Flashback Friday: Eating More to Weigh Less

Flashback Friday: Eating More to Weigh Less
4.65 (92.92%) 48 votes

Energy density explains how a study can show participants lose an average of 17 pounds within 21 days while eating a greater quantity of food.

Discuss
Republish

What happens if you have people add fruit to their regular diet? Three apples or three pears a day as snacks between meals on top of whatever else they were eating. Fruit is low in calories, but not zero; so, if you add food to people’s diets, even healthy foods, won’t they gain weight? No, they lost a couple pounds. Maybe it was all that fiber? If you remember, we learned our gut bacteria can create anti-obesity compounds from fiber. That’s why they also had a cookie group. Three apples, three pears, or three cookies with enough oats in them to have about the same amount of fiber as the fruit. Despite the fiber, adding cookies to one’s diet does not lead to weight loss. They think the weight-reducing secret of fruit is its low energy density, meaning you get a lot of food for just a few calories. So, it fills you up.

Energy density is a relatively new concept that has been identified as an important factor in body weight control in both adults and in children and adolescents. Energy density is defined as the amount of calories per unit weight of a food or beverage. Water, for example, provides a significant amount of weight without adding calories. Fiber, too. Thus, foods high in water and fiber are generally lower in energy density. On the other hand, because dietary fat provides the greatest amount of calories per unit weight, foods high in fat are generally high in energy density.

The CDC offers some examples. High energy density foods are like bacon—lots of calories in a small package. A medium energy density food is like a bagel, and low density foods are typified by fruits and vegetables. In general, the lower the better, with two exceptions. Soda is so heavy that by energy density it looks less harmful than it is. And nuts have so much fat, they appear less healthy than they are.

Otherwise, though, the science supports a relationship between energy density and body weight, such that consuming diets lower in energy density may be an effective strategy for weight control. This is because people tend to eat a consistent weight of food. So, when there’s less calories per pound, caloric intake is reduced.

A small drop in energy density can lead to a small drop in weight, and the greater the decrease in energy density, the greater the weight loss.

Energy density can be reduced in a variety of ways, such as the addition of vegetables and fruits to recipes or by lowering the fat or sugar content. And indeed, that’s how we evolved, eating predominantly low energy density foods, such as fruits, vegetables, plants and tubers, starch-filled roots like sweet potatoes. The first study to emphasize how fruits and vegetables could affect energy density and food intake was conducted more than 30 years ago.

Researchers were able to cut people’s caloric intake nearly in half, from 3000 calories a day down to 1570 without cutting portions, just by substituting less calorie dense foods, which means lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and beans, compared to a high energy density meal with lots of meat and sugar. Nearly half the calories, but they enjoyed the meals just as much.

They tried this in Hawaii, putting  people on a traditional Hawaiian diet with all the plant foods they could eat. They lost an average of 17 pounds in just 21 days, resulting in better cholesterol, triglycerides, blood sugars, and blood pressure. Caloric intake dropped 40%, but not by eating less food; in fact, they lost 17 pounds in 21 days eating more food, four pounds of food per day. But because plants tend to be so calorically dilute, one can stuff oneself without getting the same kind of weight gain.

And the energy density of foods is of interest for weight management not only because it allows people to eat satisfying portions while limiting calories, but also because reductions in energy density are associated with improved diet quality. For example, lower energy dense diets are associated with lower risk of pancreatic cancer. Lower energy dense diets tend to be of healthier foods; so, we get the best of both worlds.

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Katie Schloer.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image thanks to lightwise via 123RF. This image has been modified.

What happens if you have people add fruit to their regular diet? Three apples or three pears a day as snacks between meals on top of whatever else they were eating. Fruit is low in calories, but not zero; so, if you add food to people’s diets, even healthy foods, won’t they gain weight? No, they lost a couple pounds. Maybe it was all that fiber? If you remember, we learned our gut bacteria can create anti-obesity compounds from fiber. That’s why they also had a cookie group. Three apples, three pears, or three cookies with enough oats in them to have about the same amount of fiber as the fruit. Despite the fiber, adding cookies to one’s diet does not lead to weight loss. They think the weight-reducing secret of fruit is its low energy density, meaning you get a lot of food for just a few calories. So, it fills you up.

