Why do we get fat

Chapter 28: Meat or Vegetarian?This is a problem (2)
In fact, all sugar-rich foods are relatively recent in human history.Many high-sugar foods are only a few hundred years old, one hundred thousandth of the 250 million years we've been on the planet.Machine-processed flour can only be traced back to the late 19th century. 200 years ago we ate less than 20% of the sugar we eat today.

Even the fruit we eat today is very different from the wild fruit collected by primitive people.Today's fruit is available year-round instead of just a few months of the year when it's in season.Although nutritionists regard abundant fruit as a necessary part of a healthy diet, and the relative lack of fruit is indeed one of the dietary problems, we must pay attention to the fruits we eat today that are carefully cultivated by humans-red Fuji apples, pears, Navel oranges, etc., have long been artificially bred to be sweeter and juicier than wild varieties.So in fact, sweet fruits in the market are more likely to make people fat.

In our typical modern diet, more than 60% of the calories come from "modern foods", including cereals, dairy products, beverages, vegetable oils, condiments, sugar and sweets.If we believe that human genetic makeup has a say in determining a healthy diet, then the fattening causes of easily digestible starches, flours, refined white rice, and sweets may be that we humans have not evolved to safely eat The state of these foods, let alone the question of how much we should eat.

Diets without these foods are healthier.Moreover, meat, fish, poultry, and eggs, as the main sources of protein and fat, should be the mainstay of a healthy diet, just as our ancestors 250 million years ago ate.

This evolutionary perspective is very evident in the "trophic transitions" of certain groups of people throughout history.In history, the eating habits of some groups were broken by the civilization of the invaders. After changing the natural eating habits, dietary changes are always accompanied by changes in diseases.These conditions include: obesity, diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke, cancer, Alzheimer's disease and other memory loss disorders, tooth decay, periodontitis, appendicitis, mouth and stomach ulcers, diverticulitis, gallstones, hemorrhoids , varicose veins and constipation.These diseases are very common in societies leading "modern life".And if you don't live in this kind of society, these diseases can't be said to exist, at least they are not common.When a traditional society starts to adopt a modern (Western) diet and way of life, through trade or immigration (voluntary or forced, such as the slave trade), the incidence of these diseases can quickly increase dramatically.

Chronic diseases are lifestyle diseases.This view was first put forward in the mid-19th century.The French physician Stanislas Tanchou said: "Like insanity, cancer seems to develop with the progress of civilization." This is now an indisputable fact of the connection between diet and health.Unhealthy modern diets lead to modern diseases, especially obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer.

Taking breast cancer as an example, compared to the United States, breast cancer is relatively rare in Japan.But when Japanese women immigrated to the United States, their children and grandchildren were as likely to develop breast cancer as native Americans.This may explain some of the links between American lifestyles and diets and breast cancer.There is a similar trend among the Inuit. Before 1960, almost no Inuit developed breast cancer (as did the Pima, another indigenous group mentioned earlier). When they were Westernized, the disease The rate has risen astonishingly.

However, this issue is slightly controversial.The impact of lifestyle and dietary habits on chronic disease appears repeatedly in the research literature.Colon cancer in rural Connecticut is 10 times more likely than in Nigeria; Alzheimer's is much more common in Japanese Americans than in Japan; twice as likely as people living in rural Africa.Pick a disease at random from the list of chronic diseases, and then find two corresponding regions—for example, one in the city and another in the countryside, or one that has experienced Westernization and one that has not—to compare groups of the same age group If you look at the situation, you will find that people living in urban and westernized areas are more likely to suffer from this disease, and vice versa.

Mainstream nutritionists and public health authorities also blame modern Western diets and lifestyles for the problem.However, they define the modern diet as: rich in meat, sugar, with very few vegetables and fruits.They define this as living with too many calories and too little movement.Based on this, experts tell us that if we stay away from meat, avoid processed foods and sugars, eat less or at least not too much, eat mostly plant foods with more fruit, and exercise, we can Prevent these diseases and prolong life.

The problem with this claim is that experts dismiss any food in the modern diet as bad.But what if only some parts of the Western diet are unhealthy, while the rest are good or even beneficial?Lung cancer is also a modern disease. After all, we cannot attribute it to Western diet and inactive life, but to smoking.The basis for this judgment is that we have found that non-smokers develop relatively few lung cancers, while smokers have significantly higher rates of lung cancer.

When the "criminal behavior" of obesity has occurred, we should narrow down the range of "suspects".First of all, in well-studied non-Westernized groups, a significant number of people eat a lot of meat or don't eat fruits and vegetables at all, and they have less heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and less obesity.I think this can show that eating meat is not the cause of these diseases.The so-called "meat-eating causes cancer, vegetarians can not suffer from it" has long been put forward, however, it cannot explain the reason why cancer is prevalent in vegetarian society.For example, in India, where Hinduism is popular, the incidence of cancer is still high, but the Inuit who eat reindeer and Indians who eat meat rarely get cancer.

Humans can adapt to a wide range of non-modern diets, from meat-only to vegetarian-only.All of these populations are less likely to suffer from modern diseases.A more logical explanation, then, would be to find out how the modern diet differs from all of these groups (whether meat-loving or fruit-rich).The answer, it turns out, is exactly what people in hunter-gatherer societies ate almost entirely: grains, dairy products, beverages, vegetable oils, condiments, sugar and candies.

In 1966, Thomas Cleave and George Campbell wrote Diabetes, Coronary Thrombosis, and Saccharinosis, in which they argued that populations in isolated societies began eating modern diets At that time, sugar and refined white rice noodles are the first choice, because these foods can be exchanged to all parts of the world through trade the fastest, will not spoil, and the cost is extremely low.

Modern diseases followed when the Inuit, who lived on seal, reindeer, and whale meat, began eating biscuits and bread; Diseases arose, too; when the inhabitants of the South Pacific islands, living on pork, coconut, and fish, began eating sugar and refined white flour, they arose; appeared; even the vegetarian Hindus who considered good food to be a vice started to gain weight once they started eating sugar.In view of this, should we not blame sugar and flour as the cause of these diseases?
In my opinion, this is quite reasonable.I hope, you too.However, it conflicts with the diet of "eat more sugar and less fat" and conflicts with the deep-rooted concept of nutritionists that "fat causes heart disease", so the authorities have greatly underestimated the harm of refined sugar.

In this way, if the fat and protein we eat are not the real cause of obesity, heart disease, etc., we should consider what is the cause.In the next chapter, I will share the latest research results related to diet-induced heart disease, and I will no longer be limited by traditional thinking.

(End of this chapter)