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 j3nn View Post
    I think his reasoning backfired.

    Agreed. But I think that should be encouraged more if authors wish to remain honest and open-minded. Absolutes are damaging.
    Puhleeeze. Site one place where Mark has been less than "honest and open-minded". That's a backhanded way of calling him a closed mined liar. Did you really mean to be that snotty?

    Originally posted by lea View Post
    Just because?
    I for one prefer not having to do weird back envelope calculations on everything I eat. YMMV.
    Exactly. I think there are pros and cons to each system (total vs net). As long as you pick one and use it consistently, I don't see why it it's a problem.

    Comment


    • Avocados, leafy green vegetables, squash -- all things that appear to be much higher in carbs than they actually are.
      No, they have the number of carbs they have. 'Net' carbs is the made up term. They also have fiber, and that's great.

      If you want to use 'net' carbs, fine, but that doesn't make it the only way.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
        Puhleeeze. Site one place where Mark has been less than "honest and open-minded". That's a backhanded way of calling him a closed mined liar. Did you really mean to be that snotty?
        He habitually makes caveats about the carb content in certain foods and how so and so should avoid them (people losing weight, non-athletes, etc.). His assertion about "insidious weight gain" over x amount of TOTAL carbs. How is that not generalizing? Doesn't scream honest and open-minded to me.
        | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

        “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

        Comment


        • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
          Because so many people don't take his carb curve seriously and it makes Primal look like another fad diet which will keep this WOE on the fringe and never become widely popular. On top of so many people do badly when following it. How do you take someone seriously who doesn't account for huge gaps in NET carbs? Avocados, leafy green vegetables, squash -- all things that appear to be much higher in carbs than they actually are. Subtract your daily fiber and chances are you are eating much lower in carbs than it appears.

          Primal's carb curve is its biggest flaw even if the rest of it is superb.
          Nothing is stopping you from using net carbs if you want to. The Primal police will not come bust down your door and revoke your creds.

          The carb curve is a guideline that does work for a lot of people. Outliers need to do their own adjusting. Mark can't write a book for each individual.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
            Nothing is stopping you from using net carbs if you want to. The Primal police will not come bust down your door and revoke your creds.

            The carb curve is a guideline that does work for a lot of people. Outliers need to do their own adjusting. Mark can't write a book for each individual.
            I think there are a lot more "outliers" than the Primal Blueprint accounts for. Thriving on > 150g/carbs a day does not make you abnormal or unusual!
            | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

            “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

            Comment


            • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
              He habitually makes caveats about the carb content in certain foods and how so and so should avoid them (people losing weight, non-athletes, etc.). His assertion about "insidious weight gain" over x amount of TOTAL carbs. How is that not generalizing? Doesn't scream honest and open-minded to me.
              Well, non athletic people who are trying to lose weight generally do better with low carbs. Where are you catching him in a lie there? Of course the carb curve is generalizing. It is a guideline for MOST people, not a prescription for any one person.

              Still waiting to hear when he was closed minded or lied.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                Well, non athletic people who are trying to lose weight generally do better with low carbs. Where are you catching him in a lie there? Of course the carb curve is generalizing. It is a guideline for MOST people, not a prescription for any one person.

                Still waiting to hear when he was closed minded or lied.
                You are perpetuating the same lies! Where is it proven that most people do better losing weight on low-carb?

                Insidious weight gain over 150g carbs/day = total fabrication
                | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                Comment


                • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                  I think there are a lot more "outliers" than the Primal Blueprint accounts for. Thriving on > 150g/carbs a day does not make you abnormal or unusual!
                  "Outlier" is a statistical term. I never said "abnormal" which is a pejorative term.

                  I am glad that you have found your sweet spot. You have some unique health challenges including thyroid problems and other hormonal issues IIRC. Maybe someday Mark will write a book just for you.

                  My unique health challenges means I need to customize the PB for me. This means going against Mark's advice and staying in permanent ketosis. Maybe someday Mark will write a book just for me.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                    You are perpetuating the same lies! Where is it proven that most people do better losing weight on low-carb?

                    Insidious weight gain over 150g carbs/day = total fabrication
                    Yeah, he just made it up. Really J3nn, read the book plus the citations.

