"Avoid processed food" may not be a diet panacea

[Nicest of the Damned]

Atlantic article on why avoiding processed food may not be the solution to the obesity epidemic:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... _page=true

Turns out, unprocessed food can be as dense in calories as manufactured junk. Things like portion control and not overdoing it on sweets are still necessary even if you're not eating processed food. Who knew? (All of us No S'ers, a la The Stonecutters Song: "We did. We did.")

Interesting quote, buttressing the idea that you shouldn't worry about things like antioxidants if you are 50 lbs overweight:

The health concerns raised about processing itself—rather than the amount of fat and problem carbs in any given dish—are not, by and large, related to weight gain or obesity. That’s important to keep in mind, because obesity is, by an enormous margin, the largest health problem created by what we eat.

[Jayhawk28]

"Interesting quote, buttressing the idea that you shouldn't worry about things like antioxidants if you are 50 lbs overweight:"

Loved this..........I'm about 75 pounds over my ideal bodyweight and in my perfectionism, I've ofted stressed about too much sugar or making sure my beef was grass fed and my eggs were pastured. Eating less processed food makes sense and I agree with the sciene of the Paleo Diet. But it makes ZERO sense to worry about that when I can't control my own habits.

If I can't control my tendency to binge eat, then it won't matter what I eat. Establishing basic habits initially is so much more important. Even three weeks into No S, I'm still fighting not to go super low carb to lose weight "quickly." I've done that madness so many times before. And it always ends with me eating $12 worth of donuts after depriving myself for two weeks. I can't go down that road again.

[leafy_greens]

I'm wary of the "unprocessed" phase. Snacking all day is bad even if it's unprocessed.

[Nicest of the Damned]

I'm wary of the "unprocessed" phase. Snacking all day is bad even if it's unprocessed.

Yes. I think "processed" food may be the new "bad" food, where it's supposedly OK to eat as much as you want as long as you avoid the "bad" food. You know, kind of like fat in the '80s or carbs in the '00s.

[leafy_greens]

I'm wary of the "unprocessed" phase. Snacking all day is bad even if it's unprocessed.

Yes. I think "processed" food may be the new "bad" food, where it's supposedly OK to eat as much as you want as long as you avoid the "bad" food. You know, kind of like fat in the '80s or carbs in the '00s.

Exactly. The unprocessed food may be harmless calorie-wise, if we are talking about raw fruits and veggies. But it contributes to the permasnacking habit, and you are likely to reach for something more calorie dense if those unprocessed foods are not available. You could also get into the mindset that unprocessed calorie-dense foods (such as grains, fats, nuts) are ok in unlimited amounts, which will not do anything to help you avoid weight gain.

[saracatherine]

"Interesting quote, buttressing the idea that you shouldn't worry about things like antioxidants if you are 50 lbs overweight:"


If I can't control my tendency to binge eat, then it won't matter what I eat. Establishing basic habits initially is so much more important. Even three weeks into No S, I'm still fighting not to go super low carb to lose weight "quickly." I've done that madness so many times before. And it always ends with me eating $12 worth of donuts after depriving myself for two weeks. I can't go down that road again.

You're not alone in this. I'm working on really focusing on the basic habit building (ie vanilla no s) and living my life. I was at my leanest (and most self-righteous) doing paleo but once that "broke" for me ( anxiety was high, I was becoming a social recluse, etc) I could never do it again for more than a couple of weeks without reacting against it in some extreme way. Hang in there!

[Jayhawk28]

I spent so much time on Mark's Daily Apple and reading books like the Paleo Solution and Wheat Belly. I agree with the science and I know many people get great results. But I had high ANXIETY. I felt like I could never do anything with anyone because I would esposed to vegetable oil or I would have to say no to pasta. I was miserable. Even then, I would start Paleo over and over again after failing and binging for a few days.

Over time, I'd like to eat more in the Paleo/Primal style, but it has to come out of a sense of peace and wellnes and not out of a sense of obligation or mentality of "quick fix." I'm the king of letting perfect be the enemy of good. Classic all or nothing approach.

