[Marxism] Re: atkins

Xenon Zi-Neng Yuan wenhuadageming at comcast.net
Fri Mar 26 13:28:21 MST 2004


At 12:14 AM 3/26/2004, Waistline2 at aol.com wrote:

>Why do the Atkin's diet work and Atkin's is dead and died as a fat man?

atkins wasn't really all that fat of a person, by american 
standards.  also, his death was the result of a hematoma caused by a head 
injury he sustained after slipping on a patch of ice.

these "low-carb" or "high-protein" diets are marketed as fads, but there is 
_some_ basis to their claims (though they use gimmick phrases like "carbs 
are the enemy", which is only a deceptive half-truth).  what they attempt 
to do is more closely approximate the dietary makeup of the paleolithic 
hunter-gatherer.  if you think about it, the neolithic age (advent of 
agriculture) is only 10,000 years ago in human evolutionary history - a 
heartbeat in relative terms.  for adequate digestion, grains and [mature] 
legumes require either a gristmill or earthenware cooking vessels, which 
only appear in abundance in the archeological record in the 
neolithic.  prior to this, carbohydrate sources were found mainly in fruits 
and tubers/roots.  (might also be interesting here to think of the 
allergies people have to wheat gluten, soy, and peanuts)

the human body has only one hormone to deal with blood sugar: 
insulin.  meanwhile it has myriad of methods for regulating fat and protein 
(hgh, glucagon, epinephrine, cortisol, etc).  i personally think this 
indicates that humans evolved to need only one blood-sugar-regulating 
system, while it developed redundant methods for the more commonly 
encountered fats and proteins.  there is a reason why many predatory 
animals and hunter-gatherer tribes value most highly not the flesh, but the 
blubber, brain, heart, and liver of their prey - FAT, not carbohydrates, 
was the primary source of calories.  even with early agriculture, the 
insulin probably helped with the seasonal feast/fast cycle, making use of 
the availability of carb sources by shuttling it all into your fat cells in 
preparation for the oncoming deprivation.  it's when you get a surplus, as 
an attempt to deal with scarcity, that things start to change - as marxists 
should probably know, hehe.

trying to go "low-carb" in an industrialized society however, usually means 
consuming the flesh of feedlot animals, which are fed an unnatural (and 
wasteful and ecologically unsustainable) diet of soy and grains in order to 
speed their growth for the purpose of selling on the market.  by nature 
cattle are meant to consume greenery, and that's pretty much it (although 
in temperate climates, the winter diet sometimes needs to be supplemented 
with hay and a minimal amount of grain).  the problem with feeding 
livestock with soy and grains is that the balance of omega-3 fatty acids is 
therefore thrown completely out of whack, as soy and corn contain almost no 
omega-3 in proportion to omega-6, whereas in nature the ruminant digestive 
system is meant to extract and over time accumulate the small amounts of 
omega-3 that exists in vegetation.  as a result, you get meat that's 
unnaturally high in saturated fat and omega-6 fats.  a hunter-gatherer diet 
gives you an omega-3:omega-6 ratio of at least 1:1; the traditional inuit 
diet for example is as high as 2:1.  a typical american however, gets a 
ratio of about 1:10, or sometimes even as high as 1:20.

anyway, more information can be found on the net about all this.  in 
conclusion, i nonetheless agree that the diet of modern humans is totally 
out of sync with what we evolved for.

xzy  





More information about the Marxism mailing list