Nuts

A place to get your questions answered from McDougall staff dietitian, Jeff Novick, MS, RDN.

Moderators: JeffN, carolve, Heather McDougall

Postby JeffN » Thu May 29, 2008 6:36 am

Suebee wrote:Thanks Jeff--by the way your erudite, lucid comments have won me over! I'm convinced starches are the healthiest way to base a diet. Any ideas what I could do at this conference I foolishly signed up for? Or should I just not worry for the five days we'll be there? Still--I don't want to fill up on nothing but low-calorie vegetables and fruits and lots of nuts to keep hunger away! Why this anti-grains and starchy vegetables is beyond me! It sounds like a hang-over from natural hygiene philosophy. (I don't know if he ever was in that movement). Keep encouraging us Jeff--we love you!


Enjoy the 5 days and do not worry. Just relax and have a great time.

Then, come back and let us know how it was and what your experience was.

In Health
Jeff

PS for the record. Dr Fuhrman and I serve together on the Board of Directors of the American Natural Hygience Society for the past 10 years or so. I served as the Vice President. I recently stepped down as VP to take the position of Director of Health Education for the organization, now known as the National Health Association. During the same time, Dr Fuhrman and I also served as the "Science Committee" , which we still do. Our goal was to bring Natural Hygiene out of the era of folklore and misinformation and into the arena of science based recommendations. I also helped him with the research and diet analysis for his first 2 books and have written many articles for his newsletter and have nothing but respect for him.
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

whoa

Postby ncyg46 » Fri May 30, 2008 7:34 pm

guess i have to be careful saying anything about the other site. I do think he needs to take a break and stop stressing...He is a very dedicated man, but he really needs a personality regroup...sorry. Didn't know you worked for both of them..I have all the veg source dvds and love your talks but he is the worst speaker, personality wise and he looks terrible.

Just my opinion. He has been very nasty to me which I won't forget...glad to know this info...if you would like to know all the nastygrams he sent I can still look them up...depressing. I don't really think that if I don't eat nuts I will have sudden cardiac death...among other things. you can remove this if you want. I looked at your other site and saw my question on mono and diglycerides on there. I didn't bother to join...
User avatar
ncyg46
 
Posts: 5471
Joined: Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:38 pm
Location: Arizona, Florida

Re: Nuts

Postby JeffN » Mon Jun 21, 2010 10:18 am

gabriele wrote:Wow!! As a fairly new person to all of this, and as a fairly intelligent person (i'd like to think so at least) the more i read, the more confused i get.

I understand that this is Dr. McD's site. But i'm sure a lot of us go to other sites and read other books as well.

I'm "stuck" because i need a lot of order and structure around any diet for me to lose weight and regain health, and this new way of eating that i'm learning doesn't provide it. I'm used to counting calories and i'm discouraged from doing that. You read Dr. Fuhrman's site, which is different from Dr. McD's site. You read Dr. Graham's site, which is all about fruit eating and he says that grains are bad, they are not for human consumption, they are not a natural human food. You read raw websites that say cooking food is dangerous and destructive.

I'm depressed!!! I'm confused!! Help!!!! :eek:


Forgot the name of the diet and who is promoting it and just ask yourself a few simple questions in regard to whatever it is your are deciding upon in regard to health/diet..

Where and what is the evidence for these recommendations? What quality is the evidence? Are there any conflicts of interest with the person making the recommendation?

Then, as a fairly intelligent person, review it, weigh it and then you decide.

In Health
Jeff
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

Re: Nuts

Postby Katydid » Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:08 am

Jeff, I've been doing a combination of CR, MWL and a touch of Eat to Live. My only concern is whether I'm better off taking a multivitamin to get selenium or eating a Brazil nut. One is fat-free but the other is more natural. Thoughts?
Kate
This diet can save your life - it saved mine! Read my story at:
http://www.drmcdougall.com/stars/cathy_stewart.htm
User avatar
Katydid
 
Posts: 4686
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 8:30 am
Location: Marysville, Mi.

