Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Nutrition / September 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

What do we actually NEED to eat each day?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Scott T. Jensen - 27 Aug 2004 08:38 GMT
Given the portions of food is proportional to the size of the person eating
it (i.e., a big person needs to eat more than a petite person), what basic
mix do we actually need to eat each day to have a healthy diet?

Here's my guess:

1) Some protein.  It could be red meat, fowl, pork, fish, or soybean.
Possibly also mushrooms.  I was once told by a dietitian that we just need
to eat half the size of our palm (thus being proportional to our size) of
protein a day.  True?

2) Some roughage.  Namely vegetables.  Can dehydrated ones due?

3) A daily multi-vitamin and multi-mineral pill.

4) One calcium tablet.

5) An aspirin.

6) Some fruit???  Not sure on this one.  And if it is needed, can they be
also dehydrated?

Did I miss anything?  And what's the cheapest source of the above that
humans can digest and benefit from?

Thanks in advance!

Scott Jensen
Signature

Like a cure for A.I.D.S., Alzheimer, Parkinson, & Mad Cow Disease?
Volunteer your computer for folding-protein research for when it's idle.
Go to http://www.distributedfolding.org/ to sign up your computer.

tcomeau - 27 Aug 2004 15:10 GMT
> Given the portions of food is proportional to the size of the person eating
> it (i.e., a big person needs to eat more than a petite person), what basic
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> to eat half the size of our palm (thus being proportional to our size) of
> protein a day.  True?

Up to 15 oz of good natural protein, from good healthy animals, per
day. That is about 3 to 5 oz per meal, three meals, and two snacks
with 1 oz ea. per day.

> 2) Some roughage.  Namely vegetables.  Can dehydrated ones due?

The less processed the better. The fresher the better. Right off the
plant is best. The less storage and transportation time the better.

> 3) A daily multi-vitamin and multi-mineral pill.

I take a good b vitamin complex, stress formula, and plenty of vitamin
C. I also take fish oils capsules.

> 4) One calcium tablet.

Not necessary if you omit sugar and refined carbs from the diet. That
crap will deplete you of calcium and other minerals.

> 5) An aspirin.

Not necessary if you eat well and avoid artificial fats like margarine
and shortening, and refined carbs.

> 6) Some fruit???  Not sure on this one.  And if it is needed, can they be
> also dehydrated?

Freshest is always best. After as little as a few hours of storage
they lose a lot of their vitamins. It is also important that the soils
that they are grown in be as healthy and nutrient-rich as possible.
Poor agricultural practices will signifcantly impact on the final
quality of the produce.

> Did I miss anything?  And what's the cheapest source of the above that
> humans can digest and benefit from?
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Scott Jensen

Good fats are key to health. Butter, milk, cheese, eggs, etc. from
healthy animals, with minimal alteration and processing, is very
healthy. Extra virgin olive oil is good. Oily fish or fish (cod, etc)
liver oils are very healthy.

Anything that comes processed or manufactured is not nutritious. It
may be edible, but it ain't food. Refined carbs fit this category.
Sugar, soda, white bread, white pasta, etc. Soy protein, tofu, etc is
garbage.

TC
Jan - 27 Aug 2004 15:46 GMT
> Given the portions of food is proportional to the size of the person eating
> it (i.e., a big person needs to eat more than a petite person), what basic
> mix do we actually need to eat each day to have a healthy diet?
>
> Here's my guess:

Your question is based on a premise that it would be a good idea to
try to manage with a very simple diet with very little variety. I
think this is basicly wrong assumption. To have a really good diet,
you need to consume a very large variety of different foods mostly
from vegetarian sources. That is a way to get large variety of
different nutrients the body needs. Also, it is a good idea to eat as
little processed food as possible. The rest is details.

Jan
Bob - 30 Aug 2004 04:12 GMT
>Given the portions of food is proportional to the size of the person eating
>it (i.e., a big person needs to eat more than a petite person), what basic
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>to eat half the size of our palm (thus being proportional to our size) of
>protein a day.  True?

Quality of protein is important. This refers to the content of certain
specific amino acids that we cannot make (so-called essential amino
acids). As a generality, animal protein is high quality; after all,
animals are similar to us. Plant protein quality is variable, often
deficient. Eating diverse proteins, including diverse plant proteins,
compensates for this.

