Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Allergic to Carbs. Zero Carb (or at least low low carb) for Cure

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

  • #61
    Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    It's also extremely important to have a flexible metabolism. It is an absolute sin to not be able to digest half the foods on Earth. He should be trying to fix his health, not avoid the issue. Going HFLC eternally in his case is exactly the same as a doctor prescribing a pill to help suppress side effects of a disorder instead of actually spending time to correct the disorder itself. That's exactly the mentality we discourage around here.
    Its one of many human diets to eat HFLC, so how does this become a "sin"? Did he slight God by shunning the bounty of the garden of eden or something? Sure he could reintroduce carbs at some point if he wants in a systematic manner, but really there is no scientific evidence that his will improve his overall health in any form.

    Meh, OP has started another thread with a more updated version of what he's up to so.....

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post

      OMG, somebody get this fella some startch and fruit stat!!!! He feels.............great
      Ha you made me snort!
      When I'd had enough of the grain and starched based 'diabetic eating for health' diet (eating for health, my ass!) my weight was 242.5 lbs. On starting primal- 18th April 2013 weight : 238.1.
      27th July 2013. weight after 100 days 136.9 weight lost 101.2lb ; that's 105.6lbs since I stopped the 'diabetic eating for health'
      new journal http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum...ml#post1264082

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
        Wasn't true the first time, won't be true the one millionth time you say it.

        "I feel fantastic on a high fat diet (meats, eggs, full fat yogurt, olive oil, avocado), obviously moderate to high protein.. Since almost completely eliminating carbs: (Zero to low low carbs.. less than 50 a day only coming form veggies) my energy is sustainable, my skin looks great, I sleep better, actually sustain my weight (& gain a little), heart beats quietly, stool seems perfect, & digestive system seems quiet & peaceful.. " - OP

        OMG, somebody get this fella some startch and fruit stat!!!! He feels.............great
        Someone with severe tooth decay would feel fantastic having all their teeth removed. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to remove all their teeth. As usual, you can't argue in context. He clearly has severe health issues and your argument is to keep doing what he's doing when what he's doing is causing the problem. Pass the medication! No reason to fix the problem, just suppress the side effects.
        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
          Its one of many human diets to eat HFLC, so how does this become a "sin"? Did he slight God by shunning the bounty of the garden of eden or something? Sure he could reintroduce carbs at some point if he wants in a systematic manner, but really there is no scientific evidence that his will improve his overall health in any form.

          Meh, OP has started another thread with a more updated version of what he's up to so.....
          When exactly, before the invention of diet books and the internet, was HFLC a diet? Seems to me people always just ate what was available at the time. Care to elaborate?
          Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

          Comment


          • #65
            I'm allergic to fat. See how stupid this sounds? If this were the case, there would something very wrong with me. Choco is right. I don't give a shit if you feel better eating HFLC, but, getting horrible reactions from carbs is a sure sign something is wrong.
            Make America Great Again

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
              When exactly, before the invention of diet books and the internet, was HFLC a diet? Seems to me people always just ate what was available at the time. Care to elaborate?
              If you gotta ask you haven't been paying attention all the years you've been on here. The archeology has been pointed out hundreds of times. Do a google search or pub med it. There are far more populations than just the Inuit to confirm its at least one of many ways our ancestors ate.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                Someone with severe tooth decay would feel fantastic having all their teeth removed. That doesn't mean it's a good idea to remove all their teeth. As usual, you can't argue in context. He clearly has severe health issues and your argument is to keep doing what he's doing when what he's doing is causing the problem. Pass the medication! No reason to fix the problem, just suppress the side effects.
                Its because I don't see the point in arguing. The difference is I at least TRY not to tell people who have devoted themselves to high carb primal that its detrimental to their health, whereas you make it a point to intercede in any low carb thread with your OPINION that it a less optimal path. Even when the individual in question feels terrific on that path!

                These are your arguments:
                If a low carber feels like crap its cause they need carbs!
                If a low carber feels great they must need carbs and just not know it yet!
                If a high carber feels like crap its cause they were low carb too long and did too much damage so eat more carbs.
                If a high carber feels great its cause they reintroduced carbs!

                How is someone suppose to have a logical debate with that? You can't cause that is the definition of dogma.

                Comment


                • #68
                  This is where the whole nature vs nurture part comes into play.
                  Make America Great Again

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    So OP has a glucose metabolism (not allergic) issue. Rather than get into an argument with a bunch of nonsense I'll simply state my stance:

                    The NUMBER ONE thing is make sure to limit collateral damage. That is if he can not metabolize, mobilize, or utilize carbohydrates efficiently then he needs to limit them. If you don't know why then just look up the myriad of diseases caused by unregulated glucose in the blood. CVD, cancer, dimentia, neuropathy.... ect. Get rid of it before things spiral down hill. Can you? Yes! Many epidemiological studies confirm healthy societies who subsisted on low carbohydrated load. More than just got by, they thrived, and did not suffer diseases of civilization.

                    You claim this a poor intervention cause it doesn't address the problem, but I believe its absolutely the best way to address the problem. Going low carb primal removes excessive carb load, improves insulin sensitivity, and gives the beta cells a reprieve. High nutritious foods with plenty of fat provide the building blocks to heal and the energy to fill the place of the carbs you no longer eat. Its the perfect Rx IMO. OP may decide to systematically reintroduce carbs at some point or not! Either way he can live a perfectly healthy life.

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                      If you gotta ask you haven't been paying attention all the years you've been on here. The archeology has been pointed out hundreds of times. Do a google search or pub med it. There are far more populations than just the Inuit to confirm its at least one of many ways our ancestors ate.
                      Ah, the "because I said so" argument. But you did a good job wrapping it in the "studies have shown" guise. It makes the fallacy sound more convincing.

