|
jt512
Aug 27, 2003, 9:35 PM
Post #51 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
[Delete duplicate post]
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 27, 2003, 9:36 PM
Post #52 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Amazing how if you disagree with JT you're fanatical.
Really? A quick glance through my contributions to the forums will show that an awful lot of people have disagreed with me; however, the only one I ever said was fanatical about anything was Gretchino.
In reply to: I taught a class on statistics, but even I'm not allowed to debate JT on that one apparently...
Why don't you think you're allowed to debate me on statistics? I only predicted it wouldn't go well for you if you did. ;)
In reply to: and in general if you don't drink milk you're screwed because the RDI (which has never been wrong) said so..
I think it is reasonable to read the above as you conceding the debate to me. Afterall, why else would you falsely claim that I said that you had to drink milk to meet the RDI?
In reply to: Well, California's potential new govornor, Arnold, doesn't drink milk and has a decent body, my wife doesn't drink milk and has a decent body...
What does having a decent body have to do with anything? The value of milk is its calcium content. You can have a decent body while consuming insufficient calcium. The question is how practical it is to consume enough calcium without consuming dairy to avoid being at elevated risk of osteoporosis in old age.
In reply to: (ooo, sorry about the personal jab, it was the "fanatic" in me).
No need to apologize. You're just embarrassing yourself.
In reply to: Here's some cool statistics: 3. Everyone who drank milk 200 years ago DIED!
Anyone with an IQ over 10 should be able to see why that has no relevance.
In reply to: Oh yeah, and this little tidbit: "The Harvard Nurses’ Health Study, which followed more than 75,000 women for 12 years, showed no protective effect of increased milk consumption on fracture risk. In fact, increased intake of calcium from dairy products was associated with a higher fracture risk. An Australian study showed the same results. Additionally, other studies have also found no protective effect of dairy calcium on bone. You can decrease your risk of osteoporosis by reducing sodium and animal protein intake in the diet, increasing intake of fruits and vegetables, exercising, and ensuring adequate calcium intake from plant foods such as leafy green vegetables and beans, as well as calcium-fortified products such as breakfast cereals and juices."
What!? Quoting statistics, Mike? I consider that a step in the right direction, but you need a little help with finding unbiased sources of information. That quote is from PETA, perhaps the most notoriously and blatantly biased group to promote vegetarianism.
In reply to: Of course these people are using statistics that disagree with JT so I'm not sure how correct they are :wink:
They're doing what propagandists always do: selecting a minority of studies that seem to support their position, while ignoring the majority of studies that don't.
To be ojective, you have to look at all the studies before coming to a conclusion. This is referred to as a systematic review, such as this one published recently in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The abstract follows:
In reply to: J Am Coll Nutr. 2000 Apr;19(2 Suppl):83S-99S. Calcium, dairy products and osteoporosis. Heaney RP. Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska 68178, USA. Osteoporosis is a multifactorial disorder in which nutrition plays a role but does not account for the totality of the problem. 139 papers published since 1975 and describing studies of the relationship of calcium intake and bone health are briefly analyzed. Of 52 investigator-controlled calcium intervention studies, all but two showed better bone balance at high intakes, or greater bone gain during growth, or reduced bone loss in the elderly, or reduced fracture risk. This evidence firmly establishes that high calcium intakes promote bone health. Additionally, three-fourths of 86 observational studies were also positive, indicating that the causal link established in investigator-controlled trials can be found in free-living subjects as well. The principal reason for failure to find an association in observational studies is the weakness of the methods available for estimating long-term calcium intake. While most of the investigator-controlled studies used calcium supplements, six used dairy sources of calcium; all were positive. Most of the observational studies were based on dairy calcium also, since at the time the studies were done, higher calcium intakes meant higher dairy intakes. All studies evaluating the issue reported substantial augmentation of the osteoprotective effect of estrogen by high calcium intakes. Discussion is provided in regard to the multifactorial complexity of osteoporotic response to interventions and to the perturbing effect in controlled trials of the bone remodeling transient, as well as about how inferences can validly be drawn from the various study types represented in this compilation.
