Good basic book on nutrition
flag
Messages 1 - 10 of 692 - Collapse all
/groups/adfetch?adid=tjKUlRIAAAC4IrGxFbmeT8MYITYkudI8A-seRgWUrY1Re68AkUbKNw
Good basic book on nutrition  
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
1.  Noelie Alito  
View profile  
 More options Sep 1 1992, 10:04 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: noe...@apollo.hp.com (Noelie Alito)
Date: 1 Sep 92 14:27:28 GMT
Local: Tues, Sep 1 1992 4:27 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition
Alan> I'm looking for a good basic non-fringe book on nutrition, comprehensible
Alan> to a random like me, and up-to-date and accurate.  Also practical (i.e.
Alan> describes how matters of nutrition affect a proper diet, not just
Alan> "this substance can have these effects").  Suggestions?

    Try Jane Brody's _Nutrition Book_  (_Good Nutrition Book_?),
    which should be available in any mainstream bookstore and is
    IMO an excellent book for the layman.  Flip through one:  It
    sounds just like what you are looking for.

    Jane Brody is the author of the bestelling _Good Food Book_,
    and had a food column in the _New York Times_.  She has also
    published more hard-core reference books on nutrition research
    (my sister lugged one home while studying to be a Registered
    Dietician).  She comes across as a food weenie that has done
    her homework.  

    Her books are thick but very readable (standalone chapters,
    well-cross-referenced) and her general philosophy is tempered
    by common sense.  The _Nutrition Book_ covers fat, caffeine,
    salt, cholesterol, childhood nutrition, osteoporosis, digestion
    in omnivores vs. carnivores (feel free to give your egg yolks
    to your dog or cats), pregnancy, et al.  There is vitamin/mineral
    table that gives 1) dietary sources, 2) known metabolic function,
    3) deficiency disease and 4) megadose effects (if any).  She
    throws in sample recipes here and there.

    This book is not the be-all, end-all.  It does not address
    exercise (check out Covert Bailey's _Fit or Fat_ books), nor
    does it aim at making you live forever.

    I would appreciate hearing from anyone WHO HAS READ THIS BOOK
    who can suggest one that has better/comparable coverage of this
    subject.

    Hope this helps.

    Noelie Alito     noe...@apollo.hp.com
--
Post naked.


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
2.  Steve Dyer  
View profile  
 More options Sep 10 1992, 3:14 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: d...@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 06:32:28 GMT
Local: Thurs, Sep 10 1992 8:32 am
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <BtwLHs....@apollo.hp.com> noe...@apollo.hp.com (Noelie Alito) writes:
>    Try Jane Brody's _Nutrition Book_  (_Good Nutrition Book_?),
>    which should be available in any mainstream bookstore and is
>    IMO an excellent book for the layman.  Flip through one:  It
>    sounds just like what you are looking for.
>    I would appreciate hearing from anyone WHO HAS READ THIS BOOK
>    who can suggest one that has better/comparable coverage of this subject.

You really can't do much better than her books.  I recommend all of 'em.

--
Steve Dyer
d...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
3.  Michelle Dick  
View profile  
 More options Sep 10 1992, 4:46 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 08:37:56 GMT
Local: Thurs, Sep 10 1992 10:37 am
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <1992Sep10.063228.9...@spdcc.com> d...@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <BtwLHs....@apollo.hp.com> noe...@apollo.hp.com (Noelie Alito) writes:
>>    Try Jane Brody's _Nutrition Book_  (_Good Nutrition Book_?),

>You really can't do much better than her books.  I recommend all of 'em.

I agree that her book is the best comprehensive nutrition book for the
layperson currently on the market, but there were a few things in that
bothered me.

One was her statement that all diets should contain at least one
tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat.  If one follows the guidelines of
eating a diet with equal amounts of mono, poly, and saturated fat,
this would mean that all diets should contain at least 39 grams of fat
(26 grams if you eliminate all saturated fat).  Granted very very few
people would get this low, but some diets on the market today
recommend 10% of calories from fat, which wouldn't yield 1 tablespoon
of polyunsaturated fat unless the individual was consuming 2340
calories or more per day (3510 calories if saturated fat is also
consumed).  This would make these diets actually dangerous if 1
tablespoon was indeed the bodily requirement.

Another is her very strong bias against msg, saccharin, and aspartame.
She presents the anti case in some depth, but only comments on
dissenting opinions in a backhanded way.  E.g.: when commenting on
complaints about aspartame, she says "...the Council on Scientific
Affairs of the [AMA], *an organization not noted for aggressive action
to protect the public health*, has concluded that ' available evidence
suggests that consumption of aspartame by normal humans is safe and is
not associated with serious adverse health effects.'"  Also, in
discussing MSG she tells a long tale about Chinese Restaurant Syndrome
but fails to mention that no double blind study has been able to
support the complaints.

And one last dig at an otherwise great book: the index is horrid.  Try
looking up aspartame.

