range which is a bit of an enigma because opinions vary on where the line should be, but most are 120 or below.

  27. Maggan:

    So if a vegetable comes from above the ground it is magically permitted in LCHF but if you eat something that comes from below the ground you're banned from the club? Is there a magic number of carbs I'm required to be under if I'm to be a LCHF member? Even Atkins recommended ramping up carbs until once you reach your maintenance weight (which I have).

    p01:

    If potatoes aren't primal because they've been selected and modified over hundreds of years, then neither are cows and pigs and scores of other plants and animals that we all eat. It seems rather arbitrary to single out potatoes for vilification.

  28. @ Janknitz - I agree totally with our comment, well said!! I too an deranged but doing a hell of a lot better now I'm paleo/low carb.
  29. FrankG:

    Thanks. I'm not even suggesting that everyone go and load up on starches and I agree that those who are diabetic or insulin resistant best avoid them.

    I'm just questioning the notion that potatoes should be lumped in the same category as white flour and sugar. Perhaps there should be gray area for those who aren't insulin resistant? I understand that most people don't cope with gray areas very well and would rather say "starch=sugar=bad".

    Janknitz:

    I was trying not to be too wordy, but I'll either have a 12 oz. portion of potato or a 6 oz. portion of white rice. In other words, I work out the portions to be 100 grams/day or less which last I checked, is widely considered "low carb". I just find it interesting that I'm suddenly a liar if I call myself LCHF if those carbs come from starches.

  30. Margaretrc
    @Mike deCock, are you sure you are eating 1 lb. per day of rice/potatoes and still staying under 100 g carbs? According to my carb counter app, 1/2 c of steamed rice is 27 g of carbs, so 1 1/2 cups is 81 g carbs. I suspect 1 lb. of rice, even if cooked, is a lot more than 1 1/2 c. and uncooked rice is even heavier. 1/2 c potato is only 13 grams, but my 5 lb. bag of potatoes has many potatoes in it--15 to 20 depending on size, so one lb. is a bunch of potatoes and quite a lot of carbs, I expect. So, if you are indeed eating 1 lb per day of either rice or potatoes, even if you eat no other carbs, you most likely are not eating low carb. But it's not about whether you eat vegetables from above or below the ground that defines low carb, it's about the amount of carbs one eats over the course of a day. It's just that vegetables that grow below the ground tend to have more carbs than those that grow above and so anyone trying to limit carbs is encouraged to stick to the ones that grow above the ground because you can eat more for less carbs. LCHF is not a club, it's a way of eating. Eat however you want, don't call it LCHF unless it is.
  31. Josh
    Not sure if any have seen Fat Head, but it debunks the myth of not being able to eat fast food. It is what you pick from the menu what counts. Obviously, it is a stretch to eat every meal fast food...but if my kids get McDonalds (every once in awhile), I have a fry or two. They're good!
  32. @ Josh - I know that Tom proved you can lose weight eating McDonalds but the point he was making was that it is not the fat that is causing weight gain but the carbs. He chose to limit his carbs so didn't eat many chips or buns. Clearly over time your nutrional needs will not be met eating junk.

    I too have a chip or two if my grandson is having McDonalds - this is a lifestyle and not a dogmatic religion!! I'll even have a few fries with fish if eating out! BUT that is a rare exception as I am sure it is with you.

  33. If I'm going to eat fries, they're going to be from In N' Out ;o) I allow myself 5 fries along with my protein burger, and if I cheat and eat 10, so what! Once in a while it's a great treat.

    Mike, I certainly didn't mean to imply you're a liar. On maintenance Atkins you do have a lot of leeway, though that's somewhat different from Andreas' more general LCHF approach.

    I think you're getting some emotional responses because we've all seen so many people THINK they're on Atkins or low carb when they really are eating way more carbs than they recognize, and then they complain that low carb is stupid because it didn't work for them. And how many "scientific" studies have we all seen claiming to compare low carb to higher carb diets, but the threshold for low carb is much higher than any of us consider low carb? That can make it a touchy subject!

  34. C. Buck
    From "Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy," The Harvard Medical School Guide to Healthy Eating. “Nutritionists and diet books alike often call potatoes a “perfect food.” But while eating potatoes on a daily basis may be fine for lean people who exercise a lot or who do regular manual labor, for everyone else potatoes should be an occasional food consumed in modest amounts, not a daily vegetable. The venerable baked potato increases levels of blood sugar and insulin more quickly and to higher levels than an equal amount of calories from pure table sugar.”
  35. moreporkplease
    I can understand why Confused is confused by the Paleo idea. It is confusing - Cordain says low-carb, no potatoes; but Sisson says moderate carb, some potatoes and some rice; while Harris and others say to eat 50% of your calories from potatoes and "safe" starches.

