| Author | Post |
|---|
Redrom
New Member
|
Posted: 2 Aug 2006 08:21 pm |
|
We've been doing ETL for months now, and enjoyed great success. I don't think of it as a diet but as a way of life, and not a very rigid one at that. We eat a little meat, coffee, alcohol, occasionally even going out to eat, and have lost lots of weight. Probably ~45 lbs this year, though the first 15-20 were on Weight Watchers Core Program, which we found to be rather similar, though not as consistently as logical as we've found ETL to be.
I have not had many questions about the program, but would like to better understand what he considers to be Processed Foods. He advocates minimizing breads and pastas, but then suggests using Pitas. Tofu and soy milk seems to be a processed food to me as well, which seems to be Ok, but soy cheeses should be used more sparingly (per his website not the book). Dried fruits should used sparingly, but are included in recipes (raisins). I'm just wondering if anyone follows the logic, because I feel like I might be missing something here.
We've just been taking the suggestions lightly, and will probably continue to do so. We got some homeade pasta from the local Farmer's Market where the producer grinds the wheat berries just before making the pasta (yum!), but then gained some weight. There's so many variables in the diet since we don't do it rigidly, I was just hoping for some perspective. Thanks.
Last edited on 7 Aug 2006 05:40 pm by Redrom
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 3 Aug 2006 10:48 pm |
|
The kind of processing which is to be avoided is refining. Think of what happens when you start from olives or nuts, and you end up with oil as the end product, or start from grain and end up with refined flour. So processing which loses nutrients or results in a less nutrient-dense food is the problem. You're not going to eat the wholewheat flour with a spoon, so you might as well get the wholewheat pita-bread. Try looking at a food (processed or otherwise) and guessing its nutrient density. Low-fat milk would be 13, full-fat milk is closer to 4; soy beans themselves will be 48 and whilst Soy milk would be less it would still probably be better than the '13' of low-fat milk.
Fruit is 45, and I'm sure raisins are lower than that, but they're better than sweets (nutrient density 0).
That's my guess anyhow.
|
Redrom
New Member
|
Posted: 4 Aug 2006 05:47 pm |
|
Thanks for the reminder; the Health=Nutrients/Calorie is certainly the foundation of the ETL logic.
Still, I'm left wondering more about the Pita example; why would this be less processed or refined than a good slice of whole wheat (local bakery sells Omega-3 seed whole grain bread)? Maybe it's the sweetener needed to get bread to rise? We could always get our wheat by eating bulgar wheat (hey, it's a lot tastier than it sounds!). Is he suggesting the pita (even on the fast loss plan) to remind us to not worry about the details, was it to make the "diet" more palatable, or does he just like pitas and couldn't give them up himself?
I've been able to give up milk (much more easily than originally anticipated), and have no doubt that Soy Milk is healthier than Cow Milk. I just think it (and Tofu) are very refined as well.
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 5 Aug 2006 07:05 am |
|
I see your point about Pita vs other wholemeal products. Probably not that different. (nutrient density 22, by the way).
Tofu has some good numbers - not that dissimiliar from pulses themselves (in terms of calories per 100g and % calories from protein). I agree it is processed. I guess its flexibility in recipes makes up for slight loss in nutrient density, as far as Dr Fuhrman is concerned?
TVP (which is in plenty of recipes in the book) is also a processed product and I've once read some less-than-complimentary things about the production method for that (not that it stops me using it).
For unprocessed whole-grain, my favourite is air-popped popcorn. 100 calories of that certainly has more volume than 100 calories of wholewheat Pita.
One thing that's personally giving me a headache is that he really doesn't want me to get any fruits/vegetables from a tin (preferring fresh, frozen or dried) yet tins are quite convenient for me. Could either be the over-cooking or the added salt/sugar. This is an easier illustration of loss of nutrient density.
|
Redrom
New Member
|
Posted: 7 Aug 2006 12:44 pm |
|
That reminds me of another question I've been wondering about. For ETL purposes is corn considered a starchy vegetable, or a grain?
Now I'm thinking that maybe the pita suggestion is more about what accompanies the bread. Typically you end up putting butter &/or cheese, etc on breads, while using healtier toppings for a pita - hummus, etc.
Canned vegetables for us is a decision we make specific to the vegetable; artichoke hearts are actually better frozen than canned, we've even started making our own beans, but Whole Foods makes amazing "refried" beans with chilies and without any added oil (in a can). We still haven't found a canned fruit were interested in though...