Energy density is a relatively new concept that has been identified as an important factor in body weight control in both adults and in children and adolescents. Energy density is defined as the amount of calories per unit weight of a food or beverage. Water, for example, provides a significant amount of weight without adding calories. Fiber, too. Thus, foods high in water and fiber are generally lower in energy density. On the other hand, because dietary fat provides the greatest amount of calories per unit weight, foods high in fat are generally high in energy density.

The CDC offers some examples. High energy density foods are like bacon—lots of calories in a small package. A medium energy density food is like a bagel, and low density foods are typified by fruits and vegetables. In general, the lower the better, with two exceptions. Soda is so heavy that by energy density it looks less harmful than it is. And nuts have so much fat, they appear less healthy than they are.

Otherwise, though, the science supports a relationship between energy density and body weight, such that consuming diets lower in energy density may be an effective strategy for weight control. This is because people tend to eat a consistent weight of food. So, when there’s less calories per pound, caloric intake is reduced.

A small drop in energy density can lead to a small drop in weight, and the greater the decrease in energy density, the greater the weight loss.

Energy density can be reduced in a variety of ways, such as the addition of vegetables and fruits to recipes or by lowering the fat or sugar content. And indeed, that’s how we evolved, eating predominantly low energy density foods, such as fruits, vegetables, plants and tubers, starch-filled roots like sweet potatoes. The first study to emphasize how fruits and vegetables could affect energy density and food intake was conducted more than 30 years ago.

Researchers were able to cut people’s caloric intake nearly in half, from 3000 calories a day down to 1570 without cutting portions, just by substituting less calorie dense foods, which means lots of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and beans, compared to a high energy density meal with lots of meat and sugar. Nearly half the calories, but they enjoyed the meals just as much.

They tried this in Hawaii, putting  people on a traditional Hawaiian diet with all the plant foods they could eat. They lost an average of 17 pounds in just 21 days, resulting in better cholesterol, triglycerides, blood sugars, and blood pressure. Caloric intake dropped 40%, but not by eating less food; in fact, they lost 17 pounds in 21 days eating more food, four pounds of food per day. But because plants tend to be so calorically dilute, one can stuff oneself without getting the same kind of weight gain.

And the energy density of foods is of interest for weight management not only because it allows people to eat satisfying portions while limiting calories, but also because reductions in energy density are associated with improved diet quality. For example, lower energy dense diets are associated with lower risk of pancreatic cancer. Lower energy dense diets tend to be of healthier foods; so, we get the best of both worlds.

To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video. This is just an approximation of the audio contributed by Katie Schloer.

Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.

Image thanks to lightwise via 123RF. This image has been modified.

Doctor's Note

The title of this video is a nod to Dr. Dean Ornish’s smash bestseller, Eat More to Weigh Less.

I talk more about the energy density concept in The Ice Diet and Nutrient-Dense Approach to Weight Management.

Are There Foods with Negative Calories? Find out in my video!

That amazing Hawaii study was done by Dr. Terry Shintani. Find out more about the natural human diet in my video, What’s the “Natural” Human Diet?

Doesn’t fruit have a lot of sugar in it? Check out my videos, If Fructose is Bad, What About Fruit?How Much Fruit is Too Much?, and Is Canned Fruit as Healthy?

I can’t wait until my new book, How Not to Diet, hits the shelves. It will be available for preorder soon, but in the meantime I have a webinar coming up that includes some of the information on fasting that I write about in the book. You can register for it [here] for a donation to NutritionFacts.org.

If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.

60 responses to “Flashback Friday: Eating More to Weigh Less

Comment Etiquette

On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.

To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.

The Short List

To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.

Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.

Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.

View the Full Community Guidelines

  1. I’m trying to gain some weight without eating unhealthy foods. Is there a table somewhere that lists the energy densities of plant foods?