                    Comment


                    • [QUOTE=Paleobird;1271781]
                      I am glad that you have found your sweet spot. You have some unique health challenges including thyroid problems and other hormonal issues IIRC. Maybe someday Mark will write a book just for you.
                      I haven't said anything about finding my sweet spot, I'm still experimenting. Maybe I need to do low-carb again. Maybe it's just certain carbs. Maybe it has nothing to do with carbs. I don't have thyroid issues (that I know of) but I have other issues. I don't need Mark to write a book for me but maybe it would be nice if he didn't generalize so much? There are more people like me than I think are acknowledged.
                      | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                      “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                        Yeah, he just made it up. Really J3nn, read the book plus the citations.
                        Dr. Atkins and Ray Peat and Jack Kruse cite a lot of research, are they all correct?
                        | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                        “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                        Comment


                        • [QUOTE=j3nn;1271788]
                          Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                          I haven't said anything about finding my sweet spot, I'm still experimenting. Maybe I need to do low-carb again. Maybe it's just certain carbs. Maybe it has nothing to do with carbs. I don't have thyroid issues (that I know of) but I have other issues. I don't need Mark to write a book for me but maybe it would be nice if he didn't generalize so much? There are more people like me than I think are acknowledged.
                          Then I wish you well in finding your sweet spot. I do recall you referring to yourself as a "hormonal trainwreck". Those are unique challenges. As are mine. Neither invalidates the general guideline targeted at a center mass of westerners (who would like to lose some of the center mass).

                          Comment


                          • [QUOTE=Paleobird;1271796]
                            Originally posted by j3nn View Post
                            Then I wish you well in finding your sweet spot. I do recall you referring to yourself as a "hormonal trainwreck". Those are unique challenges. As are mine. Neither invalidates the general guideline targeted at a center mass of westerners (who would like to lose some of the center mass).
                            Yep. It's complicated. We do what we have to do to survive. Still disagree with assigning carb targets to everyone or even in general. I think it should be individual with a focus on micronutrients, not macros.
                            | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

                            “It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.” - Samuel Adams

                            Comment


                            • This thread (and all the others on Peat-ism) is getting so out of hand.

                              I don't see what people are arguing about. What are both "sides" trying to achieve?

                              My desire to write about what I have learned recently is to say there *MAY* be some positives to take from it, in addition to what you know from Primal already.

                              Are the "anti-Peaters" trying to say that it's all crap, that there is nothing that someone can learn from him or other nutritionists who broadly follow his ideas?

                              Paleobird has written that Peat is high-carb Primal.

                              In one way, perhaps, but in other ways, this completely misses the point of Peat in my opinion.

                              If people actually want to have a discussion and learn about his ideas, and try to implement them, then fine. I'm sure they would find useful stuff.

                              JUST the addition of bone broths, shredded carrot daily, and removing all above-ground vegetables and nuts from my diet has gone a long way to regulating my "bowel" (TMI maybe!).

                              Perhaps there are tons of people on this site with gas, bloating and constipation who can implement this and see a result in 1-2 weeks. Also I learnt from Peat that changing diets has a temporary negative effect on your "gut" - which explained why it was more uncomfortable for a week, and then got better.

                              I've also been able to drink milk because of what I read about lactase from his site.

                              It's not like people are saying "eat wheat", "don't eat meat" etc.
                              Disclaimer: I have read some info about Ray Peat and think it may help me, however if you follow any advice related to Ray Peat you may start spontaneously guzzling OJ and Mexican Coke by the gallon, eating bags of sugar with a spoon, popping aspirins 10 times a day and buying loads of stuff from him that he doesn't sell.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                                Well, non athletic people who are trying to lose weight generally do better with low carbs. Where are you catching him in a lie there? Of course the carb curve is generalizing. It is a guideline for MOST people, not a prescription for any one person.

                                Still waiting to hear when he was closed minded or lied.
                                I think it's a guideline for fat people, not most people. I think mark's target audience is overweight, middle-aged women who don't exercise. Judging by the prevalence or them on this forum and the fact that most diet books, diet pills, etc are purchased by that demographic. The primal blueprint is mark's take on a paleo diet, catered towards that demographic. Hormonal issues. Metabolic issues. A lifetime of damage, etc. That is why his carb curve makes sense to that population

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X