--
Michelle Dick
arte...@netcom.com


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
4.  Steve Dyer  
View profile  
 More options Sep 10 1992, 10:12 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: d...@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Date: 10 Sep 92 13:34:18 GMT
Local: Thurs, Sep 10 1992 3:34 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <vdtnxl+.arte...@netcom.com> arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick) writes:
>One was her statement that all diets should contain at least one
>tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat.  If one follows the guidelines of
>eating a diet with equal amounts of mono, poly, and saturated fat,

Are these HER guidelines?

>this would mean that all diets should contain at least 39 grams of fat
>(26 grams if you eliminate all saturated fat).  Granted very very few
>people would get this low, but some diets on the market today
>recommend 10% of calories from fat, which wouldn't yield 1 tablespoon
>of polyunsaturated fat unless the individual was consuming 2340
>calories or more per day (3510 calories if saturated fat is also
>consumed).  This would make these diets actually dangerous if 1
>tablespoon was indeed the bodily requirement.

I really think you've taken her recommendations much too literally
and extrapolated them well outside of what she's saying.  It's certainly
not the case that everyone needs a tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat a day.

>Another is her very strong bias against msg, saccharin, and aspartame.
>She presents the anti case in some depth, but only comments on
>dissenting opinions in a backhanded way.  E.g.: when commenting on
>complaints about aspartame, she says "...the Council on Scientific
>Affairs of the [AMA], *an organization not noted for aggressive action
>to protect the public health*, has concluded that ' available evidence
>suggests that consumption of aspartame by normal humans is safe and is
>not associated with serious adverse health effects.'"  Also, in
>discussing MSG she tells a long tale about Chinese Restaurant Syndrome
>but fails to mention that no double blind study has been able to
>support the complaints.

Interesting.  I'll have to take another look; this didn't stick in my mind.

--
Steve Dyer
d...@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
5.  Michelle Dick  
View profile  
 More options Sep 10 1992, 12:05 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick)
Date: 10 Sep 92 15:54:38 GMT
Local: Thurs, Sep 10 1992 5:54 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <1992Sep10.133418.23...@spdcc.com> d...@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes:
>In article <vdtnxl+.arte...@netcom.com> arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick) writes:
>>One was her statement that all diets should contain at least one
>>tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat.  If one follows the guidelines of
>>eating a diet with equal amounts of mono, poly, and saturated fat,

>Are these HER guidelines?

Other than noting that the body needs no saturated fat, and that less
is better, she herself makes no explicit recommendation as to
proportion.  She does print a cute bar chart showing diet guidelines
with 10% calories from each of poly, mono and sat fat.  One topic I
hope she might cover in a future edition is the possible role/benefit
of monounsaturated oil (as opposed to poly).  She has nothing on it in
the current revision.  Even with a diet containing no saturated fat,
getting 1 tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat pushes most folks over 10%
calories from fat.  Later in the chapter she says you can go down to
as little as 10% of calories as fat with no risk to health.  Granted,
it's a minor point, but it is an inconsistency.

>I really think you've taken her recommendations much too literally
>and extrapolated them well outside of what she's saying.  It's certainly
>not the case that everyone needs a tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat a day.

Hmmm.  Well, "Even strict low-fat diets should contain at least 1
tablespoon of such a polyunsaturated oil each day" is a pretty
explicit recommendation.  (page 56 in the updated edition).  My
statement was a paraphrase very close to her original statement, not an
extrapolation.

--
Michelle Dick
arte...@netcom.com


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
6.  Beth Mazur  
View profile  
 More options Sep 11 1992, 9:16 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: ma...@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 13:17:03 GMT
Local: Fri, Sep 11 1992 3:17 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <-stnjlr.arte...@netcom.com> arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick) writes:
>Even with a diet containing no saturated fat,
>getting 1 tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat pushes most folks over 10%
>calories from fat.  Later in the chapter she says you can go down to
>as little as 10% of calories as fat with no risk to health.  Granted,
>it's a minor point, but it is an inconsistency.

How so?  I would imagine that most folks eat well over 1200 calories a
day, so 1T of fat would be under 10%, no?  

I also assume that what she means is essentially 10-15g of fat per day,
from the foods one eats, not 1T of oil taken separately.  Given that
most people are hard pressed to consume only 30% of their calories in
fat, I'm not so sure what is outrageous about her 1T number.

Beth Mazur                   "...life is more than a vision.  The sweetest
ma...@inmet.inmet.com         part is acting after making a decision."
...!uunet!inmet!mazur                                  -- The Indigo Girls


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
7.  Michelle Dick  
View profile  
 More options Sep 11 1992, 10:35 am
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 92 14:29:57 GMT
Local: Fri, Sep 11 1992 4:29 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition
In article <1992Sep11.131703.11...@inmet.camb.inmet.com> ma...@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur) writes:

>In article <-stnjlr.arte...@netcom.com> arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick) writes:
>>Even with a diet containing no saturated fat,
>>getting 1 tablespoon of polyunsaturated fat pushes most folks over 10%
>>calories from fat.  Later in the chapter she says you can go down to
>>as little as 10% of calories as fat with no risk to health.  Granted,
>>it's a minor point, but it is an inconsistency.

