Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The True Definition of Calories i.e. "Why what you believe is extremist BS"

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

  • Originally posted by charliemathers View Post
    It has tons of sugar which is good for you and feeds the body the energy is truly needs. Certain candies are really good for you as long as they use real sugar and not HFCS. Especially if its something like gummy bears that also have gelatin in it.
    Hoo boy. Looks like someone has been drinking the highly sweetened Peat Cool-Aid.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
      @Stackingplates' long rant.

      Oh goodness, not the Okinawans. Again. OK. One more time just in case Choco hasn't beat this point home often enough. Paleo does not necessarily equal low carb. There is a wide range of healthy carb levels. Based on your activity level, you may very well have been eating too little carbs *for you*. So your workouts were not great and you chucked the whole thing instead of making it work. And you have this weird need to ridicule those of us who do make it work.

      About clean eating, you showed the flaw in the study yourself. It was not long term. So, you like your pizza and ice cream. If you are young and super active, it won't hurt you once in a while. Enjoy those treats on a regular basis, not so much. I would like to see how you look at age 45. 'Nuff said.
      First off, it wasn't a rant. And, if you subscribe to Sisson's version of Paleo™ then it absolutely does equal low carb, don't fool yourself. Look at my last post and you'll see the graphic taken directly from his recommendations which illustrate this point.

      Secondly, tell me once where I ridiculed someone who made Paleo™ work for them and told them to stop eating that way? I just got done talking about how many folks I work with are die hard Paleo™ fanatics and I don't try to convert them or talk them out of it? Why should I if it works for them? The whole "make it work for you" comment was pretty funny to me though...why should I eat six potatoes when oatmeal, bread, and bagels do the trick? Do I really have to love sweet potatoes that much? LOL

      The study design was short term however the empirical evidence overwhelms us. If you want to live long and healthy then wouldn't you study the folks who have the longest lifespans with the least incidence of chronic diseases? How about those with low obesity rates? Hint, very few of these societies would eat a diet that is Paleo™ approved.

      I'm glad you chimed in though because your post struck me as the prototypical "I found something that works so how dare you criticize it as I've become emotionally vested in it" comment. These are the most fascinating comment types I come across...

      Originally posted by Neckhammer
      Didn't mean to paint you with any brush. I will just concede that you have probably "done your homework" and come to a different conclusion than I.

      As to the "superhuman" thing....what I said was that eating paleo actually would NOT make you superhuman. Being healthy to start, you are unlikely to see much change with your lifestyle change to paleo.

      I you are healthy you can probably get away with eating "junk" from time to time. I'm not certain that there will be no draw backs health wise from it though....as you seem to be. Even so, I'm not 100% anything and have a significant cheat day at least once a week (not necessarily a planned body hack or anything so eliquent. Just happens).

      I do think that as we age we may lose some of this flexibility and lea way. Are you able to take advantage of the lea way when young and not pay for it in the future is my only real question. Most chronic issues do take decades to develop, so I think there are subtle changes that may rear their head in the future if you overindulge....even in my case where it is only once a week.
      No harm, no foul - my friend. You have always struck me as one of the most sensible of the "harder core" Paleo™ crowd here. Again, I never recommend "over indulging" and always maintain the stance of maintaining your targets over the long term. Many will find that they have considerable "wiggle room" where they can choose to eat non Primal treats, some even daily. As you said, the only real disconnect between us is that you still seem to be reserving caution that non "primal approved" foods somehow automatically lead to chronic issues. I would challenge you to back that up, or at least think about how there is really no evidence that this is true. Interestingly enough, as you also mention, you have "cheat days" at least once a week. What is a "cheat" though? Does it mean you have a couple pieces of pizza or a bowl of ice cream or a huge bowl of rice?

