Goat meat nutrition

I prefer sheep myself, I don't think I've ever had goat but we have some amazing lamb here. Lamb fat especially, added to any meat dish will give it out-of-this world flavor, though it's too much for some people.

NextLevel said:

Fat and cholesterol are good for you so I am not sure why you are running away from them. They only cause issues when high amounts of sugar are present in the blood to damage blood vessels and oxidize lipoproteins.

Click to expand...

*Certain* kinds of fat are worse than others. Animal fat, usually, is the bad kind. Activates SREBP-1c and PPARgamma (screwing up your transcriptome), increases VLDL, heart disease, all that kind of stuff. The presence of high amounts of sugar in the blood are not required for this to be a bad thing. The exception is fish fat (or seal oil etc... stuff in the water), which tends to be the good kind. Cod liver oil, for example, is the magical food that actually makes you lose weight.

Cholesterol in food isn't as big of a concern. Most of our cholesterol is actually made by our liver... and saturated fats (from animals) is what tells our body to make this cholesterol.

The fat from cows that are eating non-polluted grass and eggs of chickens who eat seeds/bugs/whatever on the field are two excellent examples of fat/cholesterol nutrition our bodies really need to function.

There has been such a decades long coordinated effort to villainize these and replace them with some really evil stuff (refined grains, refined sugar, modified oils...) and they wreck a body.

What we could agree that meats coming from factory operations where the animals are fed bullcrap that is 180 degrees different from their required diet from nature... these meats have many baddies... the bad diet and added chems/antibiotics in their stuff goes right into us and blows us up.

If USA people really saw the truth of what is happening and who is behind it all, USA might get pissed off and correct it... but for many reasons, it hasn't gotten to that point yet.

Mtcollins said:

*Certain* kinds of fat are worse than others. Animal fat, usually, is the bad kind. Activates SREBP-1c and PPARgamma (screwing up your transcriptome), increases VLDL, heart disease, all that kind of stuff. The presence of high amounts of sugar in the blood are not required for this to be a bad thing. The exception is fish fat (or seal oil etc... stuff in the water), which tends to be the good kind. Cod liver oil, for example, is the magical food that actually makes you lose weight.

Cholesterol in food isn't as big of a concern. Most of our cholesterol is actually made by our liver... and saturated fats (from animals) is what tells our body to make this cholesterol.

Click to expand...

This is wrong. In fact, lots of people are reversing atherosclerosis and diabetes by eating exclusively meat and reducing or eliminating sugar and all carbohydrates especially starchy and sugary vegetables and fruits including grains. If what you were saying were true, people would be dying of heart attacks if they eat just fatty meat.

NextLevel, the biochemistry is what it is. Sat fat does what it does. Your body doesn't care where a molecule came from. If it's the right shape and size, it's going to activate what it's going to activate. Nutrition is complicated stuff.
Low carb diets work and low fat diets work, for weight loss and for health. As idiotic as the Atkins diet looks on paper, the thing works. For starters, both low-fat and low-carb diets tend to be low calorie overall. Then there's the glycerol backbone (from carbs) required to make TG with the FAs from fat... need both to put on weight. Then there's the whole story adipokines from excess fat storage (carbs or fats can do this), resulting inflammation, etc. You lose weight, that all goes down. Plus, low on sugar means low on insulin. Low insulin means no storing fat, no glucagon from the crash, no concentration on putting on central adipose (the bad kind).

Der, I agree with you on the factory farming. Interestingly, where I'm from, there's some cool research indicating that many of the health problems that come with red meat don't apply (but we have out own share of health problems, don't you worry haha). Researchers were thinking it might be because a lot of our meat is wild game. Sat fat and cholesterol are bad either way, though, for most of us in the western world. It's just that there tends to be less, and way less of the other nasty stuff we shouldn't be eating.

Mtcollins said:

NextLevel, the biochemistry is what it is. Sat fat does what it does. Your body doesn't care where a molecule came from. If it's the right shape and size, it's going to activate what it's going to activate. Nutrition is complicated stuff.
Low carb diets work and low fat diets work, for weight loss and for health. As idiotic as the Atkins diet looks on paper, the thing works. For starters, both low-fat and low-carb diets tend to be low calorie overall. Then there's the glycerol backbone (from carbs) required to make TG with the FAs from fat... need both to put on weight. Then there's the whole story adipokines from excess fat storage (carbs or fats can do this), resulting inflammation, etc. You lose weight, that all goes down. Plus, low on sugar means low on insulin. Low insulin means no storing fat, no glucagon from the crash, no concentration on putting on central adipose (the bad kind).