Re: Nuts

Postby JeffN » Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:45 am

You can read my thoughts on selenium here...

viewtopic.php?f=22&t=6500&p=67775

In Health
Jeff
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

Fats on nutrient dense foods

Postby sonicrami » Thu Oct 20, 2011 10:19 am

What about this? http://www.ajcn.org/content/80/2/396.long

About 5 walnut halves is enough to absorb all the phytonutrients of a nutrient dense meal. Bloodstream levels were measured without a fat and with. The results are significant.
sonicrami
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Nuts

Postby JeffN » Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:19 pm

All the points above, still remain.

Absorbing more doesn't automatically equate to better health outcomes.

Speaking of health outcomes, which is what really matters, lets put all of this into proper perspective.

From

"'Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids', Food and Nutrition Board. Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press, Washington D.C. Pp. 343-344 (2000)"

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=353

"These data, although in varying populations, suggest that 3 to 6 mg/day of β-carotene from food sources is prudent to maintain plasma β-carotene concentrations in the range associated with a lower risk of various chronic disease outcomes (see Table 3)."

Table 3:

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=341

As just detailed, plasma and tissue concentrations of carotenoids have been associated with a variety of health outcomes; that is, higher concentrations are associated with a lower risk of cancer, coronary heart disease, and all-cause mortality. This could be used as a possible indicator for establishing requirements for carotenoids. However, the limitation of this approach is that it is not clear whether observed health benefits are due to carotenoids per se or to other substances found in carotenoid-rich foods.

Thus, these data are suggestive of prudent intake levels, not required levels of intake. Recommendations have been made by a number of federal agencies and other organizations with regard to fruit and vegetable intake. Nutrient analysis of menus adhering to the U.S. Dietary Guidelines and the National Cancer Institute's Five-a-Day for Better Health Program, for example, indicates that persons following these diets would be consuming approximately 5.2 to 6.0 mg/day provitamin A carotenes on average if a variety of fruits and vegetables were consumed (Lachance, 1997). Similar levels would be obtained by following Canada's Food Guide for Healthy Eating which specifies a minimum of five servings of vegetables and fruit (Health Canada, 1997). Other food-based dietary patterns recommended for the prevention of cancer and other chronic diseases would provide approximately 9 to 18 mg/day of carotenoids (WCRF/AICR, 1997).


NOTE: this is 3-6x the amount recognized as being enough to lower disease risk

It is also based on the WCRF/AICR report from 1997. In many other discussions here, I have quoted the WCRF/AICR newest report from 2007 saying that they now more than ever, recommend dietary "patterns" over recommending specific "individual foods".

So, in other words, if Americans would just get in the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies, it would not only provide carotenoids, but more than enough of all of them to produce the beneficial health outcomes, including reduced risks of cancer. And anyone following a Whole Food plant based diet, as recommended here, would already be consuming WAY more than enough.

Of course, the real issue is why do you have to increase the absorption of raw veggies (which are very low) when you can just eat tubers, which have almost the highest absorption rate, as is. :)

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=354

In Health
Jeff
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

Re:

Postby BenFTW » Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:40 am

f1jim wrote:NCYG46
Let it go!!!! I have traveled the path you are on and I see myself in you. Let go of the fatty food like peanut butter. There are isolated studies that can prove anything is healthy!!! But the truth is lot's of peanut butter or cashews will keep the weight on, contribute to your heart disease, and keep your taste for fatty foods at the forefront. I think back about what I used to put on my salads thinking I was being healthy and I cringe now. I was getting more fat from my salads than someone else next to me was eating in their cut of meat! It's hard to wean away from this stuff but once you have done it the same habits that were hurting you can be helping you. Now my salads are large and topped with balsamic vinegar and I love them. I have a large salad twice a day and it has made a world of difference in my weight and blood lipids. For me, I was the poster boy for the comment that Dr. Caldwell Esselstyn makes when he says "with heart disease moderation kills." See, if I ate a little peanut butter I would eat a lot...If I ate a little salad dressing I would eat a lot. Does that sound familiar to you at all? I used to have every excuse why this or that food was okay for me. Chest pain and fear were enough to bring me back to reality. If you check out nothing else please invest the time to watch this video and understand why the struggle is so hard and what can be done to make it easier. It's funny and informative at the same time.
http://vsh.voip-info.org/lisle.html
Good luck to you.
Your teammate in good health.
f1jim


