PDA

View Full Version : Report: Week 6 of My High-Carb (after Paleo) Diet


Will Moore
12-21-2008, 10:53 PM
As indicated in my prior post, I abandoned a low-carb Paleo diet because it was just not providing the energy for my workouts (or my brain for that matter) or producing strength gains for resistance training. It's been over 6 weeks now since I made the swith....it wasn't a gradual transition either, it was an abrupt change. My diet basically looks like this: Very low-fat, no meat (all protein comes from powdered egg, milk, and whey protein supplements), large quantities of vegetables, whole wheat breads (traditional type, not commercial), and as many hard pretzels as I can choke down (whole wheat and regular, ingredients: flour, yeast, salt). An important footnote here is that I eat IF style (always have) where I do not eat anything till after 10pm at night, at which time I pig out for close to 3 hours...takes a lot of time to chew the huge salads I make.
Anyway, the net result is that I have lost 3 pounds of fat, even though my weight is exactly the same as my last day of low-carb Paleo. I know this because you don't retain water of low-carb...since my weight on the scale is the same and I know I'm holding much more water now, I know I have lost fat somewhere. And no, its not because I have lost muscle. My strength is improving now and I actually have some glycogen in the muscles. For cardio, I walk 5 to 6 miles per day, 6 days per week, with a heavy 65 pound backpack, going as fast as I can over varied terrain. Towards the end of my low-carb experiment, I was dying as I neared the finish each time....now, I feel like I'm flying and I don't feel like a dead man when I finish.
So why is it that I seem to thrive on very low-fat, high carb diet? And carbs aren't the only issue here, its also true that my current diet is heavy on the dreaded white flour products, supposedly the bane of civilization as we know it and the root of all health problems. Its basically the anti-paleo diet: No Meat = bad; Grain = bad; Low-fat = bad.
I would like to get feedback from a living example of someone who practices what he preaches about Paleo, is athletic, and thrives on the diet. I want to know what the formula for success is because I really want to eat that way if I could only make it work. Many of you claim to be Paleo but then shed light on the fact that you eat beer and pizza on the weekend. The idea being that 90% of the time is ok....I'm sorry, but I don't buy that. You either believe in something or you don't. If you can't live without your weekly departure for junk food, you either lack discipline or the diet is not giving you enough energy and you just don't want to admit it.
Ok, you can all attack me now.....

Steven Low
12-22-2008, 01:24 AM
You have the genetics that handle processed high carbs. That's great for you. Stick with it. The greatest thing about our bodies is that we all react different to different things so you have to find out what works FOR YOU. Looks like you did. Paleo, clearly, may not be the best thing for you.

As for 90/10 or 80/20 rule... are you seriously saying that people don't have "the right" to kick back and enjoy things once in a while? Hey, I know TV is a waste of time when I could be doing better things, but I still go ahead and watch it occasionally. If alcohol did that for me maybe I'd drink some on the weekend as well.. but it doesn't at least for me.

In the end though if you're not enjoying life or what you're doing then what's the point? I'm sure most of us don't want to restrict our calories to 75% just to live an extra 10 years (over the age of like 80) even though calorie restriction has been proven to increase lifespan in mammals. In fact, why wouldn't you do this now that you know?

I don't buy your false dichotomy.

Will Moore
12-22-2008, 02:06 AM
Steven, listen to what you are saying......"the right to enjoy life...". Does this mean that a Paleo style diet is painful and unenjoyable, therefore I need to relax the standards and have my weekly junk food? When I am following a Paleo style diet, I very much enjoy the foods I eat...especially all the nuts and seeds I cannot consume with a high-carb/low-fat diet. I simply do not perform well on the Paleo diet. I stand by what I said: You either don't really believe in the diet, its not really working for you, or your simply undisciplined if you feel the need to "cheat".

Many people who follow a low-carb Paleo diet (I'm referring to Bodybuilder, Powerlifters, etc.) employ weekly carb refeeds, as in the Anabolic Diet which I am sure you are all familiar with. Why do they do it? Simple...because low-carb, Paleo or not, simply doesn't fuel machine adequately enough to produce results. That brings me back to the question: Why doesn't it? The theory, if you will, behind the Paleo diet is that man is biologically suited for a diet of meat and plants which by its very nature is going to be low in carbohydrate content....unless you really pile on the fruit but thats unrealistic. Fruit has always been seasonal and in some colder climates, may not have been available at all. So, if I'm eating the diet that nature intended for me, it should produce optimal health results in all aspects, athletic or otherwise. However, this doesn't appear to be the case..and no, I'm not saying in MY case, but in most cases, otherwise all the carb refeeds, cheats, or however you label them, would be unecessarry.

Could it be that there is no best dietary model to follow? Should a food be rejected as health because it is "processed" or "man-made"? After all, man has been using his superior brain for eons to shape the world around him, to dominate this planet. Could we not use our superior brain to "create" foods from the raw materials nature provides that are equally, if not more nutritious than the animals and plants found in a Paleo diet?

Allen Yeh
12-22-2008, 04:48 AM
Could it be that there is no best dietary model to follow? Should a food be rejected as health because it is "processed" or "man-made"? After all, man has been using his superior brain for eons to shape the world around him, to dominate this planet. Could we not use our superior brain to "create" foods from the raw materials nature provides that are equally, if not more nutritious than the animals and plants found in a Paleo diet?

I got this from the Michael Pollan book "In Defense of Food" this is somewhat paraphrased as I can't remember his exact quote:

"With all the advances made in nutrition and food science people have still not been able to duplicate breast milk....formula has always been deficient in comparison, no matter what they add or take away from it."

From what I know about parenting and reading all those books and my wife...I'm pretty sure this is true, if you can breast feed, do it is what they say.

Later in the book he basically makes the point about at what point is stuff still considered food and at what point is it some type of Frankenstein food stuff. Maybe someday we could use our bran to create foods that are better but right now we haven't. I could get to you on a plate the equivalent in calories of protein, carbs and fats of what goes into a Big Mac from "real" foods. Have a group of people eat those for 10 years while the other group can eat Big Mac's. Who do you think will come out better?

Mike ODonnell
12-22-2008, 08:40 AM
I had a nice long rant...but the forum is not about that....so my $0.02 is that people need to find what works for them and then go with it. I don't think low carb is right for me all the time, but doesn't mean others can't find success with it. It also doesn't mean that I don't have low and high carb days and play around to see how my body responds depending on training or recovery needs. My way is not the only way....and there never is just one way. Much like IF...people can make their own way or maybe not at all...it's their choice. To each his own....and if you don't believe 90% paleo lifestyle is healthy or even should be called paleo-like by the unviersal paleo standards of the world....well then get over it, and move on with your own life eating what works for you. None of us need to be right.....we just need to be healthy....and that can come from many different approaches.

