[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
I can’t prove the point but my expectation is that the epidemiological evidence favoring at-least particular amounts of fruits and vegetables is really not so much from the amount of fruits and vegetables per se, but from:
Prebiotic fiber intake, supporting healthy population of bacteria and Archaea (being precise, could have just said bacteria)
Effect of phytochemicals on the above (not as important as above I think)
Effect of phytochemicals on the body
If overall intake requires it, the vitamin and mineral content
Intake of beneficial bacteria on surface of fruits and vegetables (largely depleted with commercial produce.)
So no fixed answer really. If going for minimal fruit and/or vegetable intake, I’d try to in some way make sure that the above don’t get shortchanged.[/quote]
This. This just my experience, but I experienced a medical event last year that resulted in the loss of almost all of my colon and serious damage to my stomach. As a result, I can’t eat fruits or vegetables, excepting some very limited things I’ve been able to tolerate without putting myself at risk of blockage (iceberg lettuce and watermelon have worked for me).
I used to be someone who ate a substantial amount of vegetables; not as much fruits. But I can say that I’ve had substantially negative effects on my physique as a result of my dietary restrictions on that end. The problem is really twofold: first, I just feel less healthy overall by not being able to eat vegetables. Second, you will find that you have to fill your stomach with something. Because of my dietary restrictions against fiber, I’m left with things that don’t really fill me up or leave me feeling satisfied, which leads to fairly frequent overeating.
Just imo, but if you’re going to cut costs on the grocery bill, nixing vegetables is not the place to start.