Quote Originally Posted by MyNameIsTerry View Post
It's like a vegan's nemesis!

Getting back to less processed food and less sugar is obviously a good thing but what about veg & fibre? What about calcium (those that won't eat dairy)? It's the opposite of health advice and I am questioning the claims it says your GI is better for it when you are eating things that aren't aimed at helping with that. People thousands of years ago would be eating a combination and not just meat.

I would agree it's benefits are more about removing heavily processed foods, something which are recent to humans, and cutting back on so many areas that you end up eliminating some bad foods too.

I have never heard of it so did a quick Google. The first result sounded like every BS product claim out there stating how it solves so many healthy problems and utter nonsense about never feeling hungry or counting macros (healthy eating is all about watching what you eat or you end up overeating and putting weight on with bowls of salad every day if they are bin lid sized). Like the bogus claims found in paleo I guess.
Ohhh... I have a mate who seems to lap up every fad diet like this and he now seems to proclaim himself an expert on T2 diabetes as a result because it's helped a couple of his mates. He's also convinced that statins kill everybody who take them, grains are very bad for you due to spikes in blood sugar &c. Nearly everything seems to boil down to ketogenic diets; get rid of the carbs and make the cells take nutrition from fat.

Trouble is... there's this thing called ketoacidosis. To me, diets like this are akin to playing Russian Roulette with your body, with potentially the same outcome.

And one other way of proving if something's of dubious merit: does its advocate try and sell you something?