bluey2223 saidIt is a fitness cult that markets trendy ideas that aren't based in sound science, but because enough people do it, crossfit people question real workout principles. They also promote the trendy paleo diet instead of something created by boards of PhDs on the government website, choosemyplate.gov
Lol - you clearly don't understand how controversial either the food pyramid that came before it, or the myplate approach has been - particularly given the influence of food lobbyists. Try using google.
Link your credible website.
It's more than a little shocking given your profile how ignorant you are of this issue (and how unnecessarily antagonistic you are given your ignorance with respect to CrossFit - and I'll be the first to say that your mileage will vary but I enjoy it)
Do you consider the NIH or Harvard to be credible?
and here: http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-500194_162-636355.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm - in fact, the Food Pyramid can and should be blamed for making Americans fatter and now you want to trust the same people with MyPlate?
And, like I said -
To drill down further with respect to sugars, carbs, there's also this:
http://www.uctv.tv/shows/Sugar-The-Bitter-Truth-16717 (from a researcher/endocrinologist at UCLA)
Yes there are lobbyists. I agree you are right that lobbyists try to influence the government. Corn is commody and in everything. Beef cattle raising is promoted even though feeding everyone on Soy would be much healthier and cheaper.
However, nutrition science has progressed at the university level as rapidly as the world has changed with Internet and computers. We didn't have those in 1993. The food pyramid was 2 models ago. Since, we have had MyPyramid, and now MyPlate.
MyPlate was challenged by Walter Willet, of Harvard, mainly because he believes in epidemiology. He believes that dairy is bad because it has shown increased rates of prostate cancer in epidemiological studies. Epidemiological studies do not show causation. They ask a population of people to fill out a food frequency questionnaire as well as a medical history profile, and then they divine correlations. These questionnaires were not sensitive to the saturated fat content of the dairy (were the people getting prostate cancer eating whole fat dairy or nonfat dairy? Was it the calcium or the fact they are eating too many calories anyways? These answers are not broken down in Willet's Harvard Plate. Feel free to analyze it yourself. Until we have further evidence, there's quite enough evidence that milk is an ideal post-workout drink due to the ratio of carbohydrate to protein content, and people aren't going to start popping calcium supplements on an epidemiological level either. I hope you agree we still need calcium in your diet, and vegetables are not a rich source of them.
The other posts you listed are bloggers and journalists. They write for sensationalism. You also need to forgive the old guidelines because they were pre-internet. Preventative health science has advanced just as fast as computers and the internet have in the last 20 years. Your articles from 1993 are like saying the Catholic Church is evil because they had an Inquisition. Nothing referenced is later than 2009.
As for you bashing my education, you don't know what I learned in school, so don't bash it. I don't believe ketosis is evil unless you are in ketoacidosis which occurs in diabetics, but I also know that most people don't know how to portion control. Carbohydrates are the preferred fuel of the brain and nervous system, muscles, lens of the eye, blood cells, and nephron of the kidney. The latter three have to rely on glycolysis for energy. Carbs include fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and dairy/calcium beverages with added sugars like soymilk.
Anyhow, I'm not going to convince anyone because it is a forum post, but cross-fitters read a lot of hype and believe it.