>How so?  I would imagine that most folks eat well over 1200 calories a
>day, so 1T of fat would be under 10%, no?  

Only if 100% of the fat you ate were polyunsaturated.  You'd have to
have a mighty odd diet not to eat any saturated or monounsaturated
fat.  I think it is safe to presume that to get 1T of polyunsaturated
fat in any sane and sustainable diet, you'd have to consume at least
2T of fat (thus meaning you'd have to consume at least 2600 calories).  

What makes polunsaturated fat a requirement is that it is a source of
linoleic acid, which the body needs to make fats.

I'm not saying that its theoretically impossible to get 1T of
polyunsaturated fat in a 10% fat diet, just that you'd really have to
work hard at it.  Most vegetables have some of their fat as
monounsaturates, some with more mono than poly.  People who try to
keep a 10% fat diet (they do exist) have enough of a restriction as it
is, to add to that the restriction that almost all of the 10% be
polyunsaturated might leave them with other nutritional deficiencies.

Thus, I'm left with one of two alternatives:

1. A 10% fat diet is very unwise
or
2. Most people don't need a full 1T of polyunsaturated fat per day.

I'll vote for 2.
--
Michelle Dick
arte...@netcom.com


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
8.  Beth Mazur  
View profile  
 More options Sep 11 1992, 7:17 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: ma...@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 23:14:22 GMT
Local: Sat, Sep 12 1992 1:14 am
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <2pvnpvc.arte...@netcom.com> arte...@netcom.com (Michelle Dick) writes:
>I'm not saying that its theoretically impossible to get 1T of
>polyunsaturated fat in a 10% fat diet, just that you'd really have to
>work hard at it.  Most vegetables have some of their fat as
>monounsaturates, some with more mono than poly.  

Huh? Vegetables have so little fat as to make their fat content negligible.

>Thus, I'm left with one of two alternatives:

>1. A 10% fat diet is very unwise
>or
>2. Most people don't need a full 1T of polyunsaturated fat per day.

>I'll vote for 2.

A 10% fat diet is ridiculously extreme, except for the most anal retentive
types.  If you were crazy enough to try and follow a 10% fat diet, you
probably wouldn't have that much of a problem ensuring that most of the
fat you consumed was polyunsaturated.

However, 1T of polyunsaturated fat is probably what most people
who follow a diet that is 30% fat wind up with anyways. A 30% fat diet
allows for close approximately 600 calories of fat a day, which easily
enables one to get 1T of polyunsaturated fat in addition to the other
fat in their diet.

I still think you are taking Brody too literally.  She probably meant
that you need 1T of fat a day to get the essential fatty acids, and she
recommends the polyunsaturated kind.

Anyways, it's not that I figure Brody cannot be mistaken, it's just that
I think you are being a bit nit-picky here.  The woman writes several
hundred pages and the worst thing you can say is "she says you need
1T of fat!"

Now, if she had said amino acids helped cure depression, then you might
have a point :-).

Beth Mazur                   "...life is more than a vision.  The sweetest
ma...@inmet.inmet.com         part is acting after making a decision."
...!uunet!inmet!mazur                                  -- The Indigo Girls


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
9.  Jamie Lubin  
View profile  
 More options Sep 1 1992, 2:32 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: j...@uts.uucp (Jamie Lubin)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 92 18:37:09 GMT
Local: Tues, Sep 1 1992 8:37 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <17upsgINN...@agate.berkeley.edu> jaff...@zippy.sonoma.edu writes:
>I'm looking for a good basic non-fringe book on nutrition, comprehensible
>to a random like me, and up-to-date and accurate.  Also practical (i.e.
>describes how matters of nutrition affect a proper diet, not just
>"this substance can have these effects").  Suggestions?

"Nutrition Almanac" by Kirschenman (sp?) available in many health-food stores.

    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
10.  Beth Mazur  
View profile  
 More options Sep 2 1992, 3:04 pm
Newsgroups: sci.med.nutrition
From: ma...@inmet.camb.inmet.com (Beth Mazur)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:12:03 GMT
Local: Wed, Sep 2 1992 9:12 pm
Subject: Re: Good basic book on nutrition

In article <17upsgINN...@agate.berkeley.edu> jaff...@zippy.sonoma.edu writes:
>I'm looking for a good basic non-fringe book on nutrition, comprehensible
>to a random like me, and up-to-date and accurate.  Also practical (i.e.
>describes how matters of nutrition affect a proper diet, not just
>"this substance can have these effects").  Suggestions?

I'm partial to Jane Brody's "Good Food Book" as well as her book "Nutrition"
which is a collection of articles she wrote for the New York Times.

The Tufts Guide to Nutrition by Dr. Jean Meyer is also very readable.

[ Note, these refs are from memory, please feel free to correct my errors. ]

Beth Mazur                   "...life is more than a vision.  The sweetest
ma...@inmet.inmet.com         part is acting after making a decision."
...!uunet!inmet!mazur                                  -- The Indigo Girls


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2010 Google