Will Moore
12-22-2008, 10:26 AM
Mike, well said and I concur with what you are saying....but I would still like someone to shed some light on why some people seem to thrive on a grain based diet and do poorly on a Paleo or low-carb approach to diet. This should not be the case if as a species, our genes are 99.99% identical, or whatever the exact figure is. For example, I have read many of your posts where you were drawn into an argument by those making a case for plant foods and carbohydrates...you point out that the Inuit as a whole, are healthy and thrive on their diet. Given time, any group of people should be able to do the same. But, I bet if you take an Egyptian, who's healthy as a horse and has been eating bread as a staple his entire life, put him on an Inuit diet for a while and he will feel worse than a dead man...no matter how long he stays on it and tries to adapt...ditto for somone Asian is descent. Many references are made to Stephenson's adoption of the Inuit diet, and the healthy status he acheived from it. But one must keep in mind that he was of Scandinavian descent, a group that seems to do well on high protein, low-carb diets in general for whatever reason.

Anyway Mike, I like your laid back approach to life and your healthy attitude towards these issues in general. I wish I could be more like that....I have a type A personality and I'm a prisoner in my own world of rigid standards I have created for myself. I've just always been that way. Ever since I discovered the world of diet and fitness in the early 80's, I've imposed these standards upon myself. If I can't see my abs in full definition at any given time, I get angry with myself...when in reality, who gives a shit? Life isn't a 24/7 physique contest.

Also, I would like to respond to the other gentleman's remark about the "man made" foods. Yes, we have the power to use raw materials into palatable, nutritous foodstuff but will never be able to truly duplicate what nature provides. Also, people will jump on one body of research, accept it as gospel, and create new foods based on that before everything is known and the consequences are considered. Case in point: Everybody accepted the theory "Cholesteral = bad" so they invented margarine. Even though common sense should tell you that chemically altering a vegetable fat to solidify it at room temperature will certainly not positively impact health, they did it anyway and the government endorsed it. Now, they have to admit they were wrong and remove the trans-fats from foods. Well, its too damn late for everybody that had a heart attack from eating what the government told them was healthy. If they just kept real butter and good old fashion lard, maybe we wouldn't see the heart disease we have today. However, the nutritionists still can't see the forest for the trees....although they admit that hydrogenated vegetable fats are bad, they are trying to replace them with new manufactured solid fats composed of canola and other oils in order to "keep the saturated fats at a minimum". They just don't get it...saturated fats are not, and were not, ever the problem.

Steven Low
12-22-2008, 11:30 AM
Let's put it this way.

Seeing as how we know the negative effects of long distance training effect on the body such as joints are worn down faster, chronic problems in the legs, higher prevalence of cancer (probably due to oxidative damage), etc.

Would you say that people don't have "the right" to do endurance training because it's negative effects on the body?

Garrett Smith
12-22-2008, 12:12 PM
If you hike 5-6 miles a day with 65# on your back at a good pace, there is no way you can maintain energy on a low-carb diet, Paleo or not.

Paleo did not fail you, you chose the wrong Paleo approach (low carb instead of high carb) for your chosen workout demands. You're also still choosing to confuse "low carb" with "Paleo". They are completely different approaches and focus on restricting different things. While they can converge and often do, they do not have to.

Your late-night eating pattern also causes you to crave more carbs, it may also be causing your body to need more carbs to function well. That eating/sleeping pattern will not serve your health well in the long-term.

Endurance-type athletes do well on higher levels of processed carbs. Your "cardio" puts you in that category. I know that processed carbs are not beneficial to health in the long term, your short term performance may benefit from them though.

Humans are not wired for self-discipline, it is a learned trait. "Cheating" with dense sources of carbs (and fat) is actually an instinctual behavior--the key is limiting it.

On a whole other topic, if you think we've "dominated" this planet, not only are you mistaken, but you may want to pay more attention to where that is leading us...

George Mounce
12-22-2008, 01:01 PM
Garrett beat me to it, Paleo doesn't mean low carb, low carb means low carb. I've never eaten low carb, but I have upped my protein and fats substantially when I switched to Paleo.

Insects and the myriad of viruses and bacteria that roam the earth have us very outnumbered and outwitted.

Mike ODonnell
12-22-2008, 02:27 PM
but I would still like someone to shed some light on why some people seem to thrive on a grain based diet and do poorly on a Paleo or low-carb approach to diet.
Many may have less strenuous based lifestyles that a higher fat/lower carb diet can provide enough steady slower state energy....others who do more higher intensity glycolotic based workloads will do better with more glycogen based fuel (and carb replenishment). For example...I do fine on a high fat/protein diet for a couple days of non-intensity activity....but would perform poorly in an explosive based activity if I didn't restock my muscle glycogen stores at some point.

I like your laid back approach to life and your healthy attitude towards these issues in general. I wish I could be more like that....I have a type A personality and I'm a prisoner in my own world of rigid standards I have created for myself.
You said it yourself....it's your own doing, and also can be your own undoing too. I have to keep reminding myself of the 80/20 rule.....focus on the 20% that give 80% of your results...and then just enjoy life....the other perfectionist types spend 80% of their time trying to find the 20%....that provide little and nothing if the basic 20% isn't followed in the first place. Perfection is an illusion. Some where out there is a guy who doesn't have a computer, doesn't read medical research library, doesn't go to a gym, eats real food, keeps active daily, gets fresh air, has a beer and laughs with friends nightly at the local pub and lives to be 100. I envy that person.

Yes, we have the power to use raw materials into palatable, nutritous foodstuff but will never be able to truly duplicate what nature provides.
Sometimes I wonder if the answer is as simple as we created all our own problems long ago once we thought nature was not a perfect design and we could do better....and have lead us to where we are today, good and bad.

That being said....I am not going to go live in a cave and hunt dinner....but there can be some flexibility of being as natural as one can nowadays with needing 100% right or wrong with every approach.

Spend less time reading research about living to 100...and more into learning more about yourself (all that zen stuff)...you may find your happy place yet. I used to be in your place long ago....almost drove me nuts....then I started to do more of "nothing"...and it all started to have more clarity.

Mike ODonnell
12-22-2008, 02:33 PM
On a whole other topic, if you think we've "dominated" this planet, not only are you mistaken, but you may want to pay more attention to where that is leading us...

side note....good read on that is "Ishmael" by Daniel Quinn (thanks Steve L.)...good book for some deeper thinking

Scott Clark
12-22-2008, 04:54 PM
Will, I can't understand why you have such an axe to grind with Paleo. You say that you want to eat Paleo, but you also say everything is much better on a low fat, grain based diet. It seems to me that you've found your niche and that is that.

Tubers and other starchy vegetables can add up quick in terms of carbs. It's just a matter of replacing bread with potatoes, pasta with carrots, etc. Of course, there's nothing wrong with "eating paleo" and enjoying grains or dairy every so often. Black box it and enjoy life.

Craig Loizides
12-22-2008, 08:49 PM
It sounds like you tried a very low carb paleo diet while doing a lot of endurance work and ended up struggling. From this you've concluded that a diet of protein powder, vegetables, bread, and pretzels is best for you. Is it possible that something between these 2 extremes would be optimal?