    1. I hope you will get your question answered. I have the same problem and keep on trying everything out. Eating the extra cup of nuts every day does not make a difference because you will not get hungry for at least the next meal.

    2. George, grains are good for gaining. And of course, avocados and nuts.
      I sneak nuts into things to “beef them up” – throw a bunch of finely chopped walnuts into rice, etc.
      It helps me to enter my food into fitday.com – it’s free and if you go to “Nutrition” tab – it shows you all the calories, carbs, fat, etc.

    3. A table is too complex for the issue. Just remember that carbohydrates and proteins provide about 4 calories per gram. Fat contributes more than twice as much — about 9 calories per gram. It is very easy to eat a higher fat diet while avoiding bad fats.

      Good fats also lower bad cholesterol. If I had a dime for every low fat fanatic whose cholesterol went crazy after they went low fat I would be a wealthy man. Doctors seem to forget to tell people that the human body also makes cholesterol, not all comes from food. Eating very low fat for many people triggers this to happen.

      But before you do anything I would advise to check your BMI online and see if you are in the underweight range. If you are then do something. If you are on the low end of the ‘healthy’ range then celebrate. Underweight people have been scientifically shown to live longer healthier lives if they keep eating right. See my comment below about research done a while back that can be looked up online.

      1. Hi Barb,

        Thanks for the Jeff Novick link. It was very enjoyable.

        In my search to learn more I found this very useful spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZW6TlsuGv7oQFEv8sryubIzYyQ8OFebY_1or7TYzrdY/edit#gid=1827593641

        that someone made from this info http://www.invive.com/Calorie.html.

        I have been WFPB for two and a half years and lost 3.5 stone in a year (roughly a pound a week). But in the last 8-10 months I have put back on almost 2 stone and this is mainly to do with PBJ WW sandwiches and All-Bran Cereal/Bran Flakes and dried fruits like figs. I also love my seeds and nuts. These are all mostly in the mid/high – high calorie dense foods.

        Don’t get me wrong, I still wolf down my fruit and verggies and legumes.

        So I will drill down on this list and try to minimize those foods that are calorie dense.

        Thanks

        Andrew

    4. You might try consuming more plant oils George. Pour a tablespoon of olive or nut oil into your oatmeal or bowl of beans for example.

      Knees will violently jerk when they hear any suggestion of consuming oil for better health. So protect yourself from them by reading Dr. David Perlmutter’s “Grain Brain,” “The Better Brain Book,” and “Brain Maker.”

      (Dr. Perlmutter makes uninformed knees jerk too.)

      1. By “uninformed” I suspect that you mean studies, analyses and comments that don’t confirm your opinions.

        As for Perlmutter and his absurd claims (eg shamanic healing ceremonies), I would suggest people read this article below before wasting their hard-earned money on any of his books. Yes, he is a very successful marketing whizz but an ability to make lots of money isn’t a guarantee that he is giving good advice
        https://www.thecut.com/2015/06/problem-with-the-grain-brain-doctor.html

        Regarding oils, people might also try watching the videos on this site and following up the references in the :Sources Cited drop-down box, eg
        https://nutritionfacts.org/video/olive-oil-and-artery-function/

        1. You are so entirely full of yourself that there is no room left for additional oil anyway.

          My bibliographies themselves contain many hundreds of citations. You quote but two or three.

          You are a poser.

          1. What bibliographies?

            In any case, just posting your opinions and vaguely referring to bibliographies doesn’t prove that you know what you are talking about. Nor does responding with personal attacks instead of addressing the statements made in the two links provided in my post.

          2. Navy Corpsman,

            Your comments “You are so entirely full of yourself” and “you are a poser” are an ad hominem argument: You attack the messenger rather than the message itself. It’s one of many debating tricks, used when rebuttal arguments are weak or non-existent. So, by using it, you are basically admitting that you don’t have strong or even good arguments in response to the previous comments.

            They’re also impolite.

