Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Eat Fat, Lose Fat

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

  • #16
    "The first thing to realise is that it is carbohydrate (starch and sugar) and carbohydrate only which fattens fat people."

    Some call it a gem. I'll call it what it is: bullshit.

    Weight is entirely calorically driven. If you can't lose weight following CICO, it's almost certainly because you miscalculated your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) or you aren't measuring your caloric intake rigorously enough.

    When you eat carbohydrate, it isn't carbohydrate that is stored as fat. It's the dietary fat you eat along with it. When you overeat steak and potatoes, the potatoes make your insulin rise and you store the excess fat in the steak as fat. It's almost always dietary fat being stored since the way carbs are stored as fat is by the extremely inefficient de novo lipogenesis process. The average American DOES NOT eat a high carbohydrate diet. They get 30-40% of their dietary calories through dietary fat. They eat a high calorie diet. They drink far too many calories, eat far too many flour products (which do next to nothing for satiety) and everything is fried - added oil (usually of poor quality) that does nothing but add calories with little to no positive nutrition or satiety.

    Eat actual food. I don't care if it's seared ribeye and avocado or steamed chicken breast and a baked potato. Real food is nutritious, it keeps you full and your body knows what it is. It doesn't recognized Coke and taquitos as food.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
      "The first thing to realise is that it is carbohydrate (starch and sugar) and carbohydrate only which fattens fat people."

      Some call it a gem. I'll call it what it is: bullshit.
      precisely. it's a shame that this warped pseudo-scientific statement is still made by ANYONE.

      Comment


      • #18
        How timely! The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.Are carbohydrates fattening? » The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.

        "And it’s pretty clear that going off the low-carb diet will result in more weight gain than going off of a low-fat diet. Which would have to at least imply that carbohydrates are more fattening than are fat and protein. We can see from the length of this second follow-up – four years – we’re not talking about the immediate water gain that comes from going off a low-carb diet for just a few days, but the long-term weight gain."

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by otzi View Post
          How timely! The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.Are carbohydrates fattening? » The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.

          "And it’s pretty clear that going off the low-carb diet will result in more weight gain than going off of a low-fat diet. Which would have to at least imply that carbohydrates are more fattening than are fat and protein. We can see from the length of this second follow-up – four years – we’re not talking about the immediate water gain that comes from going off a low-carb diet for just a few days, but the long-term weight gain."
          This is positively false, what the good doctor should have stated is that many people tend to overeat and binging on processed carbs, not to insinuate that carbs as such are inherently more fattening, which is not correct by no means…
          "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

          - Schopenhauer

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by otzi View Post
            How timely! The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.Are carbohydrates fattening? » The Blog of Michael R. Eades, M.D.

            "And it’s pretty clear that going off the low-carb diet will result in more weight gain than going off of a low-fat diet. Which would have to at least imply that carbohydrates are more fattening than are fat and protein. We can see from the length of this second follow-up – four years – we’re not talking about the immediate water gain that comes from going off a low-carb diet for just a few days, but the long-term weight gain."
            Replying solely to this quote without reading the entire article, all this states is that the type of carbohydrate suggested promotes the intake of more calories than the type of fat mentioned.

            Obviously, eggs are going to be more filling than pasta. You're going to consume more calories with a pasta staple than an egg staple.

            Obviously, steak is going to keep you fuller longer than mangoes. You're also going to have a superior body composition on a steak-heavy diet than a mango-heavy diet thanks to the anabolic nature of animal protein, saturated fat and cholesterol.