      If so, you basically have kind of summarized my entire point here . Why deprive yourself of a type of food you enjoy if you can do so and still hit all your targets?
      http://stackingplates.com/

      Comment


      • Nah, it was traditional Russian candy, filled chocolates, and sweet condensed milk toffee-style stuff, caramels - they still know how to make really yum sweets down there. Stuff here is never tasted as good. Most ice-cream was old style cream and sugar one, I am guessing or hoping. Pasteurized, of course, but our dairy is pretty versatile with may things not available here. Interestingly, after yesterday's episode I am not craving it any more. Watermelon on another hand... and cherries... (sigh). *Administers another lick of coconut butter*.

        I had experience with consuming those healthy gummies daily after my preg in the afternoon, cherry twizzers, smal bag from a vending machine, as I recall. Once I dropped this habit, along with the healthy serving of berry field pastry after supper, my pg weight start going down.... that's all it took from 150+ to ~ 138 lbs. Just that daily bag of healthy candy.
        My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
        When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

        Comment


        • Stacking~ I think maybe we're talking about two different things here~ you seem to think most of us deprive ourselves because Mark says so. Actually, most came here just like I did~ because our body had already made it's displeasure known and we were looking for a reason why, and how to turn it around..

          Bottom line, the only thing you can control is what you put in your mouth.
          Last edited by Nady; 07-31-2012, 03:08 PM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
            The idea that cutting and cutting calories damages the metabolism I think comes from people with sugar burning metabolisms. It is incredibly stressful on a sugar burner to go without food (shaky dizzy, lethargy, etc.). People who have transitioned to being what Mark calls a fat burning beast are not damaged by calorie restriction at all. Burning your own body fat gives the metabolism a nice tasty snack to go along with the lower levels of dietary calories, so there is no damage.
            Yeah, this is really true.

            I went extremely low carb on my vacation during the long pre- and post-drive to and from the active hiking portion of my vacation. I just drove and ate pemmican, lettuce and turkey in minimal amounts. I never really felt hungry.

            During the hike I ate moderate carb paleo backpacking food I made myself. (Moderate for backpacking anyway.) We hiked about 12 hours a day at altitude. I know I didn't eat enough while we hiked. I could feel the hunger well up and then a switch went off and I could tell I was consuming my body fat instead.

            Being able to do this means you can exercise strenuously on very little food without a loss of strength or energy. This is what I like about being a "fat burning beast." The metabolic flexibility and the lack of shakiness, dizziness or lethargy that I used to know in the past. No need to keep an energy bar in my pocket.

            What's not clear is the long-term effects of doing this. Short term, for a week, it may be a decent way to lose weight. I lost 5lbs. I lost a notch on my belt. That is to say, I used being a fat-burning beast plus the CO part of the equation to my advantage.

            I have not found being a fat-burning beast plus changing the CI part of the equation to be as effective now that I'm at a reasonable weight.

            I would think that if you are stuck at some weight, if there's any way to get out of your normal routine for a while and try to manipulate the CO part of the equation to your advantage, you might have better success at pushing the needle than simply cutting calories more and more and more. At least if you manipulate the CO part you are doing things that rev up your metabolism and your body's production of various hormones. In my case, I have to really push very very hard. An hour's worth of additional exercise is not enough.

            What remains to be seen for myself is if the weight stays off or comes right back. I really feel an outsized appetite at the moment. It sure was fun to wear a bikini this weekend and feel good about it, though.
            Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

            Comment


            • The Okinawa report is a bit old... and parts of it have been hashed pretty thoroughly as misrepresentation.
              But Japan as a whole did enjoy the status of having that oldest living population for a while. Mostly due to the study of smaller pocket communities who continued to eat very traditional diets after the big cities were already leaning towards more modern western eating patterns.
              However... the diet of traditional Okinawa sounds pretty good... greens, veg, sweet potato, rice, fish, fermented soy, pork.
              It also has to do with their active lifestyle.
              However... the same longevity was found in pockets of Sardinia where they eat a diet centered on meat (sheep) and cheese.

              Most of the scientists that study this type of thing agree that there is a huge component of genetics at play in longevity, not simply diet.

