Upcoming Events Calendar
4/1/09
Rant: Everything they tell you is wrong!
So, this website (which shall remain nameless because I do not want to give bad information free promotion) talks about the safety and the benefit of using artificial sweeteners yet they say that it is still "too soon to tell" about the health effects of Agave nectar.
Are they joking? Read from "Going Ga-Ga Over Agave Nectar":
"There is some concern that the fructose content of agave nectar affects the body's metabolism of it, leading to fructose intolerance or diabetes-like symptoms without an increase in blood glucose."
and
"Agave nectar is one of many sweeteners that is available to those seeking an alternative to table sugar. It is too early to tell whether agave nectar has specific health effects, so avoid using it in excess. What's interesting about the increasing popularity of alternative sweeteners is that it seems to be symptomatic of our national collective "sweet tooth." If you are craving something sweet, rely on fruits first before reaching for a sweetened treat - even a treat sweetened with an alternative sweetener. Treats are called that because they are supposed to be eaten only on occasion."
Too early to tell? and "On Occasion"? How do they define "on occasion"? And if the title, "Going Ga-Ga", doesn't display this website's true position on Agave nectar, I don't know what will.
They also decide to go after the Acai Berry (saying it's better to eat other fruits because of "price" and that there are no "proven" health benefits) and organic produce ("at this point we do not know if organic produce is healthier"). In one breath they say that organic produce isn't any healthier, yet they tell you to buy non GMO soy!!! And they go off on the "health benefits" of soy, yet they do not make any distinction between fermented soy and isolated soy protein, and they don't bother to mention that soy is one of the top six most allergic foods in the western hemisphere, oh and they forget to mention that isolated soy protein has been connected to increased risk factor for female reproductive cancer. I suppose it was just an oversight...
They attack (what I say "attack" I am referring to the "subttle" jabs they make that cast doubt on something without making it look like they are blatantly attacking it) Gogi berries, Conjugated Linolenic acid; and go into detail about how "splenda is safe" yet Stevia is "inadequately tested".
They also talk about how certain artificial sweeteners cause gas, bloating, digestive upset, etc...Hmmm....that is very interesting, dontcha think? Last time I checked, Agave nectar has never been reported as having "side effects" like that. So, this website decides to imply that artificial sweeteners are safer than agave nectar and Stevia because "they have been tested more". So it's this logic that they use to recommend something that has reported (and probably more then we are lead to believe) serious digestive concerns, artificial sweeteners, over Agave nectar. That makes sense, eh? Where is the logic and rational thinking in that?
Oh, and in the critique on Acai Berries they say that "your hard-earned dollars are probably better spent buying a great variety of fresh produce, whether fruits or vegetables", Yet they just ruled out a very healthy and nutritious FRUIT, which limits variety! Not to mention that they also rule out Gogi berries as a "fruit" that one should chose, and countless other non-traditional foods that do not fit into the western, conventional lexicon of "healthy/nutritious foods". And for crying out loud, they talk at length about peanut butter being a healthy addition to one's diet! In case you may not know, peanuts are the #1 anaphylaxis causing food allergy in children in the United states, which was not mentioned in the article. Just an oversight, I guess, eh? Leaving a detail out like the fact that it can cause death from anaphylactic shock in almost 2million Americans seems to be more than just an oversight. Lastly, they talk about "natural" peanut butter being "no different" than the "old stand by", even though conventional peanut butter is made with GMO (genetically modified) peanuts. In another article on soy, they emphatically state that one should purchase non-GMO soy products and yet in the case of peanuts they imply there is no difference. AND, they never mention that peanuts and soybean are from the same food-family, and that people that have reactions to peanuts can also be cross-reactive to soybean. Yeah, another oversight by such well-informed professionals.
Should you trust the credibility of such professionals who leave out or overlook such important information when making their recommendations?
The overall philosophy presented here is that if it's not tested in the same manner that pharmaceuticals are tested (even though many of the whole foods they slag on have been eaten for hundreds, if not thousands of years) then it is "best to avoid them" or, at best "use in moderation" (and of course they do not even bother to define what exactly they mean by "moderation") I figure maybe 1/4 of this website is actually useful, 1/4 is information that is "old-news" and the rest is pure schlock. But yet we are supposed to believe every word as true because it is written by Registered Dietitians. What arrogance! (yeah, these are the same people that list potatoes in a "grain" list....)
How do we know what's true anymore? Just because these people have a few fancy letters at the end of their names does that mean that what they say is true? If these Registered dietitians don't even know that Potatoes are NOT a grain, then who do we trust to get the proper information about food, nutrition, and diet? Just because they say so, we are supposed to believe it as gospel?
It is this type of thinking, inaccurate information, short sighted recommendations, hypocrisy, and narrow minded-ness that made me decide NOT to spend half a million dollars and 6 years of my life to become a Registered Dietitian, and I opted instead for the Holistic Approach. They [Registered Dietitians] are just a Cabal to get people to not eat whole foods or foods that are not part of the Western Lexicon. They are the "skeptics for the sake of being skeptical" of the nutrition field and are so detached from the needs of people and the real world that their methods, ideas, and concepts are obsolete and ineffective. In a "peanut" shell, they are by-and-large, clueless. To quote an article from the website in question: "At times like these when everyone is watching their budget, your hard-earned dollars are probably better spent"- working with a Nutrition Professional who actually knows what he or she is talking about.