            But please, take aged filet mignon salted just right and seared in grassfed butter and compare that to plain boiled white potatoes without a shred of seasoning. Now give yourself an unlimited supply of each and see which you consume more of. You're going to lose a ton more weight on the boiled potato approach. You may not like the composition you get at the end of it, but damn it if that luscious steak isn't more fattening!
            Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
              This is positively false, what the good doctor should have stated is that many people tend to overeat and binging on processed carbs, not to insinuate that carbs as such are inherently more fattening, which is not correct by no means…
              You beat me. Thank you Gorbag. Does your sanity know any bounds?!
              Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

              Comment


              • #22
                The metabolic defect in the Fatten-Easilies (their tendency to store carbohydrate as fat instead of promptly turning it into energy) is probably hereditary and may be regarded as a failure to make the adaptation to a diet based on agriculture which the Constant-Weights have achieved.

                Before the cultivation of cereal crops, our ancestors, as has been said before, lived by hunting animals and subsisted on an all-meat diet of fat and protein. If they lived near woods or in forests, they may have taken a few berries, fruits and roots as well, but on the open plains they lived on meat alone and there is evidence that on this diet they were never corpulent.

                With the gradual introduction of starch and sugar which followed the cultivation of the land, some people found that they could adapt themselves to the new foods and stay slim, while others must have failed to develop the biochemical mechanism for getting energy from carbohydrate and became fat instead.

                These were the Fatten-Easilies.
                Someone figured this out a long time ago

                Eat Fat And Grow Slim by Richard Mackarness (1958)
                Coming soon - get your own online primal journal!
                http://journal.primalapp.com

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                  Weight is entirely calorically driven. If you can't lose weight following CICO, it's almost certainly because you miscalculated your TDEE (total daily energy expenditure) or you aren't measuring your caloric intake rigorously enough.
                  More and more, your previous posts make more sense with my N=1 over the last few (4-8 actually) months.

                  I still do not understand the whole calorie thing, though it would appear to be simple. But let me explain why I dont understand it, for me:

                  I tried what others were having success with. High fat, low carbs. That made me full on few calories. Like 800-1200. I had to really push it to get 1200. I do track, but I know there is room for miscalculations, but the higher the fat, the lower the calories, the slower the weight loss.

                  I can switch the macros around to include more carbs, which I felt much better BTW, lowered the fat to more like the 30-40% and/or under 60grams per day, and it doesnt really seem to matter where the calories are, higher or lower, and I am losing again.

                  So for me, calories (CICO) are still such a weird thing. Low calorie with high fat = little to no weight loss. But yet higher calories with a different macro breakdown of which includes lower fat = weight loss.

                  So it seems for me, I need to watch the fat in order to lose weight, and not so much the calories. Though I do watch the calories also. I make sure it is a deficit also but some days I push maintenance calories and it is still okay. But I would assume it is more like it is "averaging out" okay. And I am sure Calories Out are coming in to play to help with that also. I forget about the Calories Out part, though I track it also, but that always seems to track high so I never really pay attention to it. I had no energy for Calories Out on the high fat. At least not much so that is a factor as well.

                  Anyways, I started my "diet" on 30-40% fat, had great success. Went to 60% lifestyle change and it dropped in half. Went 75+ and it stopped, even with low calories. Now I have shifted back, and it is working again. And maybe it is just the shake up that is working, I don't know, but I think I have learned that for me, it is the fat that determines whether I lose, maintain, or gain. Even if on the low end of calories, if most of those calories come from fat, I just can't lose weight.

                  This exception to this, I did go LC/HF for two days this week because I thought it might help me to get water weight off. That seemed to work great, but even then I was only hitting about 40-50% fat. I added CO to my coffee on Monday cuz I wanted a higher fat day and still only barely made 40%. Otherwise I havent done that for a couple of months.

                  I dont avoid fats from meats, etc. and I do still add CO when stir frying veggies or steak, etc but I do avoid adding extras, like butter on top of my steak etc. At least for now until I get the weight off. Once the weight is all gone, it will be a different story I am sure.