[saracatherine]

I spent so much time on Mark's Daily Apple and reading books like the Paleo Solution and Wheat Belly. I agree with the science and I know many people get great results. But I had high ANXIETY. I felt like I could never do anything with anyone because I would esposed to vegetable oil or I would have to say no to pasta. I was miserable. Even then, I would start Paleo over and over again after failing and binging for a few days.

Over time, I'd like to eat more in the Paleo/Primal style, but it has to come out of a sense of peace and wellnes and not out of a sense of obligation or mentality of "quick fix." I'm the king of letting perfect be the enemy of good. Classic all or nothing approach.

Totally could have written this post myself, all of it. When my habits are solid (4 months? 6 months? a year?) I might employ more MDA stype stuff, but maybe by then the mental stuff that pushes me that way will have fixed itself. (Edited to add that I've basically had to make a rule for myself not to read the paleo blogs and whatnot - like a drunk has to abstain from booze...)

[emmay]

Jayhawk28 and saracahterine, your posts ring true for me too. Early last year, I was following the primal blueprint and reading Marks daily apple regularly. Then stress hit, both from the low carb dieting and other life stress. I started bingeing, first on primal allowed foods, then on anything.
For a long while I thought I would get back to primal/paleo eating once I sorted out the stress eating. I agreed with the science too and thought I would combine No S and primal. But now I have all but forgotten the primal blueprint in favour of old fashioned balance and moderation. A portion of carbohydrate with my meals, along with the vegetables, protein and fat, helps me feel satisfied for longer. I am perfectly happy to eat grains, legumes and potatoes, even bread and pasta.
As for unprocessed foods. They are great but you can still overeat them. I have done it many a time, especially nuts and fruit. Overeating is a problem, even if the thing you are eating is healthy, low calorie, low carb, unprocessed, organic etc.

[wosnes]

It doesn't appear that readers of The Atlantic were very fond of this article.

I've been avoiding processed foods longer than I've been following No-S. My avoidance of processed foods had nothing to do with weight loss, but was an instruction from my cardiologist to reduce sodium in my diet.

There was little, if any, weight loss. Largely because at least initially I wasn't eating less. What I did see was improvement in all the markers of health from blood pressure to total cholesterol (and the fractions) and everything else. Not only that, I just felt better. The best way I can describe it is "less sluggish." Much less sluggish.

Based on my own experience, I'd have to say that what you eat is important no matter what your weight. If you're normal weight or 50 pounds overweight, eliminating processed foods can improve your health.

[Blithe Morning]

Once you get past disrobing the Emperor of his wholesome food garb, the article is really about the intractability of food deserts and the socio-economic realities of addressing the obesity crisis. Freedman makes a fairly compelling case that Big Food and Fast Food are coming on board as partners to change the food lower socio-economic groups -those with the highest incidences of obesity - are eating.

Wholesome food, better-for-you fast food, standard American diet, whatever; I think until we remove the idea that snacking is good for you we are pretty much shutting the windows but leaving the door wide open.

[oolala53]

Any program that states or implies that you can eat something with abandon as long as you leave something else out is going to have a huge failure rate at establishing moderate habits, as its premise is that necessary moderation will come naturally just from eating certain foods. Of course there will be some successes; that is the natural corollary (right word?) to a failure RATE.

I do believe it is EASIER, but not easy, to eat moderately of foods NOT designed to overcome that natural appestat. That's the whole point. But the food itself is not the only factor in doing that, as aptly shown by Brian Wansink repeatedly.

I'm not a purist and I won't expect others to be on this front. That is a recipe for disappointment, for economic and plain human reasons. I've got plenty of those recipes already. I do worry for those who have a lot fewer resources than I do, but I also know when the motivation is strong, a lot can become possible that wasn't before.