You seem to believe that a paleo diet is supposed to be very low carb. In The Paleo Diet, Cordain recommends 19-35% protein, 22-40%C, 28-47% fat. In a study of 229 modern hunter gatherer societies, plant foods made up 0-80% of the calories with a mean of about 35%. In earlier times there was proabably an even higher percentage of plant foods. The majority of carbs usually come from tubers rather than fruits. There is no single paleo diet. People have been successful on a very wide range of paleo diets. You can find more information here:
http://www.thepaleodiet.com/index.shtml

You mention the anabolic diet. There's no reason why you can't combine paleo with the anabolic/metabolic diet. I prefer cycling carbs. It feels more natural to me than trying to eat the exact same ratios all the time. You might want to take a look at the metabolic diet trouble shooting guide.
http://www.metabolicdiet.com/images/md_tshoot.pdf
You could also take a look at the Paleo Diet For Athletes. It ends up being about 50% carbs with the bulk pre/post workout.

Regarding creating superior foods, it would require first understanding what nutrients are really needed and in what proportions. Michael Pollan has blamed this nutrition reductionism for a lot of our problems today. People seem to think they just need to get the recommended amount of certain vitamins and they'll be fine. But studies generally show that eating fruits and vegetables is good for you, while taking vitamins doesn't do anything unless you're deficient. We just don't know enough to do better than real foods and I'm not sure there's a reason to try.

As for 90/10 ... it really depends on your goals and how your body responds to certain foods. Not everyone has the same goals as you. For me, paleo serves as a guiding principle in helping maximize happiness, not a hard set of rules.

Will Moore
12-22-2008, 11:37 PM
Thank you all for your responses. I knew at some point, Mr. PhD, Garrett Smith, would have to chime in...No Garrett, I'm not confusing Paleo with low-carb. I "chose" a low-carb approach to Paleo because the Paleo diet by its very nature is already relatively high in fat....no diet should be relatively high in fat and carbohyrdate at the same time, I don't care how now natural the food is. I've seen your posts all over these boards and it seems to me that you think you know it all, but you don't. I can't match your educational credentials, in fact, I've never spent a day in a college classroom...but I do have an IQ that puts me squarely in the 98th percentile of the population and I have a job as a Senior .NET Developer for Microsoft Products and Technologies. I was working as a baker in an artisan bread bakery prior to this job. I taught myself programming.

Now, about what you said; You implied that "late night" eating is unhealthy and leads to carb cravings. Well, tell that to everyone here that uses an IF approach to eating. Personally, I DON'T have a problem with it and I DON'T crave carbs. In fact, I have no problem whatsoever with hunger. I can easily go 24 hours where I have put in a full day at work, with 1 - 1.5 hour workout, and not feel hungry at all. Like I said before, I don't crave the carbohydrate foods, I simply perform much better on them. The point I was trying to make is that a Paleo diet, by its very nature, would have been fairly low-carb. The cardio I was (and still am) doing was not excessive, its actually just enough to make up for the fact that I sit on my ass in front of a computer for a living now. There is no reason that I can see that it wouldn't provide enough "gas" to get me through my workouts, especially with the high levels of fats from nuts and seeds. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that I should return to a low-fat high carb diet. And don't jump in with the "sweet potato" bullshit....been there, done that, and they don't come close to providing the fuel that grain based products do. While your at it, take a look at the carbohydrate breakdown of sweet potatos. They are high in sugar. Just as modern cultivated fruits are too high in sugar, so are modern cultivated sweet potatos. I don't eat these foods. What do you get when you dry fruit? You get a super-sweet ball of sugar and its no better for you than candy....just a fruit juice, natural or not, is concentrated sugar, no better for you than Pepsi Cola. Now, toss a few more degrees down in your signature block and hit me with your rebuttal.

Steven Low
12-23-2008, 12:04 AM
Sounds like you're not going to agree with anyone here, so you might as well stop now.

Will Moore
12-23-2008, 04:49 AM
It's not about agreement or disagreement....a forum is a place for an exchange of ideas or debate. Is that now this this forum works? Or is it "agree with the moderators who regularly post here or get out"....that's what it sounds like to me.

Garrett Smith
12-23-2008, 05:10 AM
Will,
Have fun with your diet. Don't worry, I'll be making no more comments on your posts at all.

Allen Yeh
12-23-2008, 05:21 AM
It's not. I had deleted a response earlier but didn't post it because I didn't think it'd do any good.

The gist was, agree or not let's keep the tone a bit down. I realize being talked down to is irritating, I know I have to habit of doing it to people here and there, I have tried to really reign that tone back. With that said I think what you said to Garrett was out of line.

Some of your posts are very informatative while some of your posts have a very confrontational tone. Which IMO has a "prove me wrong" type of thing. Some people have tried, saying or suggesting different things and sometimes they may or may not get a terse response from you.

I'm not one of those people that feel the need to push Paleo across on the masses, I do try to avoid processed stuff and eating insane amounts of carbs but I've tried to adopt a more laid back approach especially with my family. I try to make sure they get veggies, fruits and meat. If they happen to have some rice/pasta/bread, ok. I do try to steer them away from soda, fast food and things of that nature. I'd much rather my kids have a sweet potato that has 24 grams of carbs with 7 from sugar than 2 slices of wheat bread which has 24 grams of carbs with 2 from sugar, because I just think it's a better idea. The sweet potato is very high in Vitamin A, and C, along with some trace calcium and iron, while the bread might have some calcium and iron in it.

For a while I was very dialed in only upon the macro's, how much protein, carbs and fat did each thing have? I hadn't even thought about all the the things I'd been neglecting like making sure I was getting different colors of vegetables and not eating the same thing all the time. If you find that your diet of low-fat high carb works for you as many others have said more power to you. It seems you to have a fixed notion of what you think the Paleo Diet should be even though there is evidence to the contrary.

Chris H Laing
12-23-2008, 05:32 AM
I "chose" a low-carb approach to Paleo

Why not try a higher carb paleo...Paleo is about food choices so you can still eat a buttload of carbs, just make better choices about how you get those carbs.

What do you get when you dry fruit? You get a super-sweet ball of sugar and its no better for you than candy....just a fruit juice, natural or not, is concentrated sugar, no better for you than Pepsi Cola

But theres no high fructose corn syrup, processed sugar, or any preservatives in fruit, dryed or not.

And whats up with the attack on Dr. G...not cool. I feel like you posted this just so you could fight with people about paleo...

Emily Mattes
12-23-2008, 06:03 AM
We understand, it didn't work for you. What you are doing now works for you, and that's great. So what more do you want? Do you want us all to say "You are absolutely right Will, our diets are all wrong, let's go eat a loaf of challah?" Even when many of us have found that to be harmful to our performance?

Understand that your diet is working for you, and that's great. Many, many people have discovered however that type of diet does not work for them, and that's why they switch to something else. The party line of nutrition in our culture is "low-fat, whole-grain, preferably no meat," and it turns out a lot of hungry, fat people. Paleo is another option for them to try. Key word here is "try," nobody is going to pry your oatmeal from your fingers, y'know?

So cool the defensiveness . . . There are ways to disagree without it. And you can argue your point without throwing in extra aggressive comments, like "People who do 90/10 or 80/20 are weak."

Darryl Shaw
12-23-2008, 06:24 AM
I would like to get feedback from a living example of someone who practices what he preaches about Paleo, is athletic, and thrives on the diet. I want to know what the formula for success is because I really want to eat that way if I could only make it work.