Notice how, when you look at all the studies published on the subject, rather than the few that PETA chooses to quote, the picture looks quite different.
Thanks for playing, Mike.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
gretchino
Aug 27, 2003, 10:10 PM
Post #53 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 393
|
Is the double post for effect, or did you mean to say more?
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Aug 28, 2003, 12:34 AM
Post #54 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: Notice how, when you look at all the studies published on the subject, rather than the few that PETA chooses to quote, the picture looks quite different. Thanks for playing, Mike.
The "fanatic" comment was only to back G up on this thread. It had nothing to do with anywhere else you've posted. It's that whole, "protecting someone with a cute tush" additiction I have. Oh yeah, and you were wrong. As for playing, didn't realize this was a game, just thought it was an internet site with friends, but hey, I'll ante up for an easy win. Let's hijack this post until it heads to the Community wasteland:
Looking at a few other "propagandist" studies outside of PETA:
Here's one from those propagandists at the National Dairy Council: "[study] involved giving a group of postmenopausal women three 8-ounce glasses of skim milk per day for two years and comparing their bones to those of a control group of women not given the milk. The dairy group consumed 1,400 mg of calcium per day and lost bone at twice the rate of the control group. According to the researchers, “This may have been due to the average 30 percent increase in protein intake during milk supplementation ... The adverse effect of increases in protein intake on calcium balance has been reported from several laboratories, including our own” (they then cite 10 other studies).
Or this one from those propagandists at Harvard: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/calcium.html (of note, "we aren't sure what the healthiest or safest amount of dietary calcium is."
Those propagandist fitness people: http://www.afpafitness.com/articles/MilkCal2.htm
Or from that propagandist author Dr. John McDougall: http://www.drmcdougall.com/
Of note: After looking at 34 published studies in 16 countries, researchers at Yale University found that countries with the highest rates of osteoporosis “including the United States, Sweden, and Finland” are those in which people consume the most meat, milk, and other animal foods. This study also showed that African Americans, who consume, on average, more than 1,000 mg of calcium per day, are nine times more likely to experience hip fractures than are South African blacks, whose daily calcium intake is only 196 mg. “[O]n a nation-by-nation basis, people who consume the most calcium have the weakest bones and the highest rates of osteoporosis. ... Only in those places where calcium and protein are eaten in relatively high quantities does a deficiency of bone calcium exist, due to an excess of animal protein.”
And lastly, from that phenomenal expert and author JT512: oh wait, I couldn't find anything online. Please forward it when get a chance JT, thanks. :wink:
Moral of the story - No one definitively knows the answers to the milk controversy. I certainly don't, but I'm willing to bet that the Dairy Council, Harvard, and the thousand other researchers out there on this subject know a bit more than JT does. Do the research when it comes to nutrition and your body. And once again, pay attention to your own needs, not some statistical nonsense spouted on an internet site. You know what works for you and what doesn't. And getting regular medical check-ups will ensure that you stay as healthy as possible.
Personally speaking, I'm not a vegan (love sushi too much), but I don't drink milk and have never had a problem with my calcium levels (that includes bone density tests among others thanks to insurance demands for running a company). Neither have several billion other folks on this planet. Some folks drink milk, when I worked on a dairy farm growing up I did, but now I pass. Drinking milk to me makes about as much sense as drinking milk from a rat, giraffe, lion, elephant, etc. I'm none of those animals (pig, satan, and other things I've been called :D ), and last I checked, my wife wasn't lactating so I'll pass.
Thanks for letting me play Jay. That was the ante, who's up for $5? :D
Can we argue about what shoes are the best ones to buy for leading 5.6 now? :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
climberchic
Aug 28, 2003, 12:50 AM
Post #55 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2000
Posts: 2077
|
Sorry, I have to intervene for the sake of the other readers in this forum.