I can resent the food industry all I want, but I do sometimes wonder what kind of work many of those in the lower ranks of it would do if the whole society actually snacked less and resorted to manufactured food at the rate I do. I'm not saying it's a reason to keep overeating. I'm just thinking out loud. I wonder what percentage of our labor market such work is and how it compares to countries such as France and Italy, which are my benchmarks. I 'm in love with the concept of moderation and do believe it is a desirable goal, but I don't claim it would not create other very real problems along the way.

Which is getting pretty far afield of the original article. Yes, quality food is much more expensive to produce, and is not a panacea for overeating.

[Nicest of the Damned]

Based on my own experience, I'd have to say that what you eat is important no matter what your weight.

I would agree, but I would also add that how much you eat is important no matter what you are eating. Diets that encourage people to eliminate some type of food too often ignore that.

[Jethro]

At the end of the day, the cure for obesity is to eat less.

This fellow lost weight on a junk food diet:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/tw ... index.html

[AndreaRN9]

Americans seem to be on the constant lookout for that magical class of food that, when eaten in abundance, doesn't cause weight gain or, when eliminated from the diet entirely, leads to effortless weight loss.

Might as well search for the Holy Grail or look high and low for a Unicorn.

Right now it's *cue scary music* processed food. The current thinking is pounds will just melt away as long as everything you eat comes from the farmer's market, your cheese is artisanal and your beef is grass-fed. When multicolored locally grown fingerling potatoes are lovingly fried in first cold-pressed organic olive oil they don't make you nearly as fat as the crappy french fries McDonald's serves, or so they think.

I follow a blog of a woman who, over the course of several years, lost 120 lbs. She did it by changing eating habits (no processed foods, healthy, etc.) and exercising A LOT. Well, she has since since put back on what looks to be like 40 or so pounds (although she won't say) which is pretty typical. The kicker is her diet. She's vegetarian and eats in a style that would make Pollan and Bittman profoundly proud. She posts pictures of her meals and they're like an advertisement for the whole foods movement. But, that doesn't mean they're not calorically dense because they most certainly are. That's why she's put back a lot of weight even though she continues to exercise.

A whole foods locally grown artisanal blah blah diet can have just as many excess calories as a processed diet. It's just as easy to overeat a whole foods diet as it is a processed diet. It's the height of magical thinking to believe that somehow you'll eat less of that delectable calorically-dense whole foods meal because your body "senses" the nutrition in it and therefore "stops" you from overconsuming. People actually believe this.

Ounce for ounce, artisanal cheese has as many calories as Kraft American Cheese. Ounce for ounce, corn oil has as many calories as first cold-pressed unfiltered organic olive oil. We can argue night and day about whether one delivers more meaningful health benefits than the other but both, consumed in excess will lead to weight gain.

[oolala53]

Yeah, just about no matter what, the amount of calorically dense food in your diet is what determines your general weight. Some of them bind up a few more pounds of water in your body than others so that you might weigh more, but that is usually harmless.

How much dense food do you really need on a daily basis to be pleasantly satisfied, not stuffed too often? (Turns out, not much.) How many times a day do you want to spread it out over? (Most days, three.) How will you fill your time when you're not eating? (Ongoing.) Those are the questions it has all boiled down to for me. Eating better quality food is an excellent idea but isn't weight-loss foolproof. Or idiot-proof, as we might say.

Are Americans the only overweight people looking for such miracle plans? I traveled in Peru a few years ago. I saw a lot of fat people for a country with a 50% poverty rate. Even many of the rural people weren't skinny, though I think most of them were glad of that, and probably should be. Restaurant portions were very big, especially of potatoes. I saw ads for the same kinds of weight loss tactics. Gyms, diet foods, etc. Humans often mistake short term ease for long term value. I know I do it every day, but less so with food...

[Blithe Morning]

One of the unspoken assumptions behind the superiority of wholesome foods is that you don't need as much to be satisfied. A small serving of the fingerling potatoes will do you just as nicely as monstro-mcfries.

Don't know if this is true. I like wholesome foods for reasons other than weight managment.