            Can you actually rebut the articles cited to which you responded with facts and evidence, rather than castigating the person who provided the citations?

    5. Hi George,
      Nice question. I have found Cron-O-Meter to be very useful in figuring out calorie density. You enter the food, modify the serving size to g for grams and enter 454 then hit enter. There are 454 grams per pound. A class of whole plant foods that are relatively high in calorie density are nuts. Dr. Greger does an excellent job introducing the Calorie Density concept and its scientific basis. If you want to see a bit more I and my patients have found Jeff Novick’s presentation, Calorie Density: Eat More, Weigh Less and Live Longer, helpful. It is available for free viewing on YouTube. Some of my patients want to “gain” weight… most seem to want advice in the other direction! It is an individual choice but too much fat on your body is not healthy… barring a famine. Our more “experienced” citizens… guilty here… oft benefit from adding muscle which unfortunately is not accomplished by eating. Good luck and hope this was helpful.

  2. My experience supports this.
    I had been vegetarian and low sugar/white flour for many years. March 2018, I started working out at the gym 4-5 times a week (had just been walking and doing yoga) I went totally vegan last November. Even though I am doing none of this to lose weight, only to be healthy, I did lose weight, beginning about 7 months into the vegan whole foods diet.
    I don’t want to lose weight, so now- for the first time in my life – I have to make sure to eat enough.
    A dream come true!

      1. Hey Spring,

        I am trying to understand beet juice.

        Can I buy the powdered stuff and have that actually do anything?

        The Naked Beet chips are a pretty good snack, but they are dried and don’t seem to benefit.

        Do I need to juice them myself?

        I watched the Beet video and organic has fewer Nitric Oxides and powdered beets seem pretty dry, too.

        I am doing so well at incorporating blueberries and leafy greens, but I haven’t solved for beets and beets turned out to be the vegetable with the reaction time improvement. Three of my relatives fell this past week and last year I had so many people fall (and die because of blood thinners.) Beets would be a good topic for me to have under my belt, but the charts were in an unfamiliar type of unit for me, plus I would need to increase those portions by 15% because of the fact I do organic, but first I need to know can I just buy the can of powdered beets?

        1. I have also been nailing my turmeric and ginger with organic golden milk, but I made the mistake of buying some cashews with turmeric and ginger and cardamom and cinnamon and I am going to like those, too much.

          I tasted one, just out of being intrigued and immediately wanted to make a cashew sauce with those to see what it would taste like in a meal, but I brought them home and ended up snacking on them and ate them all in a week.

          I can’t have nuts like that.

          I end up doing the blueberries in a plain unsweetened almondmilk yogurt with golden milk and cacao mixed in. I ended up adding in a small amount of Manuka Honey and I am not sure if I am messing up right and left.

          I guess I need clarification.

          Does the almondmilk yogurt do the same thing as regular yogurt? Am I using up all the benefits of my blueberries and turmeric, etc?

          Can I throw in enough blueberries and turmeric to compensate?

          I am sorry. Some of us are confused by some of these details.

  3. Energy density eating has been around at least for 30 years and was pioneered by Dr Roy Walford M.D. who was one of the first crew locked inside the Biosphere in Arizona back in the 1980’s. His entire program was the result of animal research where they found that feeding animals nutrient rich low calorie food most every bio-marker of health improved and THE ANIMALS LIVED LONGER than the control group. He wrote a great book about it called “The Anti Ageing Plan- The only diet scientifically proven to extend the length and quality of life’.

    1. Jimbo, I have not read the book you refer to, though I have seen articles on the biosphere.

      I was going to say also that I disagree with Dr Greger about calorie density being a new concept. I am sure the book sellers would like us to believe it! Back in the 1960’s Jean Nidetch created Weight Watchers using the idea of caloric density in her food group classifications. She had an unlimited veggie group filled with thing like celery (safe to be unlimited since were not drawn to this grouping, but to the forbidden list where the cookies and chips etc were) When the rubber meets the road, it still comes down to willingness to drop the foods we are addicted to.