I've been eating paleo for twenty years now and I'd describe myself as being athletic and thriving on this diet and in my experience there is no formula for success. You seem to have the idea that the paleo diet is about absolutes with it having to be either high carb or high fat and if you hit exactly the right macronutrient ratio everything will fall into place and you'll be transformed into some kind of super athlete. The truth is that there are no predetermined macronutrient ratios with this diet and that's the beauty of it; all you need to do apart from avoiding dairy and limiting consumption of grains and legumes is eat a varied diet of natural foods and as long as you're eating enough Kcals to get through the day the macros take care of themselves.
If I've learned anything about this diet over the past twenty years it's to keep things simple and not to over analyze things because life really is too short to worry about trivial stuff so it's okay to enjoy the occasional beer or a slice of pizza because as long as they're not a regular part your diet they won't do you any real harm.

Mike ODonnell
12-23-2008, 06:59 AM
It's not about agreement or disagreement....a forum is a place for an exchange of ideas or debate. Is that now this this forum works? Or is it "agree with the moderators who regularly post here or get out"....that's what it sounds like to me.

Hell I don't even agree with half the stuff that comes out of my mouth....but let's just keep the debate "non-personal"....as we are a community of people with various opinions who can debate without attacking. I think I am no better than the next and just want to find my own happiness in what I do. I would only hope you can do the same.

oh yeah...happy holidays.

Will Moore
12-23-2008, 09:14 AM
Ok, I apologize....maybe I took Dr. G's comments the wrong way and went on the defensive. Look, when I said all the things I said about a high-carb diet, heavy on grain products working for me, I'm not trying to defend it as being a superior dietary stategy. In fact, if you look back over my earlier posts, you will see that I stated that I prefer the foods I was eating on a Paleo diet. Its the idea that I'm eating real food that nature provides....nothing processed. And I understand what everyone seems to suggest: why not a high-carb Paleo diet? Well, mostly because I think that would result in significant fat gain, unless I were very careful and counted every calorie. Here's why - If you eat Paleo style it means eating siginificant amount of meat, which usually equates to significant amounts of fat. If you combine that with a lot of carbs, regardless of the source, your body will take the easiest route and burn the carbs...the fat will not get burned, it will end up as body fat. That has been my experience and its why (when I'm eating Paleo) that I consume as little carbs as I can get away with. By the same token, when I'm eating a high-carb diet, I keep the fats at a bare minimum. When I keep the fats super low, the diet is self-regulating because the food is bulky and has lots of fiber...I get full before I overeat on calories.

That said, I don't want to fight anyone here about what I eat or what you eat. I just want to engage in some discussion about apparent genetic differences among cultures and individuals, and their ability or inability to thrive on different diets. I want to know what your opinions, theories, and ideas are. For example, there are groups of Mediterranian people who have been pounding down pasta since the day they were born, yet have some of the highest life expectancies on the planet. Is it because they are genetically better suited for this type of food? Or would they in fact live longer and be healthier if they eliminated the grain/flour products from their diets? Could it be their extensive use of Olive oil or fish somehow makes up for the bad things in their diet? Or what about Asian cultures? I've read many posts on many different low-carb and Paleo forums where Campbell is repeatedly flamed on his research for The China Study. Could he in fact be correct about his theories regarding the superiorty of a low protein, high carbohydrate diet....but ONLY if it is applied to people of Asian descent? Or is he just way off base altogether? Also, how about all those studies showing NO significant physical performance losses once one has become adapted to a low-carbohydrate diet? Do any of you believe this? As for me, I never get adapted, just get worse over time. These are the things that I ponder.

And Garret, I'm sorry I was an $%*!!@....please accept my apology.

Steven Low
12-23-2008, 11:55 AM
Nope, I said that because you were attacking other people. But it sounds like you already realized this. So we have no problem now.

----------------------------

Regarding high carbs.

There's literally probably hundreds if not thousands of factors in our genetics that affect our response to different nutrition. For example, those of us that don't downregulate insulin receptors normally or produce excess insulin receptors may get no insulin resistance regardless of if they eat 90% carbs and 10% protein all day everyday for years. Downregulation is just one of the multiple pathways our body has in response to nutrition.

Point being EVERYONE has different genetics. And they all response differently. As it seems, a lot of asian people can eat rice and a lot of carbs all day and stay skinny myself included because we've had agriculture around longer than most of the world. Is there certain adaptations in our genetics that allow us to do this? Probably. Likewise, most asians cannot tolerate dairy while almost 90%+ of the european population can. Coincidence? No, more likely that Europeans have had to adapt to animal milk during the winter months while not a lot of asians had the need to investigate milk with their diet.

Food allergies, tolerance to carbs, tolerance to fats, etc. are all along the SAME spectrum of how each of our individual bodies responds different to different things we ingest. Basically, what everyone has been saying here is find out what works for you. None of us know our exact genetics and we haven't even figured out what most of the genes do or even discovered all of the genes or innerworkings of the cells. Much less have we discovered how a lot of these would interact macroscopically with what we eat. THIS is why experimenting for the INDIVIDUAL is the answer.

If you want to keep asking why certain populations can do certain things other people can't then you'll have to do your own research on genetics as they apply to nutrition except with like food allergies (which are more immunological in nature and more researched). Fact of the matter is most of us just don't know and it's not like we don't want to answer your questions... just that no one on the planet can answer them. Hence, why most of us experiment with our bodies.

Ben Wheeler
12-23-2008, 12:07 PM
Will,

You should try to talk to someone with an endurance background to see whether any of them find they can thrive on a Paleo diet while still maintaining good energy levels. Brian Mackenzie from Crossfit Endurance would be a great guy to ask. Goodluck!

Ben Fury
12-23-2008, 11:39 PM
Will,

You should try to talk to someone with an endurance background to see whether any of them find they can thrive on a Paleo diet while still maintaining good energy levels. Brian Mackenzie from Crossfit Endurance would be a great guy to ask. Goodluck!

Charles Washington (http://zerocarbforlife.com/?page_id=2) runs half marathons on a ZERO carb diet.

Allen Yeh
12-24-2008, 02:31 AM
Charles Washington (http://zerocarbforlife.com/?page_id=2) runs half marathons on a ZERO carb diet.

His page is interesting to say the least.

Dave Van Skike
12-24-2008, 10:29 AM
Will,

You should try to talk to someone with an endurance background to see whether any of them find they can thrive on a Paleo diet while still maintaining good energy levels. Brian Mackenzie from Crossfit Endurance would be a great guy to ask. Goodluck!

an interesting question would be if there are any successful (on any level..local regional or otherwise) endurance athletes that use low to no carb approaches.

I know of only one national level track racer who used the zone diet to tank one cycling season in the quest of uber leanness but none that have used a "paleo" approach with moderated (but sensible) levels of carbs from non grain sources.