This is not in response to any particular poster and there is some useful info here, but the topic has degraded into personal conflict chock full of quotes that readers have already read 1, 2, 3+ times before in this thread. As this is a highly moderated forum for a reason (one of which is to stay away from flame wars and personal rather than informational debates in a thread) I will leave this decision up to you all to be fair.
We can:
1) move this thread to another forum (you all decide on which one would be most appropriate)
2) We can delete some of these extraneaous posts to keep this in the LR
3) The personal debate can continue in PM to save the rest of the readers here from wasting time
4) You can all tell me to shove it (but I want a good argument)
Gretchino, mreardon, jt512, the orginal poster (queenkatherine)...
What say ye troops?
~Erica
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 28, 2003, 1:03 AM
Post #56 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: The "fanatic" comment was only to back G up on this thread. It had nothing to do with anywhere else you've posted. It's that whole, "protecting someone with a cute tush" additiction I have.
Cute tush addiction, and you chose her over me? Bastard!
In reply to: Looking at a few other "propagandist" studies outside of PETA...[snip]
You can keep quoting the minority of studies that support your opinion and ignoring the large majority of studies don't all day long. It is not an objective approach. You have to look at the totality of the evidence, as Heaney did in the review article I posted the abstract of. Not only did the majority of studies show that dairy had a positive effect on bone health, but the studies with the strongest study design (controlled experimental designs using milk as the intervention) showed this unanimously (6 of 6 showed positive results).
In reply to: Or from that propagandist author Dr. John McDougall:
Unfortunately, Dr. McDougall really is a propagandist.
In reply to: Moral of the story - No one definitively knows the answers to the milk controversy.
I would tend to agree with that, though it is a statement that could be made about almost any subject in nutrition. However, in the anbsense of definitive proof, the only rational recourse is to consider the preponderance of the evidence. And, in spite of what the McDougall's and PETAs of the world would like you to believe, the large majority of studies show milk to benefit bone health (including, I repeat, 6 of 6 top-quality, tightly controlled metabolic trials).
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
climberchic
Aug 28, 2003, 1:04 AM
Post #57 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2000
Posts: 2077
|
Sorry, I have to intervene for the sake of the other readers in this forum.
This is not in response to any particular poster, but more because the topic has degraded into personal conflict. As this is a highly moderated forum for a reason (one of which is to stay away from flame wars and personal rather than informational debates in a thread) I will leave this decision up to you all to be fair.
We can:
1) move this thread to another forum (you all decide on which one would be most appropriate)
2) We can delete some of these extraneaous posts to keep this in the LR
3) The personal debate can continue in PM to save the rest of the readers here from wasting time
4) You can all tell me to shove it (but I want a good argument)
Gretchino, mreardon, jt512, the orginal poster (??)...
What say ye troops?
~Erica
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 28, 2003, 1:07 AM
Post #58 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Sorry, I have to intervene for the sake of the other readers in this forum. This is not in response to any particular poster and there is some useful info here, but the topic has degraded into personal conflict chock full of quotes that readers have already read 1, 2, 3+ times before in this thread. As this is a highly moderated forum for a reason (one of which is to stay away from flame wars and personal rather than informational debates in a thread) I will leave this decision up to you all to be fair. We can: 1) move this thread to another forum (you all decide on which one would be most appropriate) 2) We can delete some of these extraneaous posts to keep this in the LR 3) The personal debate can continue in PM to save the rest of the readers here from wasting time 4) You can all tell me to shove it (but I want a good argument) Gretchino, mreardon, jt512, the orginal poster (queenkatherine)... What say ye troops? ~Erica
The issue of calcium intake and osteoporosis, though not the original topic, is relevant to women's health, so I'd leave it somewhere in the Women's forum.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Aug 28, 2003, 6:03 AM
Post #59 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: We can: 1) move this thread to another forum (you all decide on which one would be most appropriate) 2) We can delete some of these extraneaous posts to keep this in the LR 3) The personal debate can continue in PM to save the rest of the readers here from wasting time 4) You can all tell me to shove it (but I want a good argument) Gretchino, mreardon, jt512, the orginal poster (??)... What say ye troops? ~Erica
It's probably best sent to the Community if it degrades further. Otherwise, feel free to delete as much of my posts (or all of them) as you think needs to go. If there's anything worthy in these, I'd say it's that:
1. JT is jealous of my interest in G which he and I will resolve over candlelight, drinks, and a lobster dinner by the ocean (I'll bring the Costco five-gallon tub of lime Jell-O);
2. That if the "experts" can't agree, then I'm pretty sure the calcium debate v. milk intake will never be resolved here; and
3. That I am right above all others in that ALL the people 200 years ago (and billions more as early as 80 years ago!) did in fact die after they drank milk.