-Written by a HOLISTIC NUTRITIONIST
Are they joking? Read from "Going Ga-Ga Over Agave Nectar":
"There is some concern that the fructose content of agave nectar affects the body's metabolism of it, leading to fructose intolerance or diabetes-like symptoms without an increase in blood glucose."
and
"Agave nectar is one of many sweeteners that is available to those seeking an alternative to table sugar. It is too early to tell whether agave nectar has specific health effects, so avoid using it in excess. What's interesting about the increasing popularity of alternative sweeteners is that it seems to be symptomatic of our national collective "sweet tooth." If you are craving something sweet, rely on fruits first before reaching for a sweetened treat - even a treat sweetened with an alternative sweetener. Treats are called that because they are supposed to be eaten only on occasion."
Too early to tell? and "On Occasion"? How do they define "on occasion"? And if the title, "Going Ga-Ga", doesn't display this website's true position on Agave nectar, I don't know what will.
They also decide to go after the Acai Berry (saying it's better to eat other fruits because of "price" and that there are no "proven" health benefits) and organic produce ("at this point we do not know if organic produce is healthier"). In one breath they say that organic produce isn't any healthier, yet they tell you to buy non GMO soy!!! And they go off on the "health benefits" of soy, yet they do not make any distinction between fermented soy and isolated soy protein, and they don't bother to mention that soy is one of the top six most allergic foods in the western hemisphere, oh and they forget to mention that isolated soy protein has been connected to increased risk factor for female reproductive cancer. I suppose it was just an oversight...
They attack (what I say "attack" I am referring to the "subttle" jabs they make that cast doubt on something without making it look like they are blatantly attacking it) Gogi berries, Conjugated Linolenic acid; and go into detail about how "splenda is safe" yet Stevia is "inadequately tested".
They also talk about how certain artificial sweeteners cause gas, bloating, digestive upset, etc...Hmmm....that is very interesting, dontcha think? Last time I checked, Agave nectar has never been reported as having "side effects" like that. So, this website decides to imply that artificial sweeteners are safer than agave nectar and Stevia because "they have been tested more". So it's this logic that they use to recommend something that has reported (and probably more then we are lead to believe) serious digestive concerns, artificial sweeteners, over Agave nectar. That makes sense, eh? Where is the logic and rational thinking in that?
Oh, and in the critique on Acai Berries they say that "your hard-earned dollars are probably better spent buying a great variety of fresh produce, whether fruits or vegetables", Yet they just ruled out a very healthy and nutritious FRUIT, which limits variety! Not to mention that they also rule out Gogi berries as a "fruit" that one should chose, and countless other non-traditional foods that do not fit into the western, conventional lexicon of "healthy/nutritious foods". And for crying out loud, they talk at length about peanut butter being a healthy addition to one's diet! In case you may not know, peanuts are the #1 anaphylaxis causing food allergy in children in the United states, which was not mentioned in the article. Just an oversight, I guess, eh? Leaving a detail out like the fact that it can cause death from anaphylactic shock in almost 2million Americans seems to be more than just an oversight. Lastly, they talk about "natural" peanut butter being "no different" than the "old stand by", even though conventional peanut butter is made with GMO (genetically modified) peanuts. In another article on soy, they emphatically state that one should purchase non-GMO soy products and yet in the case of peanuts they imply there is no difference. AND, they never mention that peanuts and soybean are from the same food-family, and that people that have reactions to peanuts can also be cross-reactive to soybean. Yeah, another oversight by such well-informed professionals.
Should you trust the credibility of such professionals who leave out or overlook such important information when making their recommendations?
The overall philosophy presented here is that if it's not tested in the same manner that pharmaceuticals are tested (even though many of the whole foods they slag on have been eaten for hundreds, if not thousands of years) then it is "best to avoid them" or, at best "use in moderation" (and of course they do not even bother to define what exactly they mean by "moderation") I figure maybe 1/4 of this website is actually useful, 1/4 is information that is "old-news" and the rest is pure schlock. But yet we are supposed to believe every word as true because it is written by Registered Dietitians. What arrogance! (yeah, these are the same people that list potatoes in a "grain" list....)
How do we know what's true anymore? Just because these people have a few fancy letters at the end of their names does that mean that what they say is true? If these Registered dietitians don't even know that Potatoes are NOT a grain, then who do we trust to get the proper information about food, nutrition, and diet? Just because they say so, we are supposed to believe it as gospel?
It is this type of thinking, inaccurate information, short sighted recommendations, hypocrisy, and narrow minded-ness that made me decide NOT to spend half a million dollars and 6 years of my life to become a Registered Dietitian, and I opted instead for the Holistic Approach. They [Registered Dietitians] are just a Cabal to get people to not eat whole foods or foods that are not part of the Western Lexicon. They are the "skeptics for the sake of being skeptical" of the nutrition field and are so detached from the needs of people and the real world that their methods, ideas, and concepts are obsolete and ineffective. In a "peanut" shell, they are by-and-large, clueless. To quote an article from the website in question: "At times like these when everyone is watching their budget, your hard-earned dollars are probably better spent"- working with a Nutrition Professional who actually knows what he or she is talking about.
-Written by a HOLISTIC NUTRITIONIST