      1. The earliest study I found from Barbara Rolls went back to 1984, but I don’t know if she started with it before that or not. It just was a start date to one of her studies.

    2. I thought Walford’s approach was basically calorie restriction as a means of life extension? The energy density approach doesn’t necessarily require calorie restriction to succeed.

      There is an argument that whole food high carbohydrate/low protein diets are just as effective as CR, eg

      ‘Both caloric restriction (CR) and low protein, high carbohydrate (LPHC) ad libitum-fed diets increase lifespan and improve metabolic parameters such as insulin, glucose and blood lipids. Severe CR, however, is unsustainable for most people; therefore, it is important to determine whether manipulating macronutrient ratios in ad libitum-fed conditions can generate similar health outcomes. We present the results of a short-term (8 week) dietary manipulation on metabolic outcomes in mice. We compared three diets varying in protein to carbohydrate ratio under both CR and ad libitum conditions. Ad libitum LPHC diets delivered similar benefits to CR in terms of levels of insulin, glucose, lipids and HOMA, despite increased energy intake. CR on LPHC diets did not provide additional benefits relative to ad libitum LPHC. We show that LPHC diets under ad libitum-fed conditions generate the metabolic benefits of CR without a 40% reduction in total caloric intake.’
      https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4472496/

      In other words, some suggest that calorie restriction may succeed because it restricts protein (rather than because it restricts calories)
      https://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-animal-protein-restriction/

  4. To make things simple, the message is in the video, just eat more greens, grains, beans and fruit to still the hunger and combat the overweight.

  5. Oddly enough I lost a good amount of weight by eating one meal a day at breakfast. I ate a lot of vegetables with some protein source (small amount of fish/seafood/occasional liver), but I would cook it in about a third to half cup of unsaturated oil. My study research indicated that Fats/oils slow the digestive process down drastically thereby increasing satiety much longer. This decreases the Highs and Lows with Blood Sugar and reduces the hunger drive from drastic Blood Glucose swings. For me satiety lasted until the next morning. Also that eating all my calories in a 4 hour period indicated that lab results were improved.
    During the day I drank tea, mostly decaffeinated, but with Stevia (I have a sweet-tooth). My exercise regimen was at the end of the day and was riding my bicycle for 1.5-2 hours. I dropped about 18 pounds. People asked if I was ill, but my labs were great, my BMI was lower within normal limits and I have a lot of energy. People expect us to be fatties.

  6. I have been binge-watching Dr. Greger videos today.

    I laugh because America is binge-watching the wrong thing.

    I even ate cherries today.

    Another fruit, which I never ate. We will see how many new ones I eat this year.

    Not bad and, by not bad, I mean that they are likely to not be the kind that are going to give me any Melatonin, but I ate a new colorful fruit and got past the “I hate cherries” which was probably more to do with the ones I hated on ice cream sundaes.

    I haven’t tried strawberries or raspberries or apricots, except that I found a cacao and goji berries and apricot snack thing in the bulk department of Whole Foods and I bought it because cacao can hide everything and technically, I ate goji berries and apricots in my junk food. It is to get past mental barriers. I mentally feel like I ate apricots and goji berries and I technically did, even if I could only really taste chocolate. It is the mental warfare process that I figure mattered more.

    Anyway, Dr. Greger I wandered through your website and I got to all of these comments by you when you used to have time to comment more and you are such a sweetheart. You really are so highly motivational and you are such a nice person. Thank you for being like that.

  7. I wish sometimes you talked more about some of the results of some of the studies.

    I was looking at the Alzheimer’s videos and got to the study from Norway and I was following it pretty well.

    The elderly women performed better on cognitive tests when they ate dose-dependent up to 500 g/d of fruits and vegetables. For mushrooms, it was linear – so that would mean the benefit kept going? The white potatoes and whole grains showed a dose-dependent improvement in cognitive function up to 100 g/day.

    Question 1 is: Mushrooms kept going? Is that what linear means?