>2) Some roughage.  Namely vegetables.  Can dehydrated ones due?

sure

Fruits also provide fiber.

>3) A daily multi-vitamin and multi-mineral pill.
>
>4) One calcium tablet.

3-4 are not needed if you eat adequately. Only take them if your diet
is deficient (which contradicts the premise of your question?).

>5) An aspirin.

no; no relevance to nutrition. Possible medical benefit for some
people is a separate question, but requires medical supervision.

>6) Some fruit???  Not sure on this one.  And if it is needed, can they be
>also dehydrated?
>
>Did I miss anything?  

Yeah, calories. Energy.

Basically, you need two kinds of things from food. One is energy; you
eat things that can be burnt. All of the basic foodstuffs, except
fiber, qualify here. Carbohydrates and fats are usually the big two
energy sources. But you need enough -- but not too much, or else you
gain weight. And then you need specific things that your body cannot
make. These include the essential amino acids, some types of fatty
acids, and vitamins.

>And what's the cheapest source of the above that
>humans can digest and benefit from?

Eat a wide range of things, in moderation. If your food source is
mainly the grocery store, you can vary your diet by what is available
inexpensively. If you feel ok and your weight is steady, you are
probably doing reasonably. Then if you want you can explore subtleties
that may be "better". But be wary of any suggestions that you must buy
expensive things to be healthy.

bob

>Thanks in advance!
>
>Scott Jensen
Scott T. Jensen - 30 Aug 2004 07:26 GMT
> >1) Some protein.  It could be red meat, fowl, pork, fish,
> >or soybean.  Possibly also mushrooms.  I was once told
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> diverse proteins, including diverse plant proteins,
> compensates for this.

How about beef jerky?  High quality beef jerky.  Or can cheap beef jerky do?

And can you get essential amino acids in one of those soft vitamin pills as
one gets Vitamin E in?

> >3) A daily multi-vitamin and multi-mineral pill.
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> take them if your diet is deficient (which contradicts
> the premise of your question?).

I don't separate them away from food.  I define food as what you consume to
live and remain healthy.

> >Did I miss anything?
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> include the essential amino acids, some types of fatty
> acids, and vitamins.

I'm figuring carbs and fats one would get from what one snacks.

Scott Jensen
Signature

Peer-to-peer networking (a.k.a. file-sharing) is entertainment's future.
If you'd like to know why, read the white paper at the link below.
http://www.scottjensenshow.com/P2PRevolution.pdf

magnulus - 01 Sep 2004 23:49 GMT
> Here's my guess:
>
> 1) Some protein.  It could be red meat, fowl, pork, fish, or soybean.
> Possibly also mushrooms.  I was once told by a dietitian that we just need
> to eat half the size of our palm (thus being proportional to our size) of
> protein a day.  True?

  You can get protein from more sources than just that.     Protein
requirements vary with the amount of physical activity a person does.
Unless you subsist on nothing but starchy roots and grains (as people in
poor countries often do), or exercise alot (bodybuilder or athlete), it's
difficult to not get enough protein.   Most of the human body is made up of
water, after all.   Protein used to be thought of as an energy source ,in
fact that's where it got its name, but actually protein is mostly just used
to repair and some growth (finger nails, skin, hair, etc.).   Carbohydrates
are the main fuel- in fact nerve cells in the brain can only use
carbohydrates as fuel.

 Peanuts, brocolli, beans... those all have protein (as do many other
vegetables).  Even grain has protein (gluten), although few vegetables
sources of protein are "complete" in themselves.  Soybean protein is the
best quality for plant protein.  Mushrooms, yeast, and mycoprotein (Quorn- a
fungus derived protein) are excellent quality protein, better than many
meats (note that these are technically not plants, fungi are a seperate
kingdom).  Other plant proteins have to be combined to become complete
(grains with beans, for instance), although the body can store different
proteins during the day.

 USRDA of meat is the amount that fits within two decks of playing cards.
And you don't really need meat to live healthy.

> 3) A daily multi-vitamin and multi-mineral pill.

  Not needed specificly.

> 4) One calcium tablet.

 Only if a doctor recommends it.  Many antacids contain calcium.   Calcium
recomendations vary wildly between different countries. I believe the UN/WHO
recommends 400m per day (?), but in the US it is over 1000mg, which is
difficult for many people to consume without supplements or consuming ALOT
of dairy products (and many people are lactose intolerant).