[AndreaRN9]

One of the unspoken assumptions behind the superiority of wholesome foods is that you don't need as much to be satisfied. A small serving of the fingerling potatoes will do you just as nicely as monstro-mcfries.

Don't know if this is true. I like wholesome foods for reasons other than weight managment.

It's not true. It's magical thinking. Both can easily be overconsumed. In fact, one could argue that the fingerling potatoes prepared by that 5-star chef are eaten in greater quantity because they are MORE delicious than the monstro-mcfries.

I like wholesome foods, too, and make it a point to eat them. But they must be limited (eaten moderately) or else weight gain follows. Personally, it's just as hard for me to limit wholesome foods as it is for someone who loves processed foods to limit them.

[Nicest of the Damned]

If you eat wholesome, unprocessed foods in the kind of large portions that you've become accustomed to from fast food, you shouldn't be surprised if you don't lose any weight. Unprocessed foods aren't magic, they won't somehow prevent you from eating too much.

[leafy_greens]

It's the height of magical thinking to believe that somehow you'll eat less of that delectable calorically-dense whole foods meal because your body "senses" the nutrition in it and therefore "stops" you from overconsuming. People actually believe this.

Bingo, that's the whole foods movement in a nutshell.

[wosnes]

I've found it to be partly true that I'll eat less of foods I prepare from scratch than the prepared version of the same foods. The two examples that come to mind are bread and macaroni and cheese.

I make my own bread. I eat less of it than squishy white bread, rolls or the rolls that come in a tube from the grocery. It's denser and more satisfying.

I can easily eat all of the macaroni and cheese that comes in the blue box. I can eat a lot of the frozen variety, too. When I make it at home, a more reasonable serving satisfies me.

However, that's not among my top five reasons for eating more whole, mostly unprocessed foods.

[vmsurbat]

I make my own bread. I eat less of it than squishy white bread, rolls or the rolls that come in a tube from the grocery. It's denser and more satisfying.

Ha, ha! This is completely the opposite at our house! I make a lot of our bread, too, and we tend to eat MORE of my bread just because it is soooo much tastier than most store-bought loaves!

Which is our biggest reason for more whole foods/homemade food--real food, home-prepped food just tastes good. On a recent visit to the states, I was so disappointed to discover how many prepped foods from Trader Joe's now tasted "off" and I always considered TJs the best of the best with pre-prepped foods; I had been so looking forward to a few weeks of really easy meals...

We have many people over for meals (dozens and dozens throughout the year), and most think I'm a fabulous cook.

But I'm not really a fabulous cook--a cook, yes; fabulous, no. However, because so many people have so few home-cooked meals, they rave about my cooking (which is often recipes from my trusty Better Homes and Garden (for basics) and the Eating Well site (for modern taste combos)), so nothing particularly gourmet or fancy or requiring unusual cooking skills.

I, for one, am very glad to see a rising generation interested in getting back to the kitchen to cook: for good health, for economy, for warm family memories. I just find it funny that they think they've discovered something new....

[Dale]

Yes, I DON'T make my own bread, because I eat too much of it! I hardly ever bake now . It's just too much temptation. It's easy to get fat on delicious, home-made healthy food. I'm not sure that I would have put on as much weight if I'd just been eating things like tinned food and ready meals.

[oolala53]

No S has helped me develop my skill at savoring food no matter what. The deliciousness has become less of a reason to eat more, even if my mouth tells me I'd like to. I'm more aware of the heaviness later when I do, so that now, I can enjoy the experience of a moderate portion and the appreciation of it before, during, and after without continuing to eat it. But it doesn't come overnight or even over 100 nights.

[Blithe Morning]

I've found that I can be satisfied with less of a wholesome food than its processed counterpart. However, the wholesomeness of the food does not intrinsically limit the portion. I rely on the plate for that.

[wosnes]

I've found that I can be satisfied with less of a wholesome food than its processed counterpart. However, the wholesomeness of the food does not intrinsically limit the portion. I rely on the plate for that.

You said exactly what I was trying to say.