![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Okay, I've been pondering the water thing for a while. Can it really be necessary to drink 8 cups or more of water every day? To do this, our ancestors would have done almost nothing but cart water for their large families & villages. Maybe we're really supposed to have more water-rich veggies, fruits, soups, & fresh milk, with less water-sucking sweets & ill-prepared grains?
My personal experience seems to confirm this. When I was really adamant about my daily 64 oz, I had no problem getting it, b/c I was so thirsty all the time. But when, on Dec. 26, 2007, I gave up sugar - completely - I stopped being so thirsty. I didn't crave water all the time, and my body physically was no longer parched. Skin less dry, lips no longer cracked, nose easier to breathe through ... and I was only having maybe a cup a day outside of my produce & bone broths!
But what about the health claims of water? Well, there probably really is a problem is you're eating a bunch of sweetened stuff (like I was) & not drinking it. But I don't think it's necessary for good health if you're eating real food.
What about the weight-loss claims? They seem to have gone down the drain, too. In a recent study of more than 1,000 women, drinking tons of water did nothing for waist size, but eating foods rich in water - that is, produce & soups - did. I would be that further breaking the women down into real soups & canned soups would find even greater a difference.
Of course, the writer concludes that the difference is the fiber. Bah. The difference is that the more real food you eat, the less crap you eat. And the less crap you eat, the less water you need. It's not the water. It's what surrounds the water - real nutrients in real food.
It's not a causal relationship - the water in the food doesn't make you skinnier! It's correlational - those eating real food are a healthier weight, and real food just so happens to be water-rich.
JMO, FWIW. Drink to thirst, ensuring that your thirst isn't artificially elevated by sugary & excess starchy foods.
My personal experience seems to confirm this. When I was really adamant about my daily 64 oz, I had no problem getting it, b/c I was so thirsty all the time. But when, on Dec. 26, 2007, I gave up sugar - completely - I stopped being so thirsty. I didn't crave water all the time, and my body physically was no longer parched. Skin less dry, lips no longer cracked, nose easier to breathe through ... and I was only having maybe a cup a day outside of my produce & bone broths!
But what about the health claims of water? Well, there probably really is a problem is you're eating a bunch of sweetened stuff (like I was) & not drinking it. But I don't think it's necessary for good health if you're eating real food.
What about the weight-loss claims? They seem to have gone down the drain, too. In a recent study of more than 1,000 women, drinking tons of water did nothing for waist size, but eating foods rich in water - that is, produce & soups - did. I would be that further breaking the women down into real soups & canned soups would find even greater a difference.
Of course, the writer concludes that the difference is the fiber. Bah. The difference is that the more real food you eat, the less crap you eat. And the less crap you eat, the less water you need. It's not the water. It's what surrounds the water - real nutrients in real food.
It's not a causal relationship - the water in the food doesn't make you skinnier! It's correlational - those eating real food are a healthier weight, and real food just so happens to be water-rich.
JMO, FWIW. Drink to thirst, ensuring that your thirst isn't artificially elevated by sugary & excess starchy foods.
- mood:
thirsty
AMDG
Purpose
A collection of news that tells the truth about the world, in a world that holds News as an article of Faith, but rarely gets even half the picture.
Michaelangelo maria lactansThere are many kinds of success in life worth having. It's exceedingly interesting and attractive to be ...a President, or a ranchman, or the colonel of a fighting regiment, or kill grizzly bears and lions. But... a household of children... certainly makes all other forms of success and achievement lose their importance by comparison.
Theodore Roosevelt
Powered By Ringsurf