Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why does Danny Roddy recommend sugar to reduce stress/estrogen?

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

  • Originally posted by dannyroddy View Post
    Maybe this will help address concerns of weight gain?

    Photo is attached.

    Left is me after doing zero carb for two years. Right is me after doing "peat" for a little less than a year, consuming 400+ carbohydrate a day; 1/2 gallon of orange juice and 1/2-1 cup of white sugar, plus the sugar from several quarts of milk.

    Rob Tuner is another "Peatatarian" who is beyond lean. I think he has some videos of his workouts on youtube.
    And Durian Whatsiname over at the 30 Bananas a Day website is beyond lean too. Your point?

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
      That was a direct quote of a baseless accusation by Choco. He didn't like my opinion so he tried to discredit me by saying I was "an emotional wreck" and all my arguments were just "emotional" nonsense as opposed to factual. All the time arguing himself in screaming caps.
      Nobody cares.
      Things I would appreciate if you left out of your commentary include the potty mouth. You are new here so, ok. But this is not 4chan.
      I don't go to 4chan. Adults use words. Crazy I know.

      However I am interested in the dental aspects of this like you pointed out.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by dannyroddy View Post
        Maybe this will help address concerns of weight gain?

        Photo is attached.

        Left is me after doing zero carb for two years. Right is me after doing "peat" for a little less than a year, consuming 400+ carbohydrate a day; 1/2 gallon of orange juice and 1/2-1 cup of white sugar, plus the sugar from several quarts of milk.

        Rob Tuner is another "Peatatarian" who is beyond lean. I think he has some videos of his workouts on youtube.
        Can you do/do you mind doing photobucket or postimage? I'm seeing pending approval which I think takes a while.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
          And Durian Whatsiname over at the 30 Bananas a Day website is beyond lean too. Your point?
          You're actually supplementing Danny's argument with that quote. "Sugar" doesn't make you fat anymore than "fat" makes you fat. It's always in the context of individual foods and overall caloric intake. Durian eats huge amounts of fruit and carbohydrate, yet is very lean. You just posed an argument against yourself.

          Anyone that gets fat off a Peat-style diet is simply overeating. So yes, they are "doing it wrong". Plenty of people on this website put on body fat or lose absolutely no weight because they are eating too many calories. Does that mean Primal doesn't work? Or is the problem the individual?

          You're not making any sense.
          Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

          Comment


          • Danny Roddy - Do you pay much attention to micronutrients/vitamins? Have you really been eating a cup of white sugar a day? How do you do it? Mix it with the OJ? Any idea what a day's total calories are when eating like that? Could you give us a sample menu for a day?

            Comment


            • ChocoTaco, I noticed you mentioned publishing a coconut pudding recipe made with gelatin a couple pages back, I think. Is it on your site somewhere or did you publish it somewhere else?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                You're actually supplementing Danny's argument with that quote. "Sugar" doesn't make you fat anymore than "fat" makes you fat. It's always in the context of individual foods and overall caloric intake. Durian eats huge amounts of fruit and carbohydrate, yet is very lean. You just posed an argument against yourself.

                Anyone that gets fat off a Peat-style diet is simply overeating. So yes, they are "doing it wrong". Plenty of people on this website put on body fat or lose absolutely no weight because they are eating too many calories. Does that mean Primal doesn't work? Or is the problem the individual?

                You're not making any sense.
                The last sentence was unnecessary and untrue. Which makes me think you are trolling her.

                I think that everyone on here knows that calorific restriction is (part of) the path to weight loss.

                But I like the high fat version more than the low fat version because I don't feel hungry while eating those fewer calories.
                Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                Griff's cholesterol primer
                5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                bloodorchid is always right

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                  Many people, not just me, have found that lower carbs and/or slower carbs such as sweet potatoes work well in combination with adequate protein and higher fat. They have found that this gives them a constant metabolic rate, without the roller coaster ride of a sugar burning metabolism.

                  But of course you know all of this. No wait you wouldn't. You haven't read Mark Sisson's book.
                  Losing weight is simple: eat less calories than you burn. Doesn't matter what "diet" you are on. That's how it works. People lose weight on paleo and/or low carb because they reduce calories, whether they realize it or not. Like I said before, the people that complain about weight gain on Peat add the sugar and don't reduce their fat. There are definitely some mental or hormonal hurtles that some people need to get over to make it happen, but that's how it works.

                  Oh, and I have read Mark's book, Robb's book and countless other ancestral diet books. Somehow, I don't think that will convince you to believe me though

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by They call me BUTTLOCK View Post
                    ChocoTaco, I noticed you mentioned publishing a coconut pudding recipe made with gelatin a couple pages back, I think. Is it on your site somewhere or did you publish it somewhere else?
                    No. It's simply coconut milk and water brought to a boil. I added unflavored gelatin, whisked vigorously, added shredded coconut and vanilla extract and refrigerated overnight. It turned into pudding. Awesome stuff.
                    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                      I think that everyone on here knows that calorific restriction is (part of) the path to weight loss.
                      How much is it, though? I was unintentionally eating about 700 calories eating vegetables, meat and either kerrygold butter or coconut oil. Lost nothing for months (btw I'm huge :\) And I know some people would say, "well you obviously have to raise them", which I tried, of course. But that would mean that calories is some sort of exact math you have to figure out for your body, for lack of a better way of phrasing it. I'm having a hard time buying it.

