~~~~~nutrition nazis 2012~~~~~

> know about chlorophyll in liquid form as a supplement

Generally, whole foods are better choices. Kale is 0.2% chlorophyll and spinach 0.12%, but also offer all the carotenoids and other micronutrients of fresh vegetables. The liquid supplements are solvent extracts (using acetone or DMSO), and run 100 mg/1 Tbsp, or roughly the amount in a 50 g of kale, or 3 cups loosely packed leaves.

Most research is on oral hygeine and topical application in wound healing or local inflammation. There's not much besides toxicology studies on oral ingestion. In rodents natural chlorophyll is poorly absorbed (its recognized in enterocytes and actively rejected), though sodium copper and esp. zinc derivatives aren't well recognized and are somewhat bioavailable. In vitro, chlorophyll appears to be a weak inducer of the the antioxidant response element, so its plausible that the small amounts that are absorbed might improve improve cell resistance to oxidative challenges.

In general, it hasn't attracted much interest, but I suppose it might be a natural alternative to herbal salves on wounds.

Thanks!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mascha-davis-mph-rdn/so-you-want-a-new-superfo_b_9542054.html?utm_hp_ref=healthy-living%22

“[Moringa] has the potential to make a massive impact in countries that bear the burden of malnutrition, where 3 million deaths in children under five years are due to lack of adequate calories and protein…With the leaves containing 30 percent protein and the ability to grow quickly even in harsh environments, moringa is a unique plant that can be a major part of the solution.” says Mascha Davis MPH, RD, founder of NomadistaNutrition.com in her article for The Huffington Post.

i'm not sure if it's PMS or this diet but i've been irritable af since i started it, and my skin is not impressed with the situation either.

it's also really hard to eat 2100 cals of fruit before 6pm - it's so much mass! i feel like i'm constantly eating all day, and even then i struggle to get it all in.

i've been using cronometer.com to keep track of macro nutrients, and i realized the other day that my vit A levels are really high - two days i got something like 2100% of the RDI. when i looked it up, i found out that bc it's fat soluble, toxicity is an issue and effects are really severe. so i was freaking out, since vit a is impossible to avoid in large amounts when you're eating this much fruit and sweet potatoes and pumpkin, but it seems only preformed vit A (from animal products) is really dangerous in excess amounts while proformed vit A from plants is much less toxic.

wouldn't 2100 calories of fruit be like, a massive amount of sugar?

yes! it's tons! but fructose doesn't trigger an insulin response and has a low GI - apparently. i'm not a legit enough researcher to quote anything as fact.

it certainly doesn't give me energy spikes :/ i don't feel any different than when i started this 2 weeks ago.

i knew a fruitarian. she went raw for a few years, then switched to all fruits

she did lose weight and at the beginning, yes, her skin was bad, but it cleared up and she did have pretty nice skin after a few months

was going to reply to your original post, just1n3, but decided not to because i don't know how much you're telling us about your eating habits and past eating experiences (and you probably don't want to, understandably)

the thing that jumped out at me is low energy. i'd go to the doctor's but i'm assuming you've done this already so are exerpimenting with different diets. if this is the case, have you tried reading about how to better absorb vitamins/minerals in foods? and eating different food combinations

Vitamin A on cronometer combines both preformed vitamin A (retinol) and pre-vitamin A carotenoids (mostly β- & α- carotene). Vitamin A hypervitaminosis is possible with preformed vitamin A, so if you're a explorer, lay off the polar bear and seal livers. The body self-regulates vitamin A production from carotenoids, so there's no upper limit. Traditional diet Okinawans do very well on a diet of 80% sweet potato.

High-dose β-carotene supplementation caused poorer outcomes in smokers in some studies from the 90s. The reason may be that the carotenoids (both provitamin A and not) compete for absorption, so high doses of one reduce availability of others. So too much β-carotene reduces uptake of lycopene, lutein, zeaxanthin etc. The lycopene (and cooked tomato intake generally) has some benefits in preventing prostate cancer and skin photodamage, the lutein & zeaxanthin are critical for preventing UV-damage to retinas.

Most problems with added sugar appear due to fructose content, and the problem with fructose in high doses appear due 1) liver metabolism when glycogen replete/sedentary, and 2) small intestinal fermentation and resultant increased endotoxin load. Whole fruit have microstructure and fiber that slows fructose availability, and compounds (esp. brighter colored fruit) have antibacterial compounds that modulate the microbiota. On the whole, the youtube fruitarian characters (ie, DurianRider and gf) that get away with eating 3000+ kcal bananas daily get away with it because they're long-distance bicyclists. Personally, I limit myself to 4 servings of dark berries.

does a Sanpaku do nootropics

sanpaku best robot out of all ilxors

A robot would have better spelling/grammar.

No nootropics. There are too many tardive (slow-appearing) adverse effects from any interventions to modulate neurotransmitter signalling, from tardive dyskinesia with antipsychotics to tardive dysphoria with antidepressants (where I have much painful experience*). The brain does its high-wire balancing act by integrating a lot of inputs, and will compensate with oft-bad consequences when we tug. I'm a frequent contributor at the the Longecity forums, and have witnessed many complaints of tardive effects with a variety of putative nootropics. The nootropic self-experimenters there respond by cycling between nootropics that affect different neurotransmitter systems, but it always seemed like a lot of expense for disappointing results.

