Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Losing more weight on high carb...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    1



    Pikaia, link me to info on the gardner study then.

    Comment


    • #17
      1



      "scientists have known for some time that fat can't be stored unless alpha-glycerol-phosphate is available to create the trigliceride that can be stored in fat cells. Alpha-glycerol-phosphate is created when carbohydrates are metabolized in the presence of insulin. Insulin is primarily driven by eating carbs. "


      Eva, do some research on ASP (Acylation stimulating protein).


      Let me just reiterate that if what you were saying were true, you could NOT get fat on a diet of 10,000 calories a day of fat. That just isn't true...not even close.


      Seriously though, when you see pictures of eskimos, are they usually physically fit or are they usually overweight? Answer that honestly.

      Comment


      • #18
        1



        "And Tarlach already explained the problems with the study you posted, from the perspective of a Primal/Paleo approach. "


        There is no problem with the study I posted. Please tell me how it doesn't show that some people do better on higher carb diets.

        Comment


        • #19
          1



          Bobby, just read my posts. I've linked to the Gardner data twice in this thread. Furthermore, it is contained in a talk that you claimed (in another thread) that you already watched. I don't mean to be mean, but I'm starting to doubt your ability to understand and retain any of this stuff.

          Comment


          • #20
            1



            I don't really feel like going through and re watching it. Can you at least tell me where in the vid that it is.


            Also, can't you just link me to the actual study?


            Edit: Go to the 1:10 (1 hour 10 minutes) of the video for it.


            OK, that goes against the study I posted. But I don't think it really refutes my study. I think more studies need to be done on it to truly know, but I still think that certain people do better on high carb diets.

            Comment


            • #21
              1



              I should clarify. I don't mean ability. What I really mean to say is that I think you need to spend some serious time reading and really absorbing this stuff. It won't happen overnight. Once you have a good, solid foundation, you'll be able to look at all of the studies and come to reasonable conclusions about what is understood and what needs further study.

              Comment


              • #22
                1



                Pikaia, you mean looking at studies with a primal bias, right?

                Comment


                • #23
                  1



                  Bobby, I did tell you EXACTLY where to look: 1:09:55.


                  And I also explained that this is UNPUBLISHED data. Now before you jump all over that, let me (putting on scientist hat) explain that there's nothing nefarious about unpublished data. It may mean that Gardner is saving it for another paper. It may mean that space constraints required him to cut the data. (Submitted papers have to conform to specific length/figure limits.) It doesn't mean it is faulty data. It just means that for some reason it wasn't considered important enough or relevant enough to main goals of the original study.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    1



                    I don't mean to say that there is anything nefarious about the unpublished data. But you should watch the video that Gardner actually posts and look at the ratios of carbs and fats in their diet.


                    The study that I cited provided the food for 16 weeks. The study gardner did was designed so they told them which diet to follow, gave them the book, explained it to them, left it up to them, and then made them fill out a food questionnaire to figure out how they did. I believe that the study I posted would be more accurate and give better results because the diet to them was actually provided.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      1



                      Nope, I'm not talking about bias. I am, however, talking about skepticism, and a flexibility of thinking that will allow you to view a work of research through a lens other than that of the author.


                      See, that's the main issue I have with your comments here. You seem to take whatever an "expert" says, and take it as truth...at least until you find another expert to believe in. You've got to deepen your understanding so that you don't need to rely on trust in the experts.


                      Once you actually understand the material, the conclusion section of a paper is the least important part. Focus on methods and results. Reach your own conclusions. Then consider how the authors interpreted the results. If you disagree, try to figure out why. Maybe even email the first author.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        1



                        OK, here is Gardner's presentation of his study:


                        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo


                        Go to 41:00 to see what I am talking about. He actually shows 2 studies suggesting what I am saying he did that. He does show his data on it too to compare it.


                        Anyway, I just think that controlled studies that provide diets would be more accurate in studying this.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          1



                          "I believe that the study I posted would be more accurate and give better results because the diet to them was actually provided."


                          And I prefer studies that allow participants to choose and prepare their own foods. I want to see how different nutritional strategies work in the real world. If effectiveness requires lab-provided, standardized food, I am not impressed. Sure, the results may be impressive, but they won't translate well to real world situations. For a study to be compelling, the humans need to be treated like humans, not like lab animals.


                          Edited for clarity.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            1



                            Pikaia, I don't think you are void of bias though...I am sure you will look at a study differently if it goes against your beliefs than you would if it went with your beliefs...and you would be more likely to overlook problems with a study if they proved that a low carb diet was best.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              1



                              Bobby, if you want conversation, you'll engage in it. If you want to make yourself feel superior, you'll hurl insults.


                              I'm not sticking around to be insulted, nor am I planning to give you my scientific credentials. I'm not trying to be your expert. I'm just trying to help you develop critical thinking skills.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                1



                                Here we go again..........

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X