    Then, they said that the most pronounced benefits were from carrots, cruciferous, citrus fruits, and high fiber bread.

    Okay so far, except that I want to ask: Citrus fruits and high fiber bread showed the most pronounced benefits? Is that because that is what they ate more of? Notice the absence of beets and greens and berries from that list.

    Okay, now to add to the mystery, I looked at the list of foods which came next which gets very specific and gives amounts counting down to negative numbers for white flour, cakes, and a category called, “Other fruit juices” which I think contradicts the findings of at least some of the best fruit juice video unless they don’t have grape juice and cranberry juice and pomegranate juice and all of the other things which are above orange juice on that video, which is most of the juices.

    Okay, their tested best for cognitive functioning list goes like this and I want you to notice where spinach and green cabbage end up and look where cucumbers and where berries are..

    Apples 0.088
    Red Bell Peppers 0.087
    Cucumbers 0.075
    Citrus 0.074
    Legumes 0.072
    Lettuce 0.072
    Carrots 0.067
    Cauliflower, Broccoli, Brussel Sprouts 0.061
    Orange JUICE 0.057
    Tomato 0.057
    “Other fresh fruits” 0.054
    Flour, Rice, Pasta 0.048
    Cabbage 0.038
    Onions 0.033
    Berries 0.031
    Rutabaga 0.022
    Breakfast Cereal 0.022
    Spinach 0.003
    Green Cabbage 0.003
    High Fiber Bread 0.002

    The bad ones come after this which are just the white flour, cookies, cakes, pastries and “other fruit juices” which I guess there are a few beneath orange juice on the fruit juice video, so maybe they just don’t have good selection of fruit juices there.

    1. Okay, I think I get it.

      Probably nobody eats beets or drinks grape juice or eats kale there.

      Maybe with berries it might be that very few people eat them and maybe orange juice and cucumbers might have gotten such high scores because they are something only fruit and vegetable eaters eat?

      Or something like that.

      1. Some things like berries maybe everybody eats some, even people with cognitive impairment.

        Sorry.

        Laughing.

        The cognitively impaired person watching the cognitive videos got a little lost.

        1. I looked up the Citrus Flavanoids and maybe I am not giving them enough respect.

          I found titles like this:

          Neuroprotective effects of the citrus flavanones against H2O2-induced cytotoxicity in PC12 cells.

          Modulation of Akt, JNK, and p38 activation is involved in citrus flavonoid-mediated cytoprotection of PC12 cells challenged by hydrogen peroxide.

          Protective effects of the citrus flavanones to PC12 cells against cytotoxicity induced by hydrogen peroxide.

          Nobiletin, a citrus flavonoid, activates vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein in human platelets through non-cyclic nucleotide-related mechanisms.

          Update on uses and properties of citrus flavonoids: new findings in anticancer, cardiovascular, and anti-inflammatory activity.

          Neuroprotective effects of citrus flavonoids.

          1. I guess oranges and maybe even orange juice is back on the table for me to try.

            If I suddenly get smarter from drinking orange juice, I will laugh.

            I feel like I should start with orange juice just for kicks.

            Role of hydrogen peroxide in the aetiology of Alzheimer’s disease: implications for treatment.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14960126

    2. /For mushrooms, it was linear – so that would mean the benefit kept going?

      Short answer, yes.

      Long answer, it depends on how they grouped the results. If the scores were only recorded in three groups (eg up to one mushroom per year, more than 1 per year and up to one per month, and more than one per month) and the lowest score was group 1, the second highest score was in group 2 and the highest score was in group 3, then we could say the results were linear.

      It could but wouldn’t necessarily mean, though, that the more mushrooms people ate the higher their cognitive scores – it just describes the results as analysed and reported in that paper.

        1. Thanks, Tom!

          Yes, they did brain tests, but how many mushrooms they ate and how often isn’t what is being emphasized and without knowing that all I can know is that they didn’t keep going until they found a plateau. But, they weren’t doing that type of study. They weren’t saying, “Could you eat a container of mushrooms every day and see if we can just keep making you perform better and better on the cognitive tests?”

