Is This Site on Nutrition Complete Bull or True (10 Points Best Answer)?

[Yamster]

http://www.biblelife.org/myths.htm

It said liberals have a part of their brain messed up supposedly and that cancer can be caused by consuming carbohydrates. That sounds like a load of BS to me, but the other information is believable, any experts here?
Yeah, I disagree with some of what they said, but some of it seems true. I know the Bible doesn't have jack to do with nutrition, but what they're saying doesn't all seem like bull, although a lot of it does. So much controversy with nutrition. Maybe I should just go to a healthier country, lol.
Joe -
I disagree with their macronutrient ratio. I still recommend either 40% carbs, 30% fats, 30% carbs, or 40% protein, 30% carbs, 30% fats.
Lol, yeah, that would be cool. The body would tap into fat storages and muscle mass is glycogen wasn't present. I'm pretty sure their theory on saturated fat is correct though.

 

[$$ItalianStalian$$]

i think they go over the top w/ the 70% fat in a diet..that's a bit ridiculous some of that is bull crap some of it makes sense the FDA is wrong ..but their diet is also

edit: actually idk that's interesting i gotta read up on that topic more...hm im interested now that 70% fat makes up for carbs and fat total instead of 30 40 30 it's like 70 30 idk..

edit again: yeah im going to bed im def looking into this more when i get some time to it makes sense a bit if u think about it..fat is used as energy if carbs arent there but idk about the whole carbs causing disease..and that much sat fats it's tough, too much controversy on nutrition today in america..ill go live in the rain forest no processed foods hunt and fish and pick berries eat leaves!!! ha

 

[andie]

I only have to look at the web address to know that it is bull $hit. The bible has nothing to do with nutrition. And of course a conservative site will say there is something wrong with liberals.