Do you have another link to that video, as it seems it was taken down? :S Or any video on nuts, fatty foods, and your taste buds?
BenFTW
 
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 7:37 pm

Re: Nuts

Postby didi » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:00 am

There are lots of walnuts sold in my supermarket but although I looked all over the package I could not find their nationality. So I don't know if they are English walnuts.

Someone on one of these discussions uses cannellini beans in the hummus he or she makes in place of tahini. I tried it and it works great. You might want to try blended up cannellini beans in your salad dressing recipe instead of nuts and see if it has an acceptable taste.

didi
didi
 
Posts: 2777
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: Nuts

Postby f1jim » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:48 am

Try this link for Doug Lisle:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxf4kj8Rb6Y

f1jim
While adopting this diet and lifestyle program I have reversed my heart disease, high cholesterol, hypertension, and lost 54 lbs. You can follow my story at https://www.drmcdougall.com/james-brown/
User avatar
f1jim
 
Posts: 11349
Joined: Sun Feb 17, 2008 4:45 pm
Location: Pacifica, CA

Re: Nuts

Postby sonicrami » Sat Oct 22, 2011 8:54 pm

JeffN wrote:All the points above, still remain.

Absorbing more doesn't automatically equate to better health outcomes.

Speaking of health outcomes, which is what really matters, lets put all of this into proper perspective.

From

"'Dietary Reference Intakes for Vitamin C, Vitamin E, Selenium, and Carotenoids', Food and Nutrition Board. Institute of Medicine. National Academy Press, Washington D.C. Pp. 343-344 (2000)"

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=353

"These data, although in varying populations, suggest that 3 to 6 mg/day of β-carotene from food sources is prudent to maintain plasma β-carotene concentrations in the range associated with a lower risk of various chronic disease outcomes (see Table 3)."

Table 3:

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=341

As just detailed, plasma and tissue concentrations of carotenoids have been associated with a variety of health outcomes; that is, higher concentrations are associated with a lower risk of cancer, coronary heart disease, and all-cause mortality. This could be used as a possible indicator for establishing requirements for carotenoids. However, the limitation of this approach is that it is not clear whether observed health benefits are due to carotenoids per se or to other substances found in carotenoid-rich foods.

Thus, these data are suggestive of prudent intake levels, not required levels of intake. Recommendations have been made by a number of federal agencies and other organizations with regard to fruit and vegetable intake. Nutrient analysis of menus adhering to the U.S. Dietary Guidelines and the National Cancer Institute's Five-a-Day for Better Health Program, for example, indicates that persons following these diets would be consuming approximately 5.2 to 6.0 mg/day provitamin A carotenes on average if a variety of fruits and vegetables were consumed (Lachance, 1997). Similar levels would be obtained by following Canada's Food Guide for Healthy Eating which specifies a minimum of five servings of vegetables and fruit (Health Canada, 1997). Other food-based dietary patterns recommended for the prevention of cancer and other chronic diseases would provide approximately 9 to 18 mg/day of carotenoids (WCRF/AICR, 1997).


NOTE: this is 3-6x the amount recognized as being enough to lower disease risk

It is also based on the WCRF/AICR report from 1997. In many other discussions here, I have quoted the WCRF/AICR newest report from 2007 saying that they now more than ever, recommend dietary "patterns" over recommending specific "individual foods".

So, in other words, if Americans would just get in the recommended amounts of fruits and veggies, it would not only provide carotenoids, but more than enough of all of them to produce the beneficial health outcomes, including reduced risks of cancer. And anyone following a Whole Food plant based diet, as recommended here, would already be consuming WAY more than enough.