Oh yeah, and "shove it", but I can't really think of an argument as to why :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Aug 28, 2003, 6:18 AM
Post #60 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Mike, Mike, Mike, and Jay, Jay, Jay,
Get your butts out of the ladies forum (and the associated calcium based pissing match there) and come bouldering for Christ's sake.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
rrrADAM
Aug 28, 2003, 10:56 AM
Post #61 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 1999
Posts: 17553
|
Haven't read all four pages of diatribe, but if this is about milk, I dring about 6 gallons a week.
Milk does a body good. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
gretchino
Aug 28, 2003, 3:05 PM
Post #62 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 393
|
::stops slamming head on desk::
End of conversation from my end Erica....Thanks for the butt compliments Mike (I think... :shock: )
::continues to pound head on desk::
|
|
|
|
|
climberchic
Aug 28, 2003, 3:41 PM
Post #63 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2000
Posts: 2077
|
Thanks all!
I agree with Jay that there is tons of useful info here, so we'll leave it here for now unless agreeing to disagree subsides. Although, I think Curt has the best advice for anybody ;)
I'll leave it up to you all to edit/delete fluff in your posts as you see fit.
~Erica
( /me heads off to 'shove it' as soon as I figure out where) :p
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Aug 28, 2003, 6:47 PM
Post #64 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: Mike, Mike, Mike, and Jay, Jay, Jay, Get your butts out of the ladies forum (and the associated calcium based pissing match there) and come bouldering for Christ's sake. Curt
But do I really have to leave? I'll put my hair in pigtails. Maybe shave? Ribbons? Implants?
::sound of nails scraping walls as this tired blonde calcium fortified boulderer is dragged unwillingly to Arizona to get asswhipped by someone almost twice his age::
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
Aug 28, 2003, 7:18 PM
Post #65 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
In reply to: ::stops slamming head on desk:: End of conversation from my end Erica....Thanks for the butt compliments Mike (I think... :shock: ) ::continues to pound head on desk::
Oh well, Hey did you ever try some of the new protein drink powders . I am a skeptic, but they contain milk products, and are 98% lactose free, and are much easier on the digestive system. I also have a very sensitive system. Of course there are soy powders as well. :idea:
I too am a vegetarian, once and a while partake of some fish, so I know your dilemna as well. :wink:
If you get a good powder, with the protein and the calcium you'll become so super strong. And who knows' might out climb jt. Or at least give him a challenge. :lol: :lol: :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
gretchino
Aug 28, 2003, 8:03 PM
Post #66 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 17, 2003
Posts: 393
|
In reply to: Oh well, Hey did you ever try some of the new protein drink powders . I am a skeptic, but they contain milk products, and are 98% lactose free, and are much easier on the digestive system. I also have a very sensitive system. Of course there are soy powders as well. :idea: I too am a vegetarian, once and a while partake of some fish, so I know your dilemna as well. :wink: If you get a good powder, with the protein and the calcium you'll become so super strong. And who knows' might out climb jt. Or at least give him a challenge. :lol: :lol: :wink:
I use a lot of Metagenics products most of which are non-dairy. They're a great company that does a lot of research (for those of us that like that kind of stuff :? ). I really have a hard time with the powdered drinks (texture thing :shock: ), but take a variety of supplements (including one called Fem Essentials that I've had a lot of luck with).