*BTW, before anyone starts down the long descending road of pharmaceutical depression treatment, I strongly recommend working on the trinity of daily exercise, regular sleep, and conviviality/social networks. I can see using drugs with acute episodes, but there are better options for that than the slow-acting SSRIs, like dissociatives in inpatient settings.

how do i get abs in 6 weeks or less, solely through adjusting my diet but without cutting out beer

∞, i grew up in pretty restrictive food environment - very plain meat+veg, must eat everything on the plate or sit at the table all night till you do, candy was an extravagance, etc. so when i left home, i just became a terrible eater. i was a chubby kid - not fat, even though my mother told me i was - but at 16 i suddenly lost my appetite and then lost a ton of weight (then she accused me of being anorexic!). i was eating, but not as much. so until i was in my mid-twenties i would binge-starve - not with intention, but i ate what i wanted when i wanted, so sometimes i might not consume anything for a week except cups of tea and a couple of candy bars. then i might sit down with my friend on a monday night to watch tv and eat an entire 250g block of chocolate, + triple cream brie with crackers. i just didn't care! i maintained a pretty slender weight throughout this period, so i didn't bother learning to care.

i'm also a really picky eater, and by that i mean there are some foods i literally can't put in my mouth or i start gagging. texture is often a problem for me as well.

i figure i've fucked my metabolism from years of this way of eating. i started putting on weight when i moved to the US 8 yrs ago, and then when i went on antidepressants 2.5 yrs ago, my weight increased quickly (20lbs!!). i'm in my mid thirties now, i can't afford to be so disinterested in my health anymore.

the low energy thing - i've had my blood worked up, nothing there :/ but i've had moderate insomnia for about the last 3-4 years, so that's probably a big factor. drugs aren't really helping much.

i'm gonna see this out for another two weeks and if i haven't noticed much of a difference, i'll try a modified version.

even if i notice a big difference, this isn't a sustainable lifestyle for me - i would probably keep at it for a year or so, and then try to eat like a normal healthy person. i'm using this diet as a sort of reset button, i guess.

well i'm not even going to pretend i have some solution or have experience with your situation, but i sympathise

i'm a fan of adjusting/tailoring your diet to how your body responds to it

when i moved to the states, my sodium levels/blood pressure did shoot up. i don't particularly like salty foods and notice it's every where in los angeles. if i go out to eat i make sure to balance that out within the week by eating less salty things (which i usually do anyway) or by eating different/healthy things to counter that sodium. i try not to eat out more than two days a week, as well

insomnia/lack of sleep does horrible things to your body, including your diet, right? hope you find something that works for you

For insomnia: exercise, no lights (especially bluish ones) past bedtime, supplemental melatonin and try the sweet amino acid glycine in your tea.

As for "abs in 6 weeks, solely through adjusting my diet but without cutting out beer", I can't help, but there are some experimental myostatin inhibitors that are being examined for frailty/sarcopenia that will be the next banned drug for strenth athletes.

This is what being born without endogenous myostatin does:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-xRzQqYv2hBo/VQVDJ-omr_I/AAAAAAAAIRU/ZO4DJ7GX7yI/s1600/bd.png

how do i get abs in 6 weeks or less, solely through adjusting my diet but without cutting out beer

consume nothing but beer until abs appear.

treeship just do like a thousand crunches a day

Xps it's been long enough that I've already tried all that stuff and a lot more, sanpaku

tha brodawg needs leg days asap

Thinking about nn'ing this year. I'll have to go back through the archives. To study you, to eat as you do, to become a nutrition nazi. Any particularly "classic" posts?

the whole original thread, featuring cutty, filled me with envy. i loved the idea of his insane routine. i hope he is keeping up with it.

(7227 of them)

okaaaay, I'll check back in with you guys next month.

sad eyed dog plaintively asks how much ya bench

one word: sardines

xps to how's life: cut the sodium waaaaaaaaay down. use something like cronometer.com to start getting an idea of the nutritional content of the foods you typically eat.

so i just spoke to an old acquaintance who's gone through various iterations of veganism for the last 18 years or so, including fruitarian, 80/10/10, raw till 4, and she gave me some sensible advice and a bunch of links. i'm gonna stop trying to force down so many fruit calories, and ease way off the high amount of starchy carbs rawtill4 recommends.

one issue i have is with leafy greens and especially bitter greens: i can handle raw, undressed greens like spinach and lettuce in a smoothie, but not really the amount needed, and i definitely cannot stomach eating bitter greens. what to do???

sodium is delicious

i know :/

don't make yourself eat shit you don't like

Cooked greens are much less bitter - if you blanch them in boiling water before smoothy-ing the flavor isn't as strong. Ditto a quick saute/wilt if you're eating them whole. If you want to mask a lot of greens flavor, IME, putting in a half a lemon does wonders in smoothies.

