Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why can't I look like Mark Sisson!?!?!

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

  • 5 whole eggs cooked in 1/2 teaspoon of Kerrygold with about an ounce of goat cheese and some grated potatoes I baked on aluminum foil so I didn't need oil. Served cold I ate this exact meal 4 times last week.
    This doesn't sound, or look, like anything a "normal" person would eat. So maybe "looking like Mark" is not particularly natural, or even a good idea for most people? Not that you shouldn't try, if that's what you want.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by zilog View Post
      This doesn't sound, or look, like anything a "normal" person would eat. So maybe "looking like Mark" is not particularly natural, or even a good idea for most people? Not that you shouldn't try, if that's what you want.
      Really? Sounds and looks like a cheese omelet/scramble with hashbrowns to me. Though in this case there are a couple more eggs than the traditional 3 you might get in a restaurant and the hashbrowns are not fried. I'm not sure I would eat it cold, but it certainly doesn't sound outlandish.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
        You. Just saying he hasn't switched his stance on carbohydrates near as I can tell, but he seems to have put talk of insulin on the back burner, while it was all the rage when Good Calories, Bad Calories came out.
        I still like to look at it as "the alternative hypothesis":

        "Obesity is a growth disorder just like any other growth disorder. Specifically, obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation. Fat accumulation is determined not by the balance of calories consumed and expended but by the effect of specific nutrients on the hormonal regulation of fat metabolism. Obesity is a condition where the body prioritizes the storage of fat rather than the utilization of fat."

        May change the second sentence to say: "Fat accumulation is determined not only by the balance of calories......", but otherwise I think its spot on.

        We now have studies indicating that the obese and metabolically challenged do partