DGE Guidelines. A Contradiction?
The Deutsche Gesellschaft für Ernährung - German Nutritional Society, a largely government funded NGO, designated as appointed authority on nutritional matters recommends a completely different diet from the one I follow. And although I like to paraphrase the DGE guidelines as “what I should not do,” I don’t think we’re actually in contradiction:
The key is the DGE’s very carefully chosen wording about the scope of their recommendations. For an organisation of this size and reach, I can only assume they chose deliberately how to write their guidelines (page in German).
They state:
The DGE’s dietary recommendations apply to healthy adults in Germany aged 18–65 who eat both plant-based and animal-based foods (mixed diet).
Breaking down the points that matter to me:
- for healthy adults
- aged 18–65,
- who eat both plant-based and animal-based foods.
And of those, the most important point for this article is #1: “For healthy adults.” For me, as a decidedly sarcastic person, that reads as: “As a healthy person you can afford to follow our recommendations until they make you ill … and from that point on, our recommendations no longer apply to you”?
(Estimates suggest that in Germany only 15–20% of 18-to-65-year-olds are considered completely healthy (1))
Given everything I’ve experienced with a diet that ignores these recommendations, there are plenty of arguments in favour of this very sarcastic interpretation:
Anecdotal Evidence, by Example
Ketosis
A fat-focused, low-carbohydrate diet has consistently produced positive results for me. All the important markers moved in the right direction. Symptoms I had before have disappeared completely. And since I’ve been living predominantly in Metabolic state in which the body burns fat rather than glucose for fuel. Characterised by a measurable level of ketone bodies in the blood. → more, my concentration and focus have improved markedly. Body composition has also changed very positively: in particular, the switch led to a significant reduction in waist circumference.
Bland Diet and Fibre
The DGE recommends 30g of Indigestible carbohydrates. Typically distinguished as soluble and insoluble. Conventionally 'indispensable', but neither in the literature nor in my experience truly 'essential'. There are occasions where they can be beneficial. → more per day - yet for many conditions, the medical advice is to switch to a bland, low-fibre diet. Why should supposedly healthy food not help with recovery? And if healing goes better without fibre, why would I restart it after recovering?
That question is one thing - since I was warned to expect serious digestive difficulties when removing fibre from my diet, I’m still waiting for them to arrive. After more than eighteen months on minimal fibre, they haven’t materialised yet.
For context: yes, I have a condition (I prefer not to call it a disease, as it isn’t contagious) that has been 100% symptom-free since strictly avoiding fibre. More on that elsewhere.
Carbohydrates
A very simple argument, for which I’d even expect explicit agreement from nutritionists: nutritional science has the concept of an Essential nutrients are those that the body cannot synthesise itself and must obtain through food – vitamins, essential amino acids, and fatty acids.. Carbohydrates (and fibre) are listed as “essential” nowhere. And from personal experiment I can confirm: my requirement for Exogenous substances are those supplied from outside ('eaten') — opposite of 'endogenous': substances present within the body. carbohydrates (and fibre) is 0 - the body keeps working perfectly well.
Anecdotal Evidence vs Studies
In nutritional science, a great many findings come from observational analyses. Randomised controlled trials are expensive, and since food can’t usually be patented for profit, they’re also relatively rare.
Many of the existing studies are either industry-funded (hence with predictable outcomes) or conducted by institutions and individuals who are notable elsewhere for ideological (sometimes religious (2)) commitments. The latter are rarely declared as a conflict of interest.
Given this, I hold to two principles whenever my own experience diverges from published study results:
First:
Second:
The most convincing study is an “n=1 experiment” — when I am the “1” (3)
My Conclusion
I’d rather eat permanently the way I got healthy, not the way I can probably afford as a healthy person until I end up in crisis-management mode again. It’s worked well for almost 14 years now. And because I believe this approach can help many others, I started this site — my conclusion, in all its facets, is spread across it.
Anyone who thinks I’m wrong should name the timeframe in which negative effects are to be expected: what are the symptoms of carbohydrate and fibre deficiency, and when do they appear at the latest?
I’ll happily report back after that deadline with whatever my experience looks like then — and whether I’ve adjusted my diet to correct the deficiency.