                  Anyways, I just wanted to add that, because now when I just have reg. coffee with maybe a little cream, I think of your previous posts that I have read over the course of the last 4-8 months, most specifically adding in extra fats like to coffee

                  Originally posted by jakey View Post
                  precisely. it's a shame that this warped pseudo-scientific statement is still made by ANYONE.
                  I am thinking I might have read one of your posts first, about PHD? So I read through the blogs many many times over these same months, and then just one day a few months ago, this one clicked for me. Perfect Health Diet: Weight Loss Version | Perfect Health Diet
                  65lbs gone and counting!!

                  Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    I'm not going to bash a low-carb high-fat Ketogenic diet. Personally, I've been there done that, lost weight and learned my lessons.
                    Suffice to say my current way of eating is more like moderate fat, moderate (all Primal, of course) carb and adequate protein. Really, way more balanced than what it used to be when I was doing full keto. LCHF in my opinion is an extremely efficient tool that can and will jump start a person's weight loss. It will reduce inflammation, help shed water weight and might help a lot with appetite control issues. IMO many people overdo it by eating that way for way too long, which could potentially be not a good thing for their health long term. To each, their own.

                    This has been said way too many times already, but I gotta do it again. At the end of the day it's about calories in and calories out. And even a very low-carb diet can't validate drowning everything in butter or bacon fat. Eating too much fat will cause fat gain.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                      You beat me. Thank you Gorbag. Does your sanity know any bounds?!
                      I am glad that we agrees ChocoTaco, you seem to be among the crème of well-informed posters around here...
                      "All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."

                      - Schopenhauer

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Graycat View Post
                        I'm not going to bash a low-carb high-fat Ketogenic diet. Personally, I've been there done that, lost weight and learned my lessons.
                        Suffice to say my current way of eating is more like moderate fat, moderate (all Primal, of course) carb and adequate protein. Really, way more balanced than what it used to be when I was doing full keto. LCHF in my opinion is an extremely efficient tool that can and will jump start a person's weight loss. It will reduce inflammation, help shed water weight and might help a lot with appetite control issues. IMO many people overdo it by eating that way for way too long, which could potentially be not a good thing for their health long term. To each, their own.

                        This has been said way too many times already, but I gotta do it again. At the end of the day it's about calories in and calories out. And even a very low-carb diet can't validate drowning everything in butter or bacon fat. Eating too much fat will cause fat gain.

                        This is where I have landed as well. I know each has benefits for various ppl for various reasons. I now know for me, I function best meeting in the middle of about a 3 way split, up to about 40%(60grams) of fat it seems. For weight loss anyways. I was one that was HF for far too long. I seemed to have just glazed over about the part of not doing it for too long. It just didnt sink in. But it did help me get a grip on hunger.
                        65lbs gone and counting!!

                        Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                          I am glad that we agrees ChocoTaco, you seem to be among the crème of well-informed posters around here...
                          Get a room! And figure this out:

                          Does eating a high-fat meal, ie. a stick of butter or a pound of lard, give one extra energy to cope with the cold or strenuos exercise? You often hear of mountain climbers or polar explorers eating such things, but does it really offer instant energy, or does it get stored like any other food and then your body draws off the stores to provide the instant energy?

                          Can your body use dietary fat directly or must it be converted to body fat first?

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by otzi View Post
                            Can your body use dietary fat directly or must it be converted to body fat first?
                            you can burn it directly, or store it. if you eat it with carb, it will be stored first, and carb will be burnt preferentially.

                            whether it's burned immediately, stored and then burned, or stored long term, there's no getting around the energy balance equation - not by cold thermogenesis, dumb potato diets, or stupid shit that mike eades posts.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by jakey View Post
                              you can burn it directly, or store it. if you eat it with carb, it will be stored first, and carb will be burnt preferentially.
                              This is actually a serious question, no angles. Do you really think fat can be 'burned directly'? If so, it does make sense why the polar explorers would want to eat a stick of butter.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by otzi View Post
                                This is actually a serious question, no angles. Do you really think fat can be 'burned directly'? If so, it does make sense why the polar explorers would want to eat a stick of butter.
                                Aren't MCTs famous for being used immediately?
                                | 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

                                Working...
                                X