                      Every other success story I read has people either not paying attention (or at least making a nod) to their calories or eating a random amount. They seem to be paying attention to macronutrients and whole foods. It can't play that much of a role, if at all. At least, with me.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                        The last sentence was unnecessary and untrue. Which makes me think you are trolling her.

                        I think that everyone on here knows that calorific restriction is (part of) the path to weight loss.

                        But I like the high fat version more than the low fat version because I don't feel hungry while eating those fewer calories.
                        I don't think it's untrue. I think she's uncomfortable with the subject being discussed here. There's a whole lot here that I don't agree with and don't understand, but I'm interested in learning because Danny is much better researched than I am. Even if he's not totally correct, he's surely correct about some things, so I want to learn a new approach. I feel she'd prefer the thread not exist than challenge what she's comfortable with. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I believe. I wouldn't say I'm trolling her. She takes shots at me, I take shots at her - it's a thing we have, and honestly we both deserve it half of the time because we both completely lack tact. Deep down we probably both enjoy it. There's nothing else better to do at 11:30pm on a Tuesday night. I mean what am I gonna do, sleep?

                        You'd be surprised how many people on this site think calories don't matter and it's "all about insulin." Mark used to promote that idea liberally and is just recently starting to come around on calories. Before, this site was populated by people that read Taubes, and the answer to weight loss was to "add more fat" - seriously, wrap your head around that: if you're not losing body fat, add more oil to what you're eating. That is what I truly believed for the first 4-6 months when I started the PB. The forum has become a lot more carb and calorie friendly over the past year and a half. It used to not be this way.

                        I prefer a more isocaloric approach. I feel and preform best with an even amount of fat and carbohydrate. If I had to define how I eat, I'd say 30/40/30 fat/protein/carbs. When I first started I used to be 60/30/10.
                        Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 07-10-2012, 08:50 PM.
                        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                          You're actually supplementing Danny's argument with that quote. "Sugar" doesn't make you fat anymore than "fat" makes you fat. It's always in the context of individual foods and overall caloric intake. Durian eats huge amounts of fruit and carbohydrate, yet is very lean. You just posed an argument against yourself.

                          Anyone that gets fat off a Peat-style diet is simply overeating. So yes, they are "doing it wrong". Plenty of people on this website put on body fat or lose absolutely no weight because they are eating too many calories. Does that mean Primal doesn't work? Or is the problem the individual?

                          You're not making any sense.
                          If you calm down a minute and listen you will see that we agree on almost everything. Context and calories, agreed. Sugar, fat, whatever macronutrient ratio. Durian is an example of someone who is lean but not necessarily healthy. That was the point. The fact that Danny lost 20 lbs is nice but irrelevant.
                          I totally agree that it is possible to overeat on any plan and therefore not lose weight. I am the one who wrote the calorie counting threads pointing out this reason for failure in some Primal eaters. Remember?
                          I'm interested in optimal health but for many people here that means losing weight. If a plan is going to displace a lot of nutritionally dense foods with calorically dense but nutritionally sparse ones, that is cause for concern. You, yourself stated this as the reason you don't plan to start eating table sugar. See, we are agreeing.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                            If you calm down a minute and listen you will see that we agree on almost everything. Context and calories, agreed. Sugar, fat, whatever macronutrient ratio. Durian is an example of someone who is lean but not necessarily healthy. That was the point. The fact that Danny lost 20 lbs is nice but irrelevant.
                            I totally agree that it is possible to overeat on any plan and therefore not lose weight. I am the one who wrote the calorie counting threads pointing out this reason for failure in some Primal eaters. Remember?
                            I'm interested in optimal health but for many people here that means losing weight. If a plan is going to displace a lot of nutritionally dense foods with calorically dense but nutritionally sparse ones, that is cause for concern. You, yourself stated this as the reason you don't plan to start eating table sugar. See, we are agreeing.
                            I completely agree with most of that statement. You were one of the first people on MDA to call out the "all about insulin" and "calories don't count" BS that populated this forum since it started. I like Taubes, he has great ideas, he got a lot of people on the right path...but calories are the biggest key to weight loss. I didn't believe this for the longest time due to the insulin-bashing that used to go on here but have since done a big 180.