Garrett Smith
12-24-2008, 11:01 AM
Interesting article on endurance nutrition. (http://whyfiles.org/204endurance_training/3.html)
The bad news is that carbo-loading may not be all it's cracked up to be. Timothy Noakes and colleagues in Australia found that cyclists riding a 100-kilometer course produced similar times, and power outputs, after a carbo-loading spree, and after eating mock carbs (we don't even want to think what they might be). The benefits of carbo-loading, the authors wrote, may grow from the placebo effect.
...
There is some evidence backing the claim. For example, in a South African carbo-loading trial, bikers who had eaten a high-fat (more than 65 percent of calories from fat) diet were faster on a 100-kilometer ride (see "High-Fat Diet Versus Habitual..." in the bibliography). And a Swiss study found a 21 percent increase in running endurance among male runners who ate a diet containing 40 percent of calories from fat, compared to 18 percent (see "Muscle Structure ..." in the bibliography). For comparison, Americans average 30 percent to 40 percent of calories from fat.

In a study funded by a candy company (see "The Effects of Varying..." in the bibliography), Horvath compared diets containing 16 percent, 31 percent and 44 percent fat. The average runner's endurance was 14 percent greater on the medium- and high-fat diets, he reported.
The mock carb & placebo statement is very interesting.

Ben Wheeler
12-24-2008, 11:40 AM
Yeah it would be interesting to find out about the endurance athletes. My guess is that there are some who can thrive on a Paleo approach. Like I said Brian Mackenzie is a good guy to look at, he just hosted a Nutrition seminar with Robb Wolf I am pretty sure. And he runs 100 mile races, thats just about as endurance as it gets.

Ben Fury
12-24-2008, 12:00 PM
an interesting question would be if there are any successful (on any level..local regional or otherwise) endurance athletes that use low to no carb approaches.

Mamo Wolde won the marathon gold in the 1968 Olympics. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mamo_Wolde)I was told he was a very low carber. Don't have a source on the specifics of his diet.

Ben Wheeler
12-24-2008, 12:52 PM
Just recieved an e-mail from Brian @ Crossfit Endurance. He says he eats Paleo. So it can most certainly be done for endurance, like I said the guy runs 100 miles.

Dave Van Skike
12-24-2008, 02:21 PM
"paleo" (as much as I despise the term) does not equal very low carb (>50 grams per day).

i'd be intersted in hearing about any verified dietary stuff about the ethiopian runners, traditional diet in portions of those n.african countries is certainly "lowish" carb, blood, milk and beef... and their sport is pure steady state endurance.. at least more so than cycling, which has sharp forays int high and low power output in a given event.

Mike Prevost
12-25-2008, 06:24 PM
Thank you all for your responses. I knew at some point, Mr. PhD, Garrett Smith, would have to chime in...No Garrett, I'm not confusing Paleo with low-carb. I "chose" a low-carb approach to Paleo because the Paleo diet by its very nature is already relatively high in fat....no diet should be relatively high in fat and carbohyrdate at the same time, I don't care how now natural the food is. I've seen your posts all over these boards and it seems to me that you think you know it all, but you don't. I can't match your educational credentials, in fact, I've never spent a day in a college classroom...but I do have an IQ that puts me squarely in the 98th percentile of the population and I have a job as a Senior .NET Developer for Microsoft Products and Technologies. I was working as a baker in an artisan bread bakery prior to this job. I taught myself programming.

Now, about what you said; You implied that "late night" eating is unhealthy and leads to carb cravings. Well, tell that to everyone here that uses an IF approach to eating. Personally, I DON'T have a problem with it and I DON'T crave carbs. In fact, I have no problem whatsoever with hunger. I can easily go 24 hours where I have put in a full day at work, with 1 - 1.5 hour workout, and not feel hungry at all. Like I said before, I don't crave the carbohydrate foods, I simply perform much better on them. The point I was trying to make is that a Paleo diet, by its very nature, would have been fairly low-carb. The cardio I was (and still am) doing was not excessive, its actually just enough to make up for the fact that I sit on my ass in front of a computer for a living now. There is no reason that I can see that it wouldn't provide enough "gas" to get me through my workouts, especially with the high levels of fats from nuts and seeds. Therefore, I came to the conclusion that I should return to a low-fat high carb diet. And don't jump in with the "sweet potato" bullshit....been there, done that, and they don't come close to providing the fuel that grain based products do. While your at it, take a look at the carbohydrate breakdown of sweet potatos. They are high in sugar. Just as modern cultivated fruits are too high in sugar, so are modern cultivated sweet potatos. I don't eat these foods. What do you get when you dry fruit? You get a super-sweet ball of sugar and its no better for you than candy....just a fruit juice, natural or not, is concentrated sugar, no better for you than Pepsi Cola. Now, toss a few more degrees down in your signature block and hit me with your rebuttal.


Will

Go over to www.coachgordo.com and take a look at his articles. He is a world class Ironman triathlete who initially had some problems with paleo. However, after some discussions with Dr. Cordain, he added some high density carbohydrates like grains back into his diet at strategic times to fuel his training and has been very successful. Even Dr. Cordain mentioned (according to Gordo) that Paleo fell apart a bit for athletes like Gordo who trained more than 15 hours per week.

Mike

Garrett Smith
12-26-2008, 06:05 AM
Supplementing with maltodextrin-based drinks is advocated in the Paleo Diet for Athletes. (http://books.google.com/books?id=FUV15a7GZycC&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=paleo+diet+for+athletes+maltodextrin&source=web&ots=2Ze6etEAaL&sig=BhpTvm2UlD7q3OuE8V_aeydjbBU#PPA40,M1)
Note that this book was always intended for "endurance" athletes (like there's any other kind, pffft).

Ben Fury
12-26-2008, 07:09 AM
Supplementing with maltodextrin-based drinks is advocated in the Paleo Diet for Athletes. (http://books.google.com/books?id=FUV15a7GZycC&pg=PA40&lpg=PA40&dq=paleo+diet+for+athletes+maltodextrin&source=web&ots=2Ze6etEAaL&sig=BhpTvm2UlD7q3OuE8V_aeydjbBU#PPA40,M1)
Note that this book was always intended for "endurance" athletes (like there's any other kind, pffft).

LOL! Yes, I can see those Paleo hunters out stalking the wild maltodex!

If what you're doing requires maltodex, it's probably not a healthy activity. Training volumes are given as an excuse for carb addiction. Carb addicts will justify their addictive behavior with any excuse at hand that fits.

The reality is there is ZERO requirement for dietary carbohydrate in human nutrition. Carbohydrates are accessory foods like leather bucket seats. Nice to have and makes things comfier, but the car runs fine without them. :)

Garrett Smith
12-26-2008, 07:56 AM
Carb addicts will justify their addictive behavior with any excuse at hand that fits.
This is so true, in so many ways.

Will Moore
12-26-2008, 08:28 AM
Actually, I have read many articles to the contrary on enurance...saying that physical events of long duration (as long as they are below 80% of maximum output) are not compromised on a low carbohydrate diet, Paleo or otherwise. It's events that required maximum output during a short period of time (i.e. heavy weight lifting) that cause the problem. For me, that has always been the problem. Yes, my endurance efforts suffered some too, but to an extent that I could live with it. However, I could not live with the fact that I was putting a lot of effort into lifting weights and getting nothing in return...weaker if anything.