                      Last time I checked, human beings evolved around the Equator where fruit, starch and lean game meats tend to rule, not fatty animals. The Inuit are a very modern civilization. There are far more populations in human history eating HCLF than HFLC
                      Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                        Its because I don't see the point in arguing. The difference is I at least TRY not to tell people who have devoted themselves to high carb primal that its detrimental to their health, whereas you make it a point to intercede in any low carb thread with your OPINION that it a less optimal path. Even when the individual in question feels terrific on that path!

                        These are your arguments:
                        If a low carber feels like crap its cause they need carbs!
                        If a low carber feels great they must need carbs and just not know it yet!
                        If a high carber feels like crap its cause they were low carb too long and did too much damage so eat more carbs.
                        If a high carber feels great its cause they reintroduced carbs!

                        How is someone suppose to have a logical debate with that? You can't cause that is the definition of dogma.
                        What are you talking about? The OP is clearly very sick. Your recommendation was to remain sick. I attempted to provide a potential solution based on what he described. I don't think he feels "great," I think he is so used to feeling ill that simply removing illness for mediocrity is being confused for "great." A man with a broken foot probably feels a lot better not walking on his broken foot. The goal should be to heal the foot so you can use it again, not prevent its healing and just stay off of it.
                        Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 08-01-2013, 04:51 PM.
                        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                          Ah, the "because I said so" argument. But you did a good job wrapping it in the "studies have shown" guise. It makes the fallacy sound more convincing.

                          Last time I checked, human beings evolved around the Equator where fruit, starch and lean game meats tend to rule, not fatty animals. The Inuit are a very modern civilization. There are far more populations in human history eating HCLF than HFLC
                          No I'll quote it for you AGAIN!!! Geese, I really don't think you to be unintelligent, thats why I saw no sense in repeating myself for the hundreth time....

                          So for the zillionth time the most comprehensive data we have on this is the "Ethnographic Atlas" by Dr. George P. Murdock. Its the basis of Cordains analysis and for many published studies regarding nutrition and health of various societies.

                          When analyzing the data we find that out of 229 hunter gatherer groups 46 get MORE than 85% of their calories from hunted food. Oh, before we get too far please note that Murdock indicated that gathering activities could also include the collection of small land fauna (insects, invertebrates, small mammals, amphibians, and reptiles); therefore, the compiled data may overestimate the relative contribution of gathered plant foods in the average hunter-gatherer die. So we already have over 20% of the studied peoples eating what is for all intensive purposes a VLC diet.

                          So 20% of the 229 eat VLC.... I could rest my case here because this alone is enough to prove that the human organism can and will acclimate to a low carb lifestyle without breaking down into disease or ill health, but take a look at the whole of these examined. As a whole they average 70% of their calories from hunted food and 30% from gathered..... that would be a MAXIMUM of 30% carbohydrate load and quite likely to be substantially less due to the inclusion or small animals, insects...ect in the gathered group.

                          I didn't feel I had to spell this out for you yet again, but there you go. All specific and even referenced for ya.

                          If you want to delve into history further than what that knowledge shows then you ARE guessing! They may be educated guesses, but none the less are quite debatable. Humans surviving the ice age, following river and costal lines out of Africa....ect. All quite interesting, but I wouldn't put all my eggs in any of those baskets. I look to "wild" humans we know rather than guessing at times past.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                            What are you talking about? The OP is clearly very sick. Your recommendation was to remain sick. I attempted to provide a potential solution based on what he described. I don't think he feels "great," I think he is so used to feeling ill that simply removing illness for mediocrity is being confused for "great." A man with a broken foot probably feels a lot better not walking on his broken foot. The goal should be to heal the foot so you can use it again, not prevent its healing and just stay off of it.
                            OP started a new thread and I already responded as to what I believe is an actionable plan for dealing with such issues. I will also say that both you and I only have a cursory knowledge of his health and all either of us can offer is broad stroke ideas. But, even with that acknowledged I stand by what I've written in his new thread.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              What are you arguing for? Genetics and adaptation to VLC? I already pointed out nature vs nurture, and the fact that DNA dissipates in offspring at the rate of 1 / 2 ^ (number of generations). I don't think, after all this time, and gene mutation, indirect descendants have any inclination towards a particular diet, if there ever was one to begin with and it wasn't all just out of lack of choice.

                              Environment plays a large part in how one should eat. Do you really think those societies would not be consuming copious amounts of carbs from fruit assuming they had the choice? We have the ability to rise above that, and this day and age, stress is numerous in many ways, and that diet simply does not have a desirable effect.
                              Make America Great Again

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Actually you simply stated "nature vs nurture"..... hell you coulda been talking about alcoholism rates for all I knew

                                And I would say its Choco arguing for one diet. I'm simply arguing for the value of including LC in the array of diets one may choose from and still manifest good health.

                                Here is the thing. I'm actually a huge fan of many ideas circulating that address chronic stress, allostatic load, and the like, but there is always a give and take. AGE's for instance are a stress, but also work in communication via cellular pathways. Stress is a tricky word/concept. How much is just enough.... some is necessary, even the kind not initially considered hormetic. Bah, this would get too wordy and I'm not up to it. But you've been into this stuff long enough so you understand what I'm getting at I'm sure. I probably couldn't even put my thoughts on this together and make a single post on it if I wanted to.

                                Bottom line for me: If you have an issue eating Primal carbs YES you are ill. But you don't HAVE to eat many carbs to be well. SO ..... 2+2=4 . Its palliative to the current condition and IMO has the capacity to be part of the cure.
                                Last edited by Neckhammer; 08-01-2013, 06:57 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X