          1000 containers of mushrooms later, suddenly, they are solving concepts Einstein grappled with. Not likely to happen.

          I almost learned something else yesterday, but I can’t remember where to find it.

          Microgreens failed at one of the brain protective phytonutrient type tests.

          I can’t remember what it was about.

          I just remember the sentences, “but not in Microgreens” and I thought it would be easy to trace my steps from yesterday, but I looked way too many things up.

          Today, at the PEMF site, someone excitedly mentioned Microgreens as a potential way to solve for how to rival Dr. Wahls without needing to quite fill up my shopping cart so much, and I went to type what I had learned that they didn’t have one of the brain-protecting phytonutrients of some sort, but I couldn’t remember which one or what it was about. Just that Microgreens had come up way short.

          1. I also had a thought about Colin’s concept of Whole – where he is saying that all this micronutrient focus has led to stress and confusion and that is not good for us.

            I feel like it is almost the opposite, for myself. All this confusion has led to micronutrient focus and the more I learn, the less stress I have about all of it and because so many people are reversing diseases, learning it all is the opposite of stress entirely. It is hope.

            I guess if I were a young person who hadn’t been raised SAD and didn’t have disease and wasn’t requiring medical care or weight reduction or anything at all, then, it could be like when people say, “I never watch the news because it is so negative.” Or politics.

            Laughing, I bury my head in the sand about the news and about politics and I feel so much healthier at most levels, but I also know that I don’t really know what is going on and that might produce its own cortisol someplace but as long as I stay so mindful that I never try to understand anything at all, every little things gonna be alright.

            1. Plus, exercise and learning hard topics are both “stress” but I chose to use nutrition as a brain plasticity subject and I know that I am learning it without science and without statistics and with every body in my life trying to confuse me, but they are going to try to confuse me every single meal whether I learn the micronutrients or not.

              I feel like the industries and the advertisements and the press and my friends and family and the con artists on the internet all are going to confuse me more if I don’t learn it.

              1. Plus, those of us who grew up without the internet and who thought it would destroy families and the young people eventually were forced to use it and it is ten zillion times harder to learn these things without a foundation.

                I still know so many people who don’t know how to use a mouse or what a search engine is.

                I was talking with a young woman whose entire job ended up being that because of how uneducated people are.

                Health is the same way and eventually people get old and it is harder to learn it then.

                I am older and have brain problems but every sentence is Japanese to me. (Greek is on the Bible and they teach the words in Bible Study so I needed a different language)

                1. Even WFPB followers might get sick and might get old and might suddenly be trying to learn it all after a brain breakdown and that really sucks.

                  My cousin has been in rehab and they keep figuring out his insulin wrong because they don’t understand the meals. They keep having him crash dangerously low.

                  I don’t know what cholesterol or triglycerides or A1c even is because I skipped that part. Trying to learn it but lab results are not my favorite subjects.

                  But I know I might turn 90 and have to try to follow a doctor trying to explain it then.

                  Medical version of “What is a mouse?”

                  1. I think about High Carb Hannah gaining 40 pounds on raw mostly fruit and Ryan Happy Healthy Vegan testing high for triglycerides and having teeth problems and the whole stream of lemmings leaving raw vegan because of things like SIBO or the 16 cups of spinach or turning orange from carrot juice, etc.

                    So it seems like people might try to not worry about it and something always makes it necessary to actually learn it.

  8. My flatulence smells like burnt rubber, particularly after eating split peas and red lentils. Recent Youtube videos make me think of these things. Plant vs animal protein for digestibility. Protein indigestibility and risk of developing gut dysbiosis. Putrefaction of undigested dietary proteins. Rancidification of undigested dietary fats. Bile with not enough choline to emulsify fats. Any help would be appreciated.