Last edited on 7 Aug 2006 05:11 pm by Redrom
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 7 Aug 2006 03:41 pm |
|
Quoting from the section "The Six-week Plan":
LIMITED
not more than one serving 250g per day
cooked starchy vegetables or whole grains
[...]
Examples of starchy vegetables include cooked carrots, sweetcorn, sweet potatoes, white potatos, butternut squash, acorn squash, winter sqush, chesnuts, parsnips, turnips, water chesnuts, yams and pumpkins.
So Dr Fuhrman counts it as a starchy vegetable. (personally I think of corn as a grain, in all its forms, with the exception of mini-corn-cobs of course, a beautiful vegetable that's just 25 kcal per 100g and 40% of calories from protein)
canned fruit: I like the convenience and price of pineapple (I've hurt my tongue eating pineapple that I have cut myself - I tend to leave too many of thse sharp bits intact). Locally canned peach is very inexpensive (?é?ú0.14) which adds flexibility in my kitchen.
|
Redrom
New Member
|
Posted: 7 Aug 2006 05:30 pm |
|
I hear what you're saying, but I still wonder about corn. Corn on the cob is a different variety from sweet corn, if I understand correctly. And when they're made into grits (a Southeastern U.S. favorite), its a lot more like some minimally processed grain, sort of like how rolled oats are "processed". I like popcorn almost as much as the wife, but it's a lot like bread in that it's nutrient value depends greatly on what you put on top of it.
You may want to re-evaluate your pineapple cutting technique if you're catching your tongue in the process... I know it tastes great, but try cutting it when you're not so hungry or at least before you start eating it! I'm sure I'll be right there with you next winter when the fresh fruit is hard to come by, but right now we're having all we can eat around here.
|
Theresa
Senior Member
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 06:31 am |
|
Hi Nir
Please help me understand nutrient density. Full cream milk has a lower nutrient density that low fat, why if you have taken something away from the full cream muilk is it more nutrient dense? I would think it's the other way around. Is this because the fat somehow prevents the body from getting at the good stuff like protein. I'm sure your'e rolling your eyeballs at me but it is definately an interesting topic. Help?
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 06:49 am |
|
nutrient density is defined as:
non-caloric-nutrients / calories
comparing low-fat dairy with full-fat dairy, the low-fat dairy has less calories but broadly the same non-caloric "goodness". [Think back to your maths lessons, if you divide by a smaller number you get a larger result]. If 100ml of full-fat milk is 70 calories and 100ml of skimmed milk is 35 calories, for example.
Does that help?
|
Theresa
Senior Member
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 08:03 am |
|
| So is it the lower the calories but the same quantity of food is high density. In otherwords your body works just as hard at digesting the two things that are the same amount but takes in less calories on the high density foods?
|
Nir
Senior Administrator
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 10:22 am |
|
look, there is a key concept here, you are not going to get it until you get over what the word density usually means (weight per volume) and how density is completely different
what are nutrients? they are vitamins, minerals, pytochemicals and fibre.
nutrient density is a measure of how much of this nutrient 'goodness' is in a calorie (or 100 calories) etc.
so using words like 'quantity', as you do above, shows me you have not got it yet.
diseaseproof.com/archives/healthy-food-nutrient-density-of-green-vegetables.html
take 100 calories of broccoli, compare with 100 calories of cake. One of those has more goodness than the other. any help?
Last edited on 11 Oct 2007 10:24 am by Nir
|
Theresa
Senior Member
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 11:24 am |
|
| ok I think I have it, The whole milk has a lower nutrient density because the fat doesn't have as much nutrients(goodness) as the low fat milk i.e. fat has a lower goodness(nutrient density). Thanks so much Nir, I will get there yet.
|
Peter
Founder of this forum
| Joined: | 24 May 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4180 |
|
Posted: 11 Oct 2007 06:08 pm |
|
Nir wrote: what are nutrients? they are vitamins, minerals, pytochemicals and fibre.
Don't forget the macronutrients... protein, fat and carbs.
Peter
|
Peter
Founder of this forum
| Joined: | 24 May 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 4180 |
|
Posted: 18 Nov 2007 02:23 am |
|
I was just re-reading this topic and the question about corn is a kick. I've posted about this elsewhere.
Fresh or frozen it's a vegetable; dried it's a grain, as when used in cornbread. And I don't have a clue where popcorn falls!
Peter
|
Current time is 11:24 am | |
|