I couldn't agree with you more about the whole "maltodextrin" thing. If you are going to do that, why even bother with dedicating yourself to eat only primal, natural, Paleo type foods?....may as well go all the way and break out the pasta and garlic bread if you do that. This brings me back to the original intent of the posts I have made here: How can I walk a straight line with only Paleo foods and succeed in my training efforts? I suppose one could eat a lot of fruit, but I don't think the excessive amounts it would require would be healthy or effective. As you all know, the carbs in fruit (mostly fructose) have little effect on insulin, they go straight to the liver. In large quantities, natural or not, fructose is not good for you. This is especially true of dried fruits and concentrated juices. Also, the idea of the post-workout carb dose is to stimulate insulin to drive nutrients into the muscles...fruit is very poor in this regard.

I have read that one can be successful doing high intensity weight training (without carbs) from the conversion of protein to glucogen and increased intramusclular triglycerides once one has adapted...that the result is nearly as good as glycogen from carbohydrates. Does anyone have any thoughts on that? I wish this were true, and maybe it is for some, but it hasn't worked for me. I don't know, but for 20 years I was consuming a diet extremely low in fat and extremely heavy on carbs. Perhaps I have perverted my metabolism beyond the point of no return where a meat and vegetable based diet just won't work for me.

David Mathews
12-26-2008, 10:22 AM
Will,
I first read about intramuscular tryglicerides in one of Cordains books and I believe I have adapted somewhat in this area. I workout fasted every day(7 days/wk) including xfit and ME work(blackbox template) and over the past year and a half can now do even the longer workouts like Murph and Filthy Fifties etc. without bonking at all. A year and half ago this wasn't the case.I eat paleo (w/beer) with most days under 50 gr of carbs. Most of my carbs are berries PWO and the rest of the day very few if any. I read in one of Dr. Eades blogs last year that he thought this type of adaptation was not only possible but probable. I wonder if there are any studies on these intramuscular tryglicerides?

Steven Low
12-26-2008, 10:52 AM
The only studies on intramuscular triglyerides I've seen are the ones showing increases are correlated with insulin resistance. But I don't think they were looking at fat adapted athletes so I can't give you anything there.


Will:

As far as you statement goes that's like asking "why do we even need to supplement at all?" I mean, do we really need that whey or BCAAs or fish oil even though they help us perform better? Why not eat more meat, fish, whatever to counteract it?

BCAAs are one thing that you'd NEVER see in nature [by themselves] but they improve workouts. This is just one of the benefits of "modern" nutrition. Not everything is cut and dry like saying eat more whole foods or something. There's always exceptions like BCAAs or supplementing protein or carbs for those who don't have the time/stomach/etc. to eat more whole foods to get their body to run better.

Jay Cohen
12-26-2008, 10:56 AM
Steve;

Well stated. On the that same note, Lyle posted his thoughts on BCAA's today on his site:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/nutrition/what-are-good-sources-of-protein-amino-acid-profile-part-3.html

w/f/s

Ben Fury
12-26-2008, 02:04 PM
Not everything is cut and dry like saying eat more whole foods or something. There's always exceptions like BCAAs or supplementing protein or carbs for those who don't have the time/stomach/etc. to eat more whole foods to get their body to run better.

From my research and field experience, advising folks to eat more whole foods and avoid Frankenfoods is quite cut and dried. Switching from butter to margarine turned out to be a disaster when the dangers of trans fats became known. Switching from higher fat whole foods to low fat Frankenfoods produced the fattest population ever with a steep upward trend of diabesity threatening to overwhelm the primary care health system.

People who don't make time to eat more whole foods automatically schedule more time to enjoy substandard health.

Getting the body to run better is a thorny question. Run better for what? For competition to win at any cost? Then Frankenfood away however makes you stronger and faster. To last long and run well and pain free? Then real food is still your best bet.

Steven Low
12-26-2008, 05:03 PM
Well, duh, eating whole foods is better than eating processed foods. But whole foods don't solve all "problems" when it comes to optimal performance at least... hence that post on supplementation. That's all I'm saying.

Ben Fury
12-26-2008, 10:23 PM
But whole foods don't solve all "problems" when it comes to optimal performance at least... hence that post on supplementation. That's all I'm saying.

Roger that, comin' in 5X5 on that one.

The alarming trend I'm concerned about is a 'win at any cost' 'look hot at any cost' attitude that's quite pervasive and affects food, supplementation and blood doping choices.

The questions end up being on the order of, "Dude, you got so huge and fast all of a sudden. How are you managing to beat the doping tests and where can I get some?" This is deplorable but understandable when millions of dollars are at stake over infinitesimally small differences in performance. But usually it's just the average amateur athlete that wants bragging rights or to build a better looking body to attract somebody hot to 'hook up' with.

Doping and supplementation all too often are the first choices and proper nutrition and rest are the last things paid attention to. After all, it takes discipline to menu plan and get to bed by 10. To take roids and supplements and meal replacements just takes cash and a willingness to suspend belief in needing to take proper care of your body.

I can't get a huge mark up on real food and rest... and neither can anybody else, so the marketing push is immense to convince folks that it is ALL about the pills and potions.

When I ask athletes if they make food choices as if it was racing fuel to put in a Formula One Ferrari F2008 I always hear excuses. The human body is too darn adaptable and resilient in this case. You put molasses in the tank of the F2008 once and you have one very dead race car. You do the equivalent with an athlete and the body picks up the slack and soldiers on... damaged but still fighting.


There's always exceptions like BCAAs or supplementing protein or carbs for those who don't have the time/stomach/etc. to eat more whole foods to get their body to run better.


You see why that statement sets me off? People are constantly CREATING exceptions to AVOID RESPONSIBILITY for eating more whole foods. Eating more whole foods is the LAST CHOICE, almost never the first one. :(

Steven Low
12-26-2008, 10:57 PM
Psshh, you know what I meant.

If you've looked through most of the threads around here (which you have), you would know that pretty much all of us rely on the KISS rule. Whole foods for diet, enough sleep, simple training. Add supplementation or other things only at the end.

Will Moore
12-27-2008, 12:03 AM
Ben, when you said that "low-fat Frankenfoods" produced the fattest population ever, you must realize that even though these low fat foods were all the rage, people never actually reduced their fat intake...they just ate their Snackwells cookies in addition to all the high fat crap they were already eating. Therefore, the reason they were even fatter is a no-brainer. I am living proof that one can be quite "ripped" and strong while eating a very low fat diet that includes many processed carbohydrates. I'm not trying to say that this is "healthy" or ideal. I'm just saying that all of those low carb studies that blame low-fat products for obesity are wrong. While these products were alll the rage in the 80's and early 90s, almost nobody actually reduced the total fat in their diets.

Darryl Shaw
12-27-2008, 04:56 AM
"paleo" (as much as I despise the term) does not equal very low carb (>50 grams per day).

i'd be intersted in hearing about any verified dietary stuff about the ethiopian runners, traditional diet in portions of those n.african countries is certainly "lowish" carb, blood, milk and beef... and their sport is pure steady state endurance.. at least more so than cycling, which has sharp forays int high and low power output in a given event.