                            I do think we agree on most of this stuff. I just feel you're focusing on the extreme approach - eating cups of sugar and gummy bears. I think that's taking Ray Peat out of context. There is no Peat plan. It's all an amalgamation of research that individuals have tried to translate. Maybe they messed up. Peat acknowledges that white sugar should only be treated as a supplement - he states it's empty calories, so only add it if you "need it". I feel that Peat and Primal can exist simultaneously. A diet of moderately lean red meat, bone broth, lots of fruit and some squashes is pretty darn Primal. I'm not going to start drinking gallons of milk and orange juice because milk makes me break out and I'd rather eat whole oranges. I disagree with that advice.

                            The past two dinners were the same: london broil with watermelon and coconut milk pudding (coconut milk + water + gelatin) and 1% cottage cheese. I'm deloading from the gym this week and not eating any starches so I'll see where it takes me. I've been salting my watermelon and lunch salad HEAVILY - probably 3 times more than normal. I typically get cold after I eat, but I feel noticeably warmer already. Not sure if it's the salt, coconut or both?
                            Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 07-10-2012, 08:59 PM.
                            Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by They call me BUTTLOCK View Post
                              How much is it, though? I was unintentionally eating about 700 calories eating vegetables, meat and either kerrygold butter or coconut oil. Lost nothing for months (btw I'm huge :\) And I know some people would say, "well you obviously have to raise them", which I tried, of course. But that would mean that calories is some sort of exact math you have to figure out for your body, for lack of a better way of phrasing it. I'm having a hard time buying it.
                              I don't think it's an exact math. I don't measure calories. At all.

                              700 calories is below starvation level. That seems excessive to me. Why not keep eating until you gain weight slightly, then cut that a little so you are just under? It's weight loss you want right? Or is it 'must lose 100 pounds in 2 months' mode you want to enter?
                              Originally posted by They call me BUTTLOCK View Post
                              Every other success story I read has people either not paying attention (or at least making a nod) to their calories or eating a random amount. They seem to be paying attention to macronutrients and whole foods. It can't play that much of a role, if at all. At least, with me.
                              The thing that I realised, and I only realised it after being primal for about six months, was that I never knew what it was to be hungry before. I had always eaten like clockwork as a habit. Now I intentionally skip lunches at work (it was just easier than the hassle of bringing something) and since it's 4pm right now, I feel a mild nagging from my stomach that I can easily note as 'hey, hungry' but that doesn't drive all other thoughts from my mind like a low blood sugar hunger would.

                              What is your goal? Health? Weight loss? Living a long time? Avoiding diabetes? Some combination of the above?

                              For me, the other side of diet is exercise, which I definitely see as a minor component. I don't want to be able to bench press my own body weight. I want to be able to get up off the floor by myself with I'm 70 and I fall over. Or be able to paint the roof of my house when I'm retired. Or go swimming in the sea with my grandkids (when I have any).

                              Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                              I don't think it's untrue. I think she's uncomfortable with the subject being discussed here. There's a whole lot here that I don't agree with and don't understand, but I'm interested in learning because Danny is much better researched than I am. Even if he's not totally correct, he's surely correct about some things, so I want to learn a new approach. I feel she'd prefer the thread not exist than challenge what she's comfortable with. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's what I believe. I wouldn't say I'm trolling her. She takes shots at me, I take shots at her - it's a thing we have, and honestly we both deserve it half of the time because we both completely lack tact. Deep down we probably both enjoy it. There's nothing else better to do at 11:30pm on a Tuesday night. I mean what am I gonna do, sleep?
                              Well, I guess if it's a form of flirting you are both engaging in, I guess I'll just try to ignore it in the future.

                              Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                              You'd be surprised how many people on this site think calories don't matter and it's "all about insulin." Mark used to promote that idea liberally and is just recently starting to come around on calories. Before, this site was populated by people that read Taubes, and the answer to weight loss as to "add more fat." That is what I truly believed for the first 4-6 months when I started the PB. The forum has become a lot more carb and calorie friendly over the past year and a half. It used to not be this way.
                              Yeah, I came to primal via the low-carb approach, so I definitely thought that too once upon a time. Anthony Copolo had done a reasonably good debunking of the 'metabolic advantage' to my mind.

                              Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                              I prefer a more isocaloric approach. I feel and preform best with an even amount of fat and carbohydrate. If I had to define how I eat, I'd say 30/40/30 fat/protein/carbs. When I first started I used to be 60/30/10.
                              Yeah, I think that thirds is a pretty reasonable breakdown. It's a head scratcher to me when the diet is characterised as being 'low carb' when carbs are the biggest macro group (or nearly so).
                              Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

                              Griff's cholesterol primer
                              5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
                              Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
                              TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
                              bloodorchid is always right

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by magicmerl View Post
                                The last sentence was unnecessary and untrue. Which makes me think you are trolling her.

                                I think that everyone on here knows that calorific restriction is (part of) the path to weight loss.

                                But I like the high fat version more than the low fat version because I don't feel hungry while eating those fewer calories.
                                No, Chaco wouldn't do anything as juvenile as trolling me, would he?

                                Exactly, calories and context. Reducing calories is less stressful when you reduce carbs first. (As opposed to the WW approach.)

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X