> 5) An aspirin.

 Only if your doctor recommends it.  Asprin can have very bad side effects,
especially on the stomach.

> 6) Some fruit???  Not sure on this one.  And if it is needed, can they be
> also dehydrated?

  Fruit CAN be eaten daily but just consider that fruit is beyond just
whatever's from the tropics (oranges, bananas).  Berries are fruits, for
instance.  Dried fruit is OK.

 Also, many vegetables are decent sources of vitamin C.   Many traditional
diets don't have alot of fruit at all in them (many Asian diets, for
instance).

 The US food pyramid often just comes down to placating agricultural
interests.  All those Florida orange growers would be pissed if suddenly
they didn't have their own food category.  They don't want you to think
about the fact that tomatoes, cabbage, and brocolli also contain vitamin C.

 There are other beneficial chemicals in foods that are non-nutrative.
Tea, for instance, contains anti-oxidants that are "good for you", yet the
body has no specific need for them.  Consuming excess vitamins (such as
vitamin E, beta carotene) might be better for many people, but again, the
body has no specific need for those quantities.   The amount of vitamin C in
the US RDA is actually excessive compared to the amount needed to prevent
frank deficiency (scurvy), yet they recommend that much because it is said
to help against heart disease.  So there is a big gray area between
preventing deficiency and promoting health or longevity.  Other nutrients
like selenium have no established RDA, others like chromium were added
recently.
Piezzo Guru - 02 Sep 2004 04:11 GMT
Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies have
proven it also.

>   Carbohydrates
> are the main fuel- in fact nerve cells in the brain can only use
> carbohydrates as fuel.
magnulus - 02 Sep 2004 10:18 GMT
> Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies have
> proven it also.

 Anorexic girls and some diabetics are also in a state of ketosis... I
don't see how prolonged ketosis is healthy, since it is basicly akin to
starvation.  It is also hard on the kidneys; ketones are poisons.

 Atkins didn't owe up to the fact that his diet a) doesn't work and b) has
been responsable for several deaths during the 70's.  It is a rehashed diet
that has been seen before.
tcomeau - 02 Sep 2004 16:34 GMT
> > Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> > carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> been responsable for several deaths during the 70's.  It is a rehashed diet
> that has been seen before.

There is nothing inherently dangerous or harmful in ketosis. Except in
extreme cases of starvation and/or de-hydration.

TC
tcomeau - 02 Sep 2004 16:35 GMT
> > Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> > carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> been responsable for several deaths during the 70's.  It is a rehashed diet
> that has been seen before.

What deaths? Can you provide documentation or proof? Or are you just making this up?

TC
MikeL - 02 Sep 2004 13:04 GMT
>Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
>carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies have
>proven it also.

Surviving well and living well are too differen't things.
Piezzo Guru - 03 Sep 2004 04:16 GMT
The difference? $1,000,000

> >Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> >carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies have
> >proven it also.
> >
> Surviving well and living well are too differen't things.
Lictor - 02 Sep 2004 19:49 GMT
> Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies have
> proven it also.

The brain gets glucose on Atkins. Amino-acids can be broken down into
glucose, and that's enough to power the brain. If there are not enough
proteins in the diet, the body will break down it's own proteins to fuel the
brain anyway. People on Atkins do not see their blood glucose dropping to 0,
so they are obviously getting their glucose from another source than
carbohydrates (though it's hard to eat 0 carbs anyway). If their glycemia
dropped to 0, they would be dead. The brain cannot sustain itself 100% from
ketosis, it still has a basic need for glucose.
Piezzo Guru - 03 Sep 2004 04:17 GMT
Apparently not. This was disproven a few years ago in Britain.

> > Not true. Your brain can survive quite well in ketosis without
> > carbohydrates. Atkins dieters prove this every day and research studies
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> dropped to 0, they would be dead. The brain cannot sustain itself 100% from
> ketosis, it still has a basic need for glucose.
Lictor - 03 Sep 2004 06:17 GMT
> Apparently not. This was disproven a few years ago in Britain.

What was proven? That your glycemia can and will drop to 0 on Atkins and
that you can survive it??? Do you have a a link please?
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.