Der, I agree with you on the factory farming. Interestingly, where I'm from, there's some cool research indicating that many of the health problems that come with red meat don't apply (but we have out own share of health problems, don't you worry haha). Researchers were thinking it might be because a lot of our meat is wild game. Sat fat and cholesterol are bad either way, though, for most of us in the western world. It's just that there tends to be less, and way less of the other nasty stuff we shouldn't be eating.

Click to expand...

My point is that focusing on mechanisms and using them to demonize foods is a bad approach to nutrition. The Atkins diet is only idiotic in the context of your conditioning.

Focusing on mechanisms and using them to determine proper nutrition is actually the entire field of Nutrition/Biochemistry. You claimed that fat and cholesterol were healthy, and for most of us this simply isn't the case. You also claimed that fat is only bad when sugar levels are high. This is also untrue. As for the Atkins diet, I simply meant that it looks horrible at first glance because of all the negatives it causes. But the thing works in practice, because there's a lot of other stuff going on that outweighs the negative... of which I listed a couple.

Mtcollins said:

Focusing on mechanisms and using them to determine proper nutrition is actually the entire field of Nutrition/Biochemistry. You claimed that fat and cholesterol were healthy, and for most of us this simply isn't the case. You also claimed that fat is only bad when sugar levels are high. This is also untrue. As for the Atkins diet, I simply meant that it looks horrible at first glance because of all the negatives it causes. But the thing works in practice, because there's a lot of other stuff going on that outweighs the negative... of which I listed a couple.

Click to expand...

Actually, for most of us, this is the case if my statement ha understood in the context in which it was intended.

Like I said, if fat and cholesterol were inherently unhealthy, people with high levels of both in their diet would be unhealthy. But what we see is that when people go on a ketogenic diet, they do well, even when they have high levels of LDL as long as they don't have a high levels of oxidized LDL.

If you have heard the work of David Feldman, for example, what about what he has investigated with his self experiments and review of the literature would you dispute?

Here is David Diamond on the subject:

https://youtu.be/GsoidXRiHQw

As far as I know, Feldman is a random dude with no experience or training in the field whatsoever who did a cursory pubmed search and a half-arsed meta-analysis, without even as much as analyzing the papers he cites. He tried a keto diet and it worked. Amazing, since keto diets do work. I listed some of the reasons above.

Sat fat and cholesterol aren't inherently bad. We need both fat and cholesterol to function. It's just that, in today's world, we get so bloody much of it, and so many calories overall, that we can almost categorize it as bad... similar to salt. If we were in an environment where nutrition was scarce, sat fat would be great as it would make us more nutritionally thrifty. You should check out some work on "thrifty genotype hypothesis" if you're interested in this aspect. But to suggest sat fat is healthy, when most people get waaaaaaaaay too much, just doesn't make sense. It's like telling people to eat more salt.

"Like I said, if fat and cholesterol were inherently unhealthy, people with high levels of both in their diet would be unhealthy"

Correlation is not causation. Cigarettes are bad, but the dude who smokes five a day and runs 20 miles is probably healthier than the non-smoker who sits on the couch.

Mtcollins said:

...
Sat fat and cholesterol aren't inherently bad.
...

Click to expand...

That's what I needed to hear. As for David Feldman and David Diamond, they have actually done a lot of interesting work and neither are lipidologists. But their work calls into question a lot of things that people say about saturated fat and cholesterol.

As for asking people to eat more salt, it is actually what is often recommended by Steve Phinney and Jeff Volek when one is on a ketogenic diet. But I won't get into it.

People get too much saturated fat when they eat it with sugar and carbs. Many people who eat foods containing saturated fat in the absence of sugar and carbs do not have the same issues - the issue is often the combination and processing of foods. It's what I have tried to stress, but it seems you don't agree. As someone who got prediabetic eating a low fat high carb diet, this issue is not just academic to me. There are people who do well on low fat diets as well as people who do well on low carb diets. The problem is when people say that the problem is the fat - it is not the fat.

France has the highest saturated fat consumption of advanced countries. It also has the lowest rates of heart disease and obesity. When this is pointed out, people say correlation is not causation. The point is that whatever theory people come up with has to explain this. Correlation is not causation cannot end the story.

As far as Diamond goes, I watched the youtube clip and dude's out to lunch.

"Eating fat doesn't cause us to get fat or have high cholesterol"

He's half right that fish fat won't make you gain adipose, but sat fat certainly will... and program our body to store more later. And fat is literally what activates our liver to make cholesterol. And I don't know what sugar company was throwing money at scientists to show how fat affects transcription factors, the epigenome, gene expression, enzyme activation, etc... I punched my time. I want my damn check!