              If you look towards who is at the top of the pile right now, you will see that it is no longer Japan.
              As of 2011 they have moved to roughly 5th on the list behind Monaco, Macau, San Marino, and Andorra...
              Perhaps more studies are in order.
              “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
              ~Friedrich Nietzsche
              And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by StackingPlates View Post
                First off, it wasn't a rant. And, if you subscribe to Sisson's version of Paleo™ then it absolutely does equal low carb, don't fool yourself.
                First of all, nobody has the TM on "paleo" it means a lot of different things to different writers and bloggers. If you are going to talk about Mark's brand name it is "Primal" and he does have the TM on that. Yes, Mark's recommendations are low (er) carb but still leave a lot of room for variations (e.g. guys like Choco). The PB book is aimed at people who need to lose weight. And it works.

                Secondly, tell me once where I ridiculed someone who made Paleo™ work for them and told them to stop eating that way? I just got done talking about how many folks I work with are die hard Paleo™ fanatics and I don't try to convert them or talk them out of it?
                Um, calling them "fanatics" is pretty much ridicule right there.

                Again, I never recommend "over indulging" and always maintain the stance of maintaining your targets over the long term. Many will find that they have considerable "wiggle room" where they can choose to eat non Primal treats, some even daily.
                Why deprive yourself of a type of food you enjoy if you can do so and still hit all your targets?
                This sounds perfectly fine to me. For you. I don't know that "many" will have that much wiggle room. If you are trying to lose weight, you have to make every single calorie as nutrient dense as possible.

                As you said, the only real disconnect between us is that you still seem to be reserving caution that non "primal approved" foods somehow automatically lead to chronic issues. I would challenge you to back that up, or at least think about how there is really no evidence that this is true.
                Like I said, come back when you're 45 and tell us how great you feel. Until then, I'm eating clean.
                And if you want some evidence that junk food leads to physical problems, try looking around you at all the expanding waistlines, elevated BP, diabetes, etc.
                ----
                Last edited by Paleobird; 07-31-2012, 03:03 PM.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                  This sounds perfectly fine to me. For you. I don't know that "many" will have that much wiggle room. If you are trying to lose weight, you have to make every single calorie as nutrient dense as possible.

                  As you said, the only real disconnect between us is that you still seem to be reserving caution that non "primal approved" foods somehow automatically lead to chronic issues. I would challenge you to back that up, or at least think about how there is really no evidence that this is true.
                  Like I said, come back when you're 45 and tell us how great you feel. Until then, I'm eating clean.
                  And if you want some evidence that junk food leads to physical problems, try looking around you at the expanding waistlines, elevated BP, diabetes, etc.
                  +1

                  Not many people will die if they have a home made cookie or two or some other "treat" but that does not mean that the empty calories are good for you.

                  All I know is that eating whole foods that I can pick, dig, hunt or fish is much more satisfying and even before primal my taste-buds were maturing and finding cardboard pizza and store bought cakes pretty bland. So unless is it a full on fat, rich indulgent dessert I won't eat it!
                  Eating primal is not a diet, it is a way of life.
                  PS
                  Don't forget to play!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Dirlot View Post
                    +1
                    All I know is that eating whole foods that I can pick, dig, hunt or fish is much more satisfying and even before primal my taste-buds were maturing and finding cardboard pizza and store bought cakes pretty bland. So unless is it a full on fat, rich indulgent dessert I won't eat it!
                    Yes, I don't see why someone would find this WOE to be a "dietary jail" to quote Stacking. You take some frozen peaches from your garden and blend it with raw pastured cream and you have soft serve for dessert.
                    I agree, pizza doesn't even appeal anymore. I think that's the thing that many don't get. It's not about deprivation. It's about changing your tastes to be more in tune with your body's needs. Sure, it's an adjustment but, once it's made, there is no going back to cardboard pizza.

                    Comment


                    • Interesting and timely article published today...