Thanks for your input! :D and as far as outclimbing Jay...who knows? I am younger.... :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
chickskistuff
Sep 4, 2003, 5:32 PM
Post #67 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2003
Posts: 3
|
I've been on the Atkins for two months and have dropped 20 pounds of fluff myself. It works! Induction is hard for the first week but you can safely do it for up to six months depending on how much fluff you want to lose. After induction you just have to commit to eating the right foods! Don't over due it on breads and pastas and sugars and you will keep off the fluff you lose and be healthy and fit. Pretty much the program that body builders use to get ready for comps. Don't be afraid to mix it up either. Do the induction for 3-4 weeks then enjoy a week or to of sensible but fun eating maybe a big mac or two then go back to the induction phase. It works!
|
|
|
|
|
queenkatherine
Sep 16, 2003, 3:40 AM
Post #68 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 36
|
Thank you all for your advise.
I can set the forum strait for me, and only for those who care... I like milk and have even convinced my palate to accept 2% or 1% instead of whole milk. I like moo juice too much to give it up.
This post was created with the hopes that I could learn some information on my weight situation.
My daily intake of food is not usually any more than 1700 calories. I'm currently supplementing my climbing with more walking and swimming. I haven't lost any weight yet, but I am hopeful that it will help. Please don't think that I don't appreciate y'all keeping me posted on the latest stats on milk consumption. But I fall asleep in statics class up at the university. :wink:
To each their own. Thanks a lot.
~Kate~
|
|
|
|
|
rockwomyn
Sep 16, 2003, 5:05 PM
Post #69 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2001
Posts: 373
|
Well I don't think anyone is trying to tell you that you have to stop drinking milk....if you love it than drink it. There was a slight highjacking going on in this thread, because yes, people feel strongly about both sides. However, your decision is up to you. :lol:
As far as not losing any weight...try not to go to much by that. Are your clothes fitting better, do you feel better? It took a while for me to really notice a difference i weight. I was building muscle and losing fat....and muscle weighs more. :wink:
Also, you are eating 1,700 calories. Are you eating to maximize your loss? Limiting excessive sugar intake and alcohol and being sure you meals contain the right amounts of fats, proteins and carbs?
I found that keeping a journal of everything you eat and keeping an exercise log helps. I was truly amazed at how many extra calories i packed in when i thought i was eating so well. 1 cookie here a couple chips here and so on add up.
I still get bummed that i don't have a fast metabolism naturally.......cuz damn do i LOVE to eat! :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
o_snow
Sep 24, 2003, 4:25 AM
Post #70 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 24, 2003
Posts: 1
|
If you are into glycemic index counting. Check out the "south beach diet" instead of the "Atkins diet" It doesn't cut out carbs only separates good from bad and is actually quite balanced.
|
|
|
|
|
keithlester
Deleted
Oct 5, 2004, 4:16 PM
Post #71 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
eat less, do more
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Oct 5, 2004, 8:26 PM
Post #72 of 72
(2995 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I found that keeping a journal of everything you eat and keeping an exercise log helps.
I'm a proponent of keeping a diet (and exercise) journal as well. In my post, "How to Lose Weight to Improve Your Climbing," in the Technique and Training forum I specifically recommend recording the total calories and the total grams of protein in everything you eat. The reason for this is explained in that post, but in addition, it has been well documented that keeping a diet journal tends to reduce the amount you eat. At least part of the reason for this is that it is a bother, and if you really get into the habit of religiously keeping the journal, sometimes you will find that you'll skip a snack just to avoid having to write it down. The tendency of journal keeping to reduce food intake is significant enough that when we design observational diet studies we have to limit the amount of diet recording that we have subjects do to prevent it from altering the diet that we want to observe.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