Of course, the real issue is why do you have to increase the absorption of raw veggies (which are very low) when you can just eat tubers, which have almost the highest absorption rate, as is. :)

http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=9810&page=354

In Health
Jeff


Thanks for the graph, very interesting information and really good to know the bio-availability certain foods. It would seem though that including a small amount of fat (5 walnut halves, sprinkling seeds) with a salad would be beneficial. Why not have extra phytonutrients flowing through your system?
sonicrami
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Nuts

Postby JeffN » Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:13 pm

I just showed you how easily it was to get in the amount and more shown (and known) to be effective, even for cancer, as recommended by the leading scientific organizations in the world, including the largest most recent independent report on cancer.

And, how a tuber based diet would automatically have a higher absorption.

So, since none of these groups and their review of evidence from over 5000 studies support your contention, the "burden of proof" would now be on you to support your contention with equal or better evidence.

In Health
Jeff
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

Re: Nuts

Postby sonicrami » Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:19 pm

JeffN wrote:I just showed you how easily it was to get in the amount and more shown (and known) to be effective, even for cancer, as recommended by the leading scientific organizations in the world, including the largest most recent independent report on cancer.

And, how a tuber based diet would automatically have a higher absorption.

So, since none of these groups and their review of evidence from over 5000 studies support your contention, the "burden of proof" would now be on you to support your contention with equal or better evidence.

In Health
Jeff



I am not arguing your point, I agree with you. I am simply saying it seems that it doesn't matter if I were to get extra is all...unless I am misinterpreting the links.
sonicrami
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:51 am

Re: Nuts

Postby JeffN » Sat Oct 22, 2011 9:53 pm

sonicrami wrote: I am not arguing your point, I agree with you.


Great!

sonicrami wrote: I am simply saying it seems that it doesn't matter


Than you would have to prove that as that is not what I am saying.

I am saying it does matter.

Why do something that there is no evidence for, when we have plenty of data and evidence that doing it the way I am recommending not only works but works well.

sonicrami wrote: if I were to get extra is all...


Where is the evidence that adding in the nuts to get this "extra" absorption, above and beyond getting in more than enough without adding the nuts, as I showed above, is better?

You are also adding in 75 more calories, some more sat fat, some more omega 6s, all of which people do not need more of, in order to get a little more of something that you are providing no evidence of, that it is beneficial.

sonicrami wrote: unless I am misinterpreting the links.


All things have to be put in context, which is the part you are not doing.

BTW, are you implying that somehow or other, that the inclusion of a limited amount of nuts is not allowed here?

In Health
Jeff
User avatar
JeffN
 
Posts: 9412
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 5:56 am

Re: Nuts

Postby sonicrami » Thu Nov 03, 2011 7:05 am

JeffN wrote:
sonicrami wrote: I am not arguing your point, I agree with you.


Great!

sonicrami wrote: I am simply saying it seems that it doesn't matter


Than you would have to prove that as that is not what I am saying.

I am saying it does matter.

Why do something that there is no evidence for, when we have plenty of data and evidence that doing it the way I am recommending not only works but works well.

sonicrami wrote: if I were to get extra is all...


Where is the evidence that adding in the nuts to get this "extra" absorption, above and beyond getting in more than enough without adding the nuts, as I showed above, is better?

You are also adding in 75 more calories, some more sat fat, some more omega 6s, all of which people do not need more of, in order to get a little more of something that you are providing no evidence of, that it is beneficial.

sonicrami wrote: unless I am misinterpreting the links.


All things have to be put in context, which is the part you are not doing.

BTW, are you implying that somehow or other, that the inclusion of a limited amount of nuts is not allowed here?

In Health
Jeff

\

I got your from oil to nuts DVD. Great stuff. A lot of new info i didn't previously know!
sonicrami
 
Posts: 61
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:51 am

Previous

Return to Jeff Novick, RD

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests



Welcome!

Sign up to receive our regular articles, recipes, and news about upcoming events.