I couldn't find anything specific about the diets of Ethiopian runners but I would assume that it's fairly similar to that of Kenyan runners ie. very high carb with some form of grain based porridge being the main staple food.

http://jonathaninthedistance.blogspot.com/2008/06/nutrition-kenyan-marathon-runners-part.html

Arien Malec
12-27-2008, 09:40 AM
Ben, when you said that "low-fat Frankenfoods" produced the fattest population ever, you must realize that even though these low fat foods were all the rage, people never actually reduced their fat intake...they just ate their Snackwells cookies in addition to all the high fat crap they were already eating.

Not really -- consumption of fat increased slightly in women and decreased slightly in men, but the amount either way was very small in relation to the total caloric intake. The increase in total calories was from (mostly processed) carbohydrate sources. On the consumption of fat, we've seen a rather dramatic shift away from animal sources of fat (meat and whole dairy) towards vegetable sources of fat (mostly corn oil and other vegetable PUFAs).

"The increase in energy intake is attributable primarily to an increase in carbohydrate intake, with a 62.4-gram increase among women (p<0.01) and a 67.7-gram increase among men (p<0.01). Total fat intake in grams increased among women by 6.5 g (p<0.01) and decreased among men by 5.3 g (p<0.01)."

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/468528
(free registration required)

On another note -- Will, you keep arguing with people who aren't arguing back. You sound in tone exactly like the strawman dogmatic low carber (who doesn't exist on this forum, so far as I've seen) you are arguing against.

Will Moore
12-28-2008, 12:08 AM
Arien, I'm not arguing, I'm stating facts and contributing to the discussion. I'm not taking sides with anyone. Why is it that anytime someone utters something that doesn't conform to someone else's point of view, its considered an "argument" or personal attack? I'm simply stating what I have read in studies, just like everyone else here does. By the way, the Medscape article you refer to is only one of many similar studies. Even in the Medscape article it shows that fat consumption was only reduced by less than 6 grams in men...do the math Arien. The bottom line is that total calories actually increased and fat consumption decreased very little. Carbohyrates just happened to be the source of the caloric increase...if the increase were from fat calories instead, the result would have been the same. They would have grown fatter. The point I was making, which I believe to be valid, is that low-fat foods were not to blame. People simply ate more of everything.

Ben Fury
12-28-2008, 01:34 AM
The point I was making, which I believe to be valid, is that low-fat foods were not to blame. People simply ate more of everything.

Blanket inaccurate statement. Arien published some of the figures. There's far more just like it out there in the literature.

The nature of foods eaten changed as well as the totals.
Carbs increased.
Saturated fats decreased.
Polyunsaturated fats increased.
Novel nutritive AND non-nutritive sweeteners increased.

This resulted in an explosion of obesity and diabetes.

Caloric load alone does not explain the difference in body composition. It is NOT simply calories in/calories out of the metabolic black box with 1:1:1 input/metabolism/excretion. This is metabolism, not a two stroke engine. Look at what's going on with the metabolism of Frankenfoods and the glass grows ever murkier and more terrifying.

Carbohydrates are uniquely fattening due to their influence on metabolism. This is OLD news except to the Diet-Heart crowd who scream metabolic black box reductionism whenever metabolism comes up. Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin wrote about the uniquely fattening nature of carbs in 1825. OLD news.

Try ignoring the reductionists for a moment and open your mind to what the scientists with open observational windows to their imaginations have been saying for two centuries: it's the carbs making people fat.

Then there's the crazy uncle in the attic, the new Frankenfoods with poorly understood mechanisms throwing further monkey wrenches into the metabolic works. Trans fats, novel PUFA's, novel preservatives, novel coloring agents, novel flavors, and on and on... and you're going to look at ALL of that novelty and glibly reduce it down to:
"People simply ate more of everything."

It's all just calories in/calories out, eh? If that's what you wish to believe, fine.

Arien Malec
12-28-2008, 09:08 AM
Carbohyrates just happened to be the source of the caloric increase...if the increase were from fat calories instead, the result would have been the same. They would have grown fatter.

That's an experiment that hasn't been done yet, so we can't draw that conclusion. As Michael Pollan said recently, humans have evolved to maintain good health on many different kinds of diet (he mentions Kitavans, Inuit and Masai), and we have somehow settled in the present day on the single diet that makes us sick.

Why do we eat more than required to sustain healthy weight?

One point of view is that our natural inclination is to eat to the point of overweight, but only recently has the cost of food dropped to the point that we've become fat. This ignores a few points. The first is the setpoint theory. The second is that we are not in a unique era of easy food. Jared Diamond makes the point that in many hunter-gatherer societies, there wasn't much total effort put into gathering food per week; still people didn't overeat. We also see differing levels of obesity as relatively constant levels of affluence across the world.

The hypothesis that I think has the most supporting evidence is that large amounts of sugars and processed grains cause hyperinsulinemia which disrupts metabolic regulation. There may be other things going on as well -- leptin resistance, for one, and some suggestion that large amounts of PUFAs disrupt weight regulation as well:

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/12/vegetable-oil-and-weight-gain.html

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/12/omega-6-linoleic-acid-suppresses.html

The point I was making, which I believe to be valid, is that low-fat foods were not to blame. People simply ate more of everything.

And I think you can draw a straight line between what we ate more of (sugars, refined grains, and vegetable oils), and what happened.

With regard to the conclusions we can draw about healthy eating, there are two different issues, which you are conflating. The first is "what is a healthy diet to eat", and the second is "what has caused the explosion in obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease (and possibly stroke and cancer as well) in the Western world and in the US in particular."

If there was one and only one healthy diet for humans, the two questions would be connected. But humans are healthy on diets ranging from California Natives (50% acorn meal), to Kitvans (mostly tubers with coconuts and fish), to Inuit (mostly seal blubber), to Masai (blood, whole milk, and meat), to various tribes of !Kung (either mostly tubers or mostly mongongo nuts).

If, as I believe, a high processed carb diet is the trigger cause (possibly supplemented by high PUFAs) of obesity, we don't need to conclude that low carb diets are the only healthy diets, only that we need to avoid diets high in processed carbs and vegetable oils.

I'd also note, as many others have here, that if your daily life contains large amounts of glycogen depleting work, you will have a higher tolerance for simple carbs than others, due to the body's preference for refilling depleted glycogen stores, particularly post workout. I'd also note that if you already have a history of metabolic disregulation, or if you were born in a prenatal environment of hyperinsulinemia, you may have a lifelong problem with simple carbs. As others have noted, there may be genetic issues at play as well.

Mike ODonnell
12-28-2008, 09:12 AM
If, as I believe, a high processed carb diet is the trigger cause (possibly supplemented by high PUFAs) of obesity, we don't need to conclude that low carb diets are the only healthy diets, only that we need to avoid diets high in processed carbs and vegetable oils.

I'd also note, as many others have here, that if your daily life contains large amounts of glycogen depleting work, you will have a higher tolerance for simple carbs than others, due to the body's preference for refilling depleted glycogen stores, particularly post workout.