    Under the Harris plan, there's absolutely nothing wrong with potatoes at all - just make your french fries in coconut oil, I guess.

    We have to remember that Drs. Cordain, Eenfeldt, Westman and Attia here are just about the last people on earth apparently to believe that insulin regulates fat storage or gain. Outside of a biochemistry textbook you won't hardly find a doctor or researcher who believes it. No other noted Paleo expert believes it except Cordain.

    I was surprised to see Dr. Eenfeldt above say a Paleo diet has fewer carbs than SAD because Harris' 50% seems right in SAD territory.

    And I would agree with Janknitz above, Paleo is not about low carb - at 50% the non-Cordain paleo, "PaNu" or "Paleo 3.0" or whatever you want to call it, seems right in line with SAD - after all, the MyPlate will also tell you to avoid white sugar and trans fat. Really Paleo 3.0 seems just a form of gluten-free.

    So I'd be Confused too if I were just learning about Paleo now. It's tough to figure out and those people on PaleoHacks are angry and weird - like vegan-rage, if I may quote Lierre Keith. :) I too found high carbs made me cranky, and maybe someday the Paleo people will figure that out. :)

  36. Margaretrc:

    Everything I eat gets weighed and logged to my FitBit account and my carbs add up to 100 grams per day. I adjust my portions to hit those numbers.

    I was in the "starches are evil" camp for a long time, too. When I finally actually took the time to crunch the numbers, I realized that you could work in very satisfying portions of potatoes and still stay under 100 grams. It may not be right for everyone, but I certainly don't think a cup of potatoes should be viewed the same as a cup of sugar.

    Josh/Lynda NZ:
    Speaking of Fat Head, it may interest to look at his food log:
    http://fathead-movie.com/content/MyFoodLog.htm
    He's doing about 100 grams of carbs per day and it certainly isn't all from leafy greens. It's mostly from bread (hamburger buns), hash browns and french fries. He's doing approximately equal portions (in grams) of carbs/protein/fat. My diet has those same proportions except that I cook all my meals from scratch.

  37. mezzo
    I find this bit about PaleoPotatoes really interesting. What Paleo are they talking about? American? Asian? European? Well - I couldn't be European. WiKi says that potatoes as we know them now go back to a plant whose origins could be established to be in Chile and were domesticated some 10-13.000 years ago.The paleolithic age began 2.6 million years ago and ended about 7.000 before Christ, so one might just about squeeze them in.BUT: Potatoes never made it to Europe until the 16th century. Not exactly the Paleolithic Age in my history books. The same applies to rice - even in the last century rice was not a staple in the Western European diet.

    I too have followed the Paleocommunity's return to "safe" starches etc. etc. and have a sneaking feeling that this is just apologetics - an excuse to return to old eating habits. Starches maybe fine if you lead a very active life and burn them off as soon as you eat them - as paleolithic people were wont to do - and for those that are not insulin-resistant or diabetic or have a metabolism that just slurps them up and turns them into fat and for those that do not feel hungry after ingesting a potatoes, rice and wheat (as I do). Paleo is becoming an umbrella for all sorts of WOEs - very useful because nobody has been able to establish what people in the paleolithic age really ate. From a non-scientific perspective I tend to assume that they ate whatever was available to them and whatever proved most nourishing - learning by trial and error maybe. And we all know from experience that a piece of meat keeps you sated longer than a bowl of greens.

  38. Here is my take on Paleo - primal man did not have vegetable oils, chips, flour, bagels, cereal, icecream, soda, orange juice, cakes, candy, chocolate, junk food, donuts, rice, refined sugar, high fructose corn syrup... heck you get the picture!! The point I am making is that you don't need to know or even understand what a primal man ate - you just need to what HE DIDN'T EAT!! Simple when you think about it. Forget about all the websites that give differing foods and use your common sense.
  39. To be dogmatically opposed to potatoes because they weren't domesticated until 10,000 years ago while not applying the same principle to cows, pigs and other species that are neolithic creations seems biased, IMO.

    My Paleo take is that primal man certainly had access to starchy tubers and other root vegetables. While modern man may not have access to the same species of woolly mammoth, wild boar and prehistoric tubers that Grok did, the neolithic equivalents of beef, pig and potato are not at odds with our evolutionary background.

  40. Eric's-Rose
    Hi,

    First of all....WOW, that's quite a heated debate going on there!

    I think that both the Doc and Mark are great...they have the courage to publically share their own journeys and ideas, try to show people the benefits of Paleo/Primal and that eating and excersising well is key to great overall health and importantly, happiness.