Dude's right about combining fat and carbs, though. Ever wonder why athletes often have carb-protein meals early in the day and fat-protein in the evening? Combining fats and carbs isn't a good strategy for fitness. You don't want insulin and fat at the same time.

Mtcollins said:

As far as Diamond goes, I watched the youtube clip and dude's out to lunch.

"Eating fat doesn't cause us to get fat or have high cholesterol"

He's half right that fish fat won't make you gain adipose, but sat fat certainly will... and program our body to store more later? And fat is literally what activates our liver to make cholesterol. And I don't know what sugar company was throwing money at scientists to show how fat affects transcription factors, the epigenome, gene expression, enzyme activation, etc... I punched my time. I want my damn check!

Dude's right about combining fat and carbs, though. Ever wonder why athletes often have carb-protein meals early in the day and fat-protein in the evening? Combining fats and carbs isn't a good strategy for fitness. You don't want insulin and fat at the same time.

Click to expand...

It's funny that the guy is right about combining fat and carbs (which is his main point) and that he also argues that eating fat in the absence of carbs is not going to raise your cholesterol and you think he is out to lunch. His point is really that you are not going to hurt your health or clog your arteries by eating fat in the absence of carbs.

In fact, Dave Feldman came up with a protocol for lower cholesterol that was based on raising your saturated fat intake before taking a lipids profile. The issue is not as simple as you make out.

In any case, Diamond was also able to reverse his own health issues by cutting carbs. Here is his full talk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYlhG8_nZe0

You're missing a lot of the basics here. Sat fat will increase cholesterol production. It is what it is. Molecules do what they do. But no enzyme, tissue, or organ exists in isolation. If you go on a diet to lose weight, the weight loss will cause all kinds of OTHER changes that reduce cholesterol and other bad stuffs. It's not that the sat fat is good for you, it's that you overpowered the bad by losing weight.

As for the French, I wonder if there's anything else in their culture that is working so well for them? By the same argument you're using, one could argue it's all the smoking that's leading to such good health, and cigarettes aren't actually unhealthy.

Mtcollins said:

You're missing a lot of the basics here. Sat fat will increase cholesterol production. It is what it is. Molecules do what they do. But no enzyme, tissue, or organ exists in isolation. If you go on a diet to lose weight, the weight loss will cause all kinds of OTHER changes that reduce cholesterol and other bad stuffs. It's not that the sat fat is good for you, it's that you overpowered the bad by losing weight.

As for the French, I wonder if there's anything else in their culture that is working so well for them? By the same argument you're using, one could argue it's all the smoking that's leading to such good health, and cigarettes aren't actually unhealthy.

Click to expand...

The correlation between smoking and cancer is much stronger than the correlation between cholesterol and heart disease especially if you remove the effects of hyperinsulinemia. The point is that cholesterol production driven by saturated fat is not necessarily inflammatory. There are overweight people who in the absence of hyperinsulinemia are not unhealthy. There are people who have high LDL measurements who have zero Coronary Artery Calcium scores. The point is that saturated fat isn't the primary driver of atherosclerosis. The fat is just an accomplice after high carbohydrate levels have driven up insulin and opened up the cells to store the fat. What no one has demonstrated is that you can drive hyperinsulinemia with ease when carbohydrates are not present ( of course, assuming things like sleep and sun exposure are taken care of).

The good thing is that your tone has moderated a little from the position you started out with. The point is that high carbs also create a hunger that drives more eating and makes it harder to not eat because they raise blood sugar and increase insulin production. Fats by themselves do not do this.

Let's just say I could also say you haven't looked at research with a skeptical eye but what would that prove? When I say Sat fat is good for you, you seem focused on the nutrients and not on the food. No one is going to eat sat fats. But people who eat foods containing sat fats should not stop eating them because they are sat fats. In fact Micheal Eades argues that sat fats are protective. I am not going that far, but I am saying that don't go around saying that people should not eat something because it contains sat fats. This position is no longer in the dietary guidelines!

Lets not veer too much off topic shall we

lol

Lightzy said:

Lets not veer too much off topic shall we

lol

Click to expand...

The topic is way off lol.

https://theskepticalcardiologist.co...terol-limits-but-still-promote-low-fat-dairy/

A discussion of the dietary guidelines given that dietary fat is no longer considered a primary driver of heart disease by itself. From a cardiologist by the way.