                      Comparison with ancestral diets suggests dense acellular carbohydrates

                      A novel hypothesis of obesity is suggested by consideration of diet-related inflammation and evolutionary medicine. The obese homeostatically guard their elevated weight. In rodent models of high-fat diet-induced obesity, leptin resistance is seen initially at vagal afferents, blunting the actions of satiety mediators, then centrally, with gastrointestinal bacterial-triggered SOCS3 signaling implicated. In humans, dietary fat and fructose elevate systemic lipopolysaccharide, while dietary glucose also strongly activates SOCS3 signaling. Crucially however, in humans, low-carbohydrate diets spontaneously decrease weight in a way that low-fat diets do not. Furthermore, nutrition transition patterns and the health of those still eating diverse ancestral diets with abundant food suggest that neither glycemic index, altered fat, nor carbohydrate intake can be intrinsic causes of obesity, and that human energy homeostasis functions well without Westernized foods containing flours, sugar, and refined fats. Due to being made up of cells, virtually all "ancestral foods" have markedly lower carbohydrate densities than flour- and sugar-containing foods, a property quite independent of glycemic index. Thus the "forgotten organ" of the gastrointestinal microbiota is a prime candidate to be influenced by evolutionarily unprecedented postprandial luminal carbohydrate concentrations. The present hypothesis suggests that in parallel with the bacterial effects of sugars on dental and periodontal health, acellular flours, sugars, and processed foods produce an inflammatory microbiota via the upper gastrointestinal tract, with fat able to effect a "double hit" by increasing systemic absorption of lipopolysaccharide. This model is consistent with a broad spectrum of reported dietary phenomena. A diet of grain-free whole foods with carbohydrate from cellular tubers, leaves, and fruits may produce a gastrointestinal microbiota consistent with our evolutionary condition, potentially explaining the exceptional macronutrient-independent metabolic health of non-Westernized populations, and the apparent efficacy of the modern "Paleolithic" diet on satiety and metabolism

                      Comment


                      • +1 on interesting... I tried posting that Spreadbury article over on the Research forum, but no one bit...maybe it'll get more dissection here now that Choco got everyone riled with his "extremist BS" title ;-D
                        6' 2" | Age: 42 | SW: 341 | CW: 198 | GW: 180?

                        “Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.”
                        ― Søren Kierkegaard

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by cantare View Post
                          +1 on interesting... I tried posting that Spreadbury article over on the Research forum, but no one bit...maybe it'll get more dissection here now that Choco got everyone riled with his "extremist BS" title ;-D
                          Could you see more than just the abstract?

                          edit: oops, just saw you post in Research, here's the pdf. Thanks!

                          http://www.dovepress.com/getfile.php?fileID=13214
                          Last edited by otzi; 07-31-2012, 03:26 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                            Yes, I don't see why someone would find this WOE to be a "dietary jail" to quote Stacking. You take some frozen peaches from your garden and blend it with raw pastured cream and you have soft serve for dessert.
                            I agree, pizza doesn't even appeal anymore. I think that's the thing that many don't get. It's not about deprivation. It's about changing your tastes to be more in tune with your body's needs. Sure, it's an adjustment but, once it's made, there is no going back to cardboard pizza.

                            +1!

                            I was an epicurean before I went primal so no I don't miss junk food. As for that picture of the donut as a bun, if some one eats that kind of food I'm sure they know it's not good for them and if they feel deprived not eating that kind of crap it's probably too late to retrain their palate.
                            Life is death. We all take turns. It's sacred to eat during our turn and be eaten when our turn is over. RichMahogany.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by sbhikes View Post
                              I'm sorry but those still look like bagels to me. I know there's a krispy kreme shop somewhere around here because sometimes they turn up at office meetings, but I have never actually been to a krispy kreme shop myself so I guess I'm just not familiar with donuts that look like bagels.

                              By the way, real American cheese is really good. If you can find it.