    Whether people are 80/20, 100% or just a bit Paleo..or even have an occasional potato and..OMG...might still like to carry on towards good health, just shouldn't matter.

    If people are trying Paleo/Primal/the occasional Potato, there is just one thing of upmost importance; we all care about our health a great deal and are ON THE SAME SIDE dude!

    Keep up whatever good work you are personally doing, judge others a little less, smile and be happy that people are so passionate about health - its really not that common in the western world! ;)

  41. Yoly Erva
    The body doesn’t care if your carbohydrates, fats or protein are “natural” while processed food may contain other elements that may be harmful. The digestion converts everything to the components it can absorb. If you eat excess carb with excess fats it will harm you in the long run. The “natural” or “safe” nature of the food may help prevent damage from the added crap of processed food, but excess carbohydrates will do their harm no matter from where they come from, to your liver and pancreas is just the same work.
  42. Alexandra M
    "To be dogmatically opposed to potatoes because they weren't domesticated until 10,000 years ago while not applying the same principle to cows, pigs and other species that are neolithic creations seems biased, IMO."

    But the hormonal impact of the food that comes from an animal cannot be radically altered by selective breeding the in the same way that of a plant can. Animals can be bred to have more fat or less, but in the end, fat is fat and muscle is muscle and their impact on hormones remains the same (some insulin release for protein, no insulin release for fats).

    Plants, on the other hand, are chemical factories. Selective breeding can cause them to contain quantities of phytochemicals that are orders of magnitude larger than that of their undomesticated counterparts. The Russet Burbank potato (a descendant of the potato developed by Luther Burbank in the 1870s and the one used for French fries) contains far more sugar than those potatoes grown in the Andes 10,000 years ago. It's sugar content is even higher than that of the varieties used to make potato chips (crisps).

  43. DirtyDan
    I eat Burger King and Wendy's beef patties all the time. I understand they are 100% beef with no fillers, so I consider them both paleo AND low carb. I have lost 90 pounds eating from BK & Wendy's 2-3 times per week. For the record, at BK when you order a double or triple Whopper "low - carb" style, they serve it to you in a covered plate with a knife and a fork along with a generous helping of lettuce, onions and pickles. So, I even get the equivalent of a little side salad to go with my meat. Perfect. Wendy's is much skimpier with the greens - one little leaf of iceberg lettuce. Make sure to tell the server no ketchup or mayonaise because, unfortunately, sugar is added to both.

    McDonalds, however, is repulsive. There is pretty much nothing on their menu I would eat, as I believe they add sugars and starches to every item they sell (including their salads - I would bet they add a "flavor enhancer" to their salads that contains a little bit of sugar, salt and God knows what else). I also beleive they will not disclose these ingredietns to the public.

  44. Maggan A
    Mike deCock #27

    "So if a vegetable comes from above the ground it is magically permitted in LCHF but if you eat something that comes from below the ground you're banned from the club?"

    Most people on LCHF prefer above ground vegetables because they dont contain as many carbs as the underground ditos.

    I dont know what club you are talking about - but if you are overweight and want to loose - you better stay away from the underground - for your owne sake ;-)

  45. The diet solution program is absolutely organic and includes no synthetic products or procedures. Isabel's program will, instead, tell you which meals you need to be consuming and which to be preventing.
  46. Mike deCock
    All the starchy carbs (including potatoes) are excluded by the LCHF diet because it's a weight-losing diet. It is based on a paleo diet with some changes. I think the beauty of it is that it is straightforward and you're pretty well sure to weight loss if you just eat the veg that's grown above ground (and therefore less starchy). Other low-carb diets can include very small amounts of potatoes (such as 2 small new potatoes) as part of a carb-counting low-GL diet. Potatoes have a different effect on your blood sugar depending on how they're cooked, so boiled new potatoes are your best choice if you want to have them, as opposed to baked/jacket for example. But, to be honest, you can have a lot more veg if you don't have the potatoes. Similarly, you can have a couple of tablespoonfuls of cooked brown basmati rice, but not white, as it has a different effect on blood sugar. Best to stick with the veg above ground, I feel. Then once you have gained your target weight you could introduce some starchy carbs if you want to.

    BTW I think Mark Sisson says that very energetic people can use some quinoa (a seed) or wild rice (a grass).

    At the end of the day, though, people can do what they like and may have their own interpretation of the LCHF diet or what they have found works for them. I've followed a low-carb diet for 31/2 years - it's a good way to keep weight to a healthy level - and I'm just getting into the LCHF diet, which for me means eating more meat than I used to.

  47. Brad
    Confused,
    Do some research into the ingredients McDonalds uses for their fries, it's not normal...
up

Leave a Reply

Reply to comment #0 by

Pictures of participants through Gravatar