Agree on both.....look at how south the Inuit state of health went once "westernization" foods moved in (cola, sugar, processed foods, veg oils). That and then also look at athletes who train a ton and eat like crap (Michael Phelps)...and are still lean and ripped. Exercise can help make up for a less than ideal diet....although you can't outrun that forever.....as skinny people get cancers and diabetes too. This is no one perfect diet for all....unless that includes whole foods and restricted processed foods...macronutrient %s can vary and will be individualistic to the person, their goals, their activity level and degree of insulin resistance/sensitivity.

Jordan Glasser
12-28-2008, 01:00 PM
reading this thread is like watching a train wreck. I just want to look away.....but can't keep my eyes off it.
I wish I can make it stop.

It's not like the arguments haven't been made, points proven, and everyone has had a chance to express their point of view.

Is there any stone left unturned about this topic? I don't know, but it looks like I'll be watching closely whether I like it or not!

Will Moore
12-28-2008, 10:29 PM
Here we go again....I'm shocked that you think carbs (or any macronutrient) are uniquely fattening. Now I AM going to argue. I give up because I can't say one thing!....just one friggin' thing without someone taking it as a personal insult.

Arien Malec
12-28-2008, 11:19 PM
Here we go again....I'm shocked that you think carbs (or any macronutrient) are uniquely fattening.

This seems like a good issue to bring to a fresh thread. I assume you've read Taubes and disagree?

Will Moore
12-29-2008, 01:02 AM
I don't agree with everything Taubes says. I think he is very honest in his reporting and makes excellent references to published medical studies. However, I don't agree with some of his analysis of those studies. For example, you take a group of people who have been eating a natural diet of meat and milk, with very little carbohydates...and suddenly switch their diet to one high in carbohydrates. The result is obesity, high blood pressure, etc. However, what this does not apply to a group of say...Japanese people who are accustomed to eating a diet heavy on rice. The carbohydrates do not make them obese. In recent years, as the Japanese diet, especially among the youth, has become more westernized and includes your typical Western burger, fries, fried chicken, and pizza....high fat foods...obesity is now becoming an issue. This is where I think dietary history and genetics come in to play; high fat diets cause problems in groups tradionally consuming low fat fare....high carbohydrate diets cause problems in groups that tradionally consume low carbohydare fare. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it. I have read most of the popular diet related books. I have read "Good Calories, Bad Calories" and "Eat To Live", for example. These two books are at opposite ends of the low-carb, high-carb debate. However, I find they both contain useful information.

Ben Fury
12-29-2008, 09:33 AM
...Western burger, fries, fried chicken, and pizza....high fat foods...obesity is now becoming an issue.

Will, think. Every single one of those foods is also packed with carbs.


I have read "Good Calories, Bad Calories" and "Eat To Live", for example. These two books are at opposite ends of the low-carb, high-carb debate. However, I find they both contain useful information.

Comparing a meticulously detailed and researched book like Good Calories, Bad Calores with Joel Fuhrman's opus to vegetarian hyperbole and study cherry picking, Eat to Live is simply hilarious.

Thanks Will! I needed a good laugh this morning.

Allen Yeh
12-29-2008, 09:41 AM
Ben,

While I've enjoyed some of your posts, try to keep the mocking tone down to a minimum.

Ben Fury
12-29-2008, 10:23 AM
Ben,

While I've enjoyed some of your posts, try to keep the mocking tone down to a minimum.

Allen, I apologize to both you and Will and all others who found my comments excessive.

Please feel free to delete my post if you feel it is necessary to maintain the decorum of the board.

My funny bone was tickled. I typed while laughing, not in derision, but in honest amusement. Type is inherently inflexible at conveying emotion in the varied and wonderful ways that human speech and body language do. It was not my desire to hurt anyone's feelings and I sincerely apologize.

Mike ODonnell
12-29-2008, 11:27 AM
reading this thread is like watching a train wreck. I just want to look away.....but can't keep my eyes off it. I wish I can make it stop.!

I agree....I'm out....I know works for me.

Jay Cohen
12-29-2008, 12:43 PM
Allen, I apologize to both you and Will and all others who found my comments excessive.

Please feel free to delete my post if you feel it is necessary to maintain the decorum of the board.

My funny bone was tickled. I typed while laughing, not in derision, but in honest amusement. Type is inherently inflexible at conveying emotion in the varied and wonderful ways that human speech and body language do. It was not my desire to hurt anyone's feelings and I sincerely apologize.

Ben;

I found your comments spot on. MOD's these days are getting really touchy, not sure why, but I enjoy all your posts, so please, stay at it.

Ben Fury
12-29-2008, 02:37 PM
Ben;

I found your comments spot on. MOD's these days are getting really touchy, not sure why, but I enjoy all your posts, so please, stay at it.

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Jay!

I fully understand the moderator insisting on maintaining a civil tone. I've seen boards go down the tubes rather quickly when personal attacks, foul language, and/or general snarkiness were permitted.

If anyone wants to discuss the merits of Joel Fuhrman's work vs Gary Taubes... without lapsing into personal attacks or pseudoscience... I'm sure we can do that.

Allen Yeh
12-29-2008, 06:32 PM
Ben,

Thanks.

Will Moore
12-30-2008, 09:29 AM
Ben, the point I was making in regards to the rising obesity rates among the Japanese youth is that it's not the carbs that are causing it...its the addition of a lot of fat into a diet already high in carbohydrates. The main caloric contributor in western style fast foods is fried fat. The Japanese who still consume a traditional diet, which is VERY high in carbohydrates in the form of soba noodles and rice and very low in fat, are not obese and are not afflicted with metabolic sydrome or diabetes...its a fact, Ben, regardless of what your anti-carb agenda is. However, this DOES NOT mean I'm saying we should all eat like the traditional Japanese. For someone of a different genetic background, that many carbs could certainly prove disasterous. So, if I may emphasize once again, I don't think you can just assign rules for nutrition that are set in stone and the same for all people, regardless of your ethnicity or genetics. I'm sure you are familiar with the work of Weston Price....he points out the good health of people eating traditional diets, whether they are low or high in carbohydrates.

David Mathews
12-30-2008, 09:34 AM
An observation that I've made over the last year, including some of my own family members and other nutrition boards is that the people that scream the loudest that a high carb diet can be healthy are ...............addicted to carbs in the worst way! IMHO

Will Moore
12-30-2008, 09:46 AM
Wow, you guys are ruthless......cut me some slack, already:) !! Thanks, Dave, that really made my day:) Looks like I'm done here. I'll start a new thread about something else, maybe something less controversial.

Allen Yeh
12-30-2008, 10:00 AM
I think one of the things being missed here is that IMO there is a difference between the carbs in the rice that Japanese might eat and the carbs you find in typical Western diet type foods.

Allen Yeh
12-30-2008, 09:32 PM
Before I forget I've been meaning to ask everyone what they consider low carb and what they consider low fat?

Arien Malec
12-31-2008, 10:42 AM
Before I forget I've been meaning to ask everyone what they consider low carb and what they consider low fat?

My definition:

Low fat -- <30% of daily calories (standard nutritional recommendation), extreme low fat would be the<10% Ornish diet.

Low carb -- < 20% of calories; extreme low carb: sufficient to cause ketosis. In personal experience, things like leafy greens and such don't seem to matter that much; things like bread, pasta, and sugars seem to matter a great deal.