                              Oh, and long ago before I adopted this diet I read Carb Sane's website because I didn't believe eating meat and fat and avoiding grains and going low carb was healthy. After reading her whole site I concluded she was a total nut case. She's disgruntled because she didn't get the weight loss she wanted. It really seems odd that so many people now just love her. It also seems really odd that it's in fashion to declare "I'm not paleo anymore. I hate paleo." If that's what people want to do that's fine, but I love paleo. I love the food, I love how it makes me feel, I love the positive health results I've had, I love the simplicity of cooking, I love that my food doesn't sit in a pantry growing moth larva. I love that when I'm hiking in the mountains the food I see is greens, mushrooms and moose and when I go home and open my fridge I see greens, mushrooms and meat. I have no intention of following the trend to love Carb Sane and that other Richard guy and the once reasonable now completely angry wack-job Dr. Harris. That's all popularity contest bull-shit. The science hasn't changed.
                              You asked about the studies of guest blogger so I linked Evelyn's take on it.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by otzi View Post
                                Interesting and timely article published today...

                                Comparison with ancestral diets suggests dense acellular carbohydrates

                                A novel hypothesis of obesity is suggested by consideration of diet-related inflammation and evolutionary medicine. The obese homeostatically guard their elevated weight. In rodent models of high-fat diet-induced obesity, leptin resistance is seen initially at vagal afferents, blunting the actions of satiety mediators, then centrally, with gastrointestinal bacterial-triggered SOCS3 signaling implicated. In humans, dietary fat and fructose elevate systemic lipopolysaccharide, while dietary glucose also strongly activates SOCS3 signaling. Crucially however, in humans, low-carbohydrate diets spontaneously decrease weight in a way that low-fat diets do not. Furthermore, nutrition transition patterns and the health of those still eating diverse ancestral diets with abundant food suggest that neither glycemic index, altered fat, nor carbohydrate intake can be intrinsic causes of obesity, and that human energy homeostasis functions well without Westernized foods containing flours, sugar, and refined fats. Due to being made up of cells, virtually all "ancestral foods" have markedly lower carbohydrate densities than flour- and sugar-containing foods, a property quite independent of glycemic index. Thus the "forgotten organ" of the gastrointestinal microbiota is a prime candidate to be influenced by evolutionarily unprecedented postprandial luminal carbohydrate concentrations. The present hypothesis suggests that in parallel with the bacterial effects of sugars on dental and periodontal health, acellular flours, sugars, and processed foods produce an inflammatory microbiota via the upper gastrointestinal tract, with fat able to effect a "double hit" by increasing systemic absorption of lipopolysaccharide. This model is consistent with a broad spectrum of reported dietary phenomena. A diet of grain-free whole foods with carbohydrate from cellular tubers, leaves, and fruits may produce a gastrointestinal microbiota consistent with our evolutionary condition, potentially explaining the exceptional macronutrient-independent metabolic health of non-Westernized populations, and the apparent efficacy of the modern "Paleolithic" diet on satiety and metabolism
                                Someone linked to it a few weeks back in comments on Wholehealth source:
                                " The acellular carbohydrates of flour,94 sugar and pro- cessed plant-starch products are considerably more dense. Grains themselves are also highly dense, dry stores of starch designed for rapid macroscopic enzymic mobilization during germination.95 Whereas foods with living cells will have their low carbohydrate density “locked in” until their cell walls are breached by digestive processes, the chyme produced after consumption of acellular flour and sugar-based foods is thus suggested to have a higher carbohydrate concentration than almost anything the microbiota of the upper GI tract from mouth to small bowel would have encountered during our coevolution. This may stimulate differing bacterial species to prosper or be outcompeted, or increase some microbial metabolic pathways and waste products in preference to others. It is proposed that the effects of these enhanced car- bohydrate concentrations will include a more inflammatory GI microbiota, initially causing leptin resistance, hence the greatly elevated leptin levels seen in Western populations when compared to those eating a wholly cellular diet.7,12–15"

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X