Sodium may not be the bugbear we once thought. I wrote this elsewhere:

Salt intake recommendations have become more controversial of late. A number of recent studies suggest heath risks are associated with both high and low sodium intake, and arguably lowest overall in the 2.5-6 g intake range that most consume: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

High salt-intake is still associated with hypertension and stroke risk in salt-sensitive populations like African-Americans, but low-salt intake (even just the AHA recommended range) may have its own hazards. From Reducing Salt Intake for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease—Times Are Changing:

"Sodium restriction low enough to decrease blood pressure also stimulates sympathetic tone, attenuates insulin sensitivity, activates the renin-angiotensin system, and stimulates aldosterone secretion. The antagonistic nature of these physiological responses probably antagonizes the blood pressure lowering effect of dietary sodium restriction and might increase rather than weaken the cardiovascular risk."

This meta-analysis of low-sodium intervention studies offers a long list of effects, both positive and negative:

"Sodium reduction resulted in a significant decrease in BP of 1% (normotensives), 3.5% (hypertensives), and a significant increase in plasma renin, plasma aldosterone, plasma adrenaline, and plasma noradrenaline, a 2.5% increase in cholesterol, and a 7% increase in triglyceride"

Estimating benefits from salt reduction while considering only BP (as in 10, 11, 12) doesn't reflect this more complex situation, or the J-shaped risk curve seen in the aggregate of studies. Reverse causation in hypertensive patients would cause serious issues with these studies, which is why the large-scale prospective studies often exclude individuals with CVD at baseline. In the recent PURE study, for example, the increased risk at low sodium intakes was robust when all participants with a history CVD, cancer, diabetes, or smoking were excluded.

I anticipate that recommended salt intakes will remain contentious - there are entrenched viewpoints, and back and forth accusations of statistical manipulation seethe from the pages. A reasonable conclusion from my reading is that while all groups would benefit from lowering sodium intake below 6 g/d, intakes under 2.5 g/d benefit those with hypertension while increasing risk in those with congestive heart failure and diabetics. For reference, American sodium intake has averaged 3.5 g for decades.

The average blood pressure response to sodium is small (2 mm Hg / 2.3 g Na in normotensives), compared to other dietary components like added sugars, and hugely variable between individuals . I think this is a topic where perhaps the perfect shouldn't be the enemy of the good, and while consuming salt in moderation we can perhaps focus on other factors with more consistent results, like reducing added sugars and increasing potassium intake with more tubers and greens.

Whoa! Just got to a point where I realized (remembered?) Sanpaku = Derelict!

Getting kinda excited about sardines.

Thanks milo!

Lol harbl - eating only what I want is what landed me in this position! ;)

the risky, bad-for-you dietary salt is generally that cached away in preservatives. table salt is considered very low risk, at least w/r/t BP and CV disease.

j i get what you mean but that's the opposite of what i said! not eat whatever you want all the time (lol but i do this) but if you don't want to eat something, don't eat it. you only have so much brain fuel with which to do these will power exercises. there are plenty of other nutritious foods to eat instead. i kinda think you should cook them but it's your lyfe~~~~

FYI, Sanpaku = former-Derelict, now sober & smoke free.

i've officially given up on this damn fruit/starch diet. i gave it over 3 weeks and got nothing good out of it - no change in energy levels, quality or quantity of sleep, nothing. actually, the only differences i noticed were that my skin got worse and i got constipated. which do not seem like good signs that a lifestyle change is beneficial to my health.

i'm trying to get an appt with a dietitian to address my specific issues, but kaiser wants me to take a bunch of fucking classes instead, which i am not down for. it's gonna be the status quo food pyramid bullshit and no personalization, plus i hate group stuff. i'm a lone wolf, maaaaan.

i'd be happy to contact my rd friend to try and connect with you if you like. she is one of the most amazing people i've ever met\/ don't think she'd feel put out (too much). pm me if you like

Yeah, the Kaiser model is statistically based, so if a certain approach works 85% of the time, you must be subjected to it and prove that it failed for you before anyone is allowed to try any other approach with you. You can see why this is a scientifically sound methodology, but it sucks if you are in any way atypical and understand how your case differs from the statistical norm.

xps thankyou ODM! but i think it's just not the diet for me. i think lots of different extreme or semi extreme diets work, but only for certain people.

I would be surprised if the group approach works anything like 85% of the time in the long term.

remember this lol

i want to change the way i eat and live. making a vegan stir fry tonight. BUT also drinking a Sixpoint Resin so

i wish i could get hypnotized out of my love of IPAs. they're one of my only true dietary vices but they mess so much up--in the morning i will feel dehydrated and won't want to go running

unfortunately i do remember this

it seems like "nutrition nazis" is a self-defeating way to think about eating healthier. you gotta crave the good feelings that comes from health, not fetishize the fact that you're denying yourself foods that make you feel bad and hurt your health

how many times does it need to be said?!

i guess over and over until no one affixes "nazi" to the word "nutrition" anymore

Mostly I smirked thinking of the Great Sardine Stan of whatever year it was.

There was a LOT of talk about sardines at one point.