    1. After more casual web browsing, I’ve figured that plant protein’s and fat’s digestibility issues are because of fibre. The undigested protein and fat are trapped in the fibre matrix. Since our bodies can’t break down the fibre, and the protein and fat are trapped there, it’s likely it’s benign in the gut even if it does putrefy or go rancid. I wonder about the protein guidelines. One recommendation is 0.8g/kg/day of protein. Do I consider this recommendation based on protein isolate or whole foods? Are the protein values listed in food databases based on ‘gross’ protein or ‘net’ protein? By gross i mean the total (digestible and indigestible) protein and net I mean the absorbable protein. If I guesstimate a two thirds absorption in plant protein, should my intake be one and half times the target? So if I want 0.8g/kg/day, then i should aim for 1.2g/kg/day?

      Also, could someone make sense of Prof. Donald Layman’s work? Here’s the DOI: https://doi.org/10.3945/ajcn.114.084053. I would like this information seen through the NF lens to put it into perspective.

      So the gas and bloating are from all those oligosaccharides and sulphurous compounds. It’s a problem. I’m starting to offend people. Especially in a crowd setting.

      1. There’s no need to micromanage your food. For the last 20 million years, our ancestors evolved to eat a WFPB diet. You and I are the result. Our finely tuned physiology is perfectly designed to eat a wide range of whole fruits and vegetables to obtain all the nutrients we need in the correct amounts. You are correct about the fiber. Many nutrients are trapped there, but this is a good thing, because when food is refined to release those trapped nutrients we absorb too much of them too fast and then suffer from diabetes, heart disease, cancer, etc, due to “over-nutrition”

  9. Hi Arthur – Thanks for your question! If you use the Daily Dozen as a guide, eating the recommended 3 servings of cooked beans is approximately 1 pound (or equal to just under 1 can of beans). This is great daily goal to strive for. If you find that you are eating so many beans where it is starting to take away from your intake of other healthful foods (example: fruit, veggies, whole grains, ect), remember to focus on balance and variety in your diet too. The Daily Dozen is a useful tool to help with this! (https://nutritionfacts.org/video/dr-gregers-daily-dozen-checklist-2/)

    I hope this helps!
    -Janelle RD (Registered Dietitian & NutritionFacts.org Health Support Volunteer)

  10. thank you for the video. But I think you got some of the facts wrong.
    Your quote:
    caloric Intake nearly in half, from 3000 calories a day down to 1570 and they lost an average of 17 pounds in just 21 days.

    that is not possible. Here the math: calories savings per day 1’430 x 21 days = total calories saved: 30’030
    30’000 calories divided by 7 calories per gram of bodyfat = 4’290 gr of bodyfat and not 17 pounds (7.7 kg).
    It is physically not possible to loose 17 pounds in 21 days.
    I think the study was for 10 weeks.

  11. Hi, I have a question about food combining and am curious if this is one of those “myths” regarding weight loss. I have been reading a lot about how to ease digestive issues. I follow a plant based diet and experience bloating and gas due to the high fiber foods that I eat. I have been reading that your body can not digest certain food combinations together which is what causes this discomfort and sometimes even weight gain. The recommendations/rules can be distilled to the following:
    1. ALWAYS eat fruit alone.
    2. NEVER combine a starch with a fat.
    3. NEVER combine a starch with a protein.
    4. Allow 3 hours digestion between meals.
    I have been following these “rules” for the past few weeks and have noticed that I am no longer bloated or gassy, and do actually feel better, but I’m skeptical on the “science” behind this. And this way of eating is very limiting.
    I’m interested in hearing your thoughts on this type of food combining lifestyle/diet.
    Thank you for your input!

  12. I believe you are following some unfounded myths, similar to the debunked proteing-combining myth https://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-protein-combining-myth. In fact sometimes eating foods in combination results in improved health: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/food-synergy/ As the first video stresses, the body is quite good at combining nutrients in just the way it needs to without worries that we must laboriously combine our foods in a certain way.
    That said, looking ar the “rules” you were following, Id agree you should wait 3 hours between meals (or considerably more!) if you want to lose weight!)
    You’ll lose weight just fine by eating a whole food plant based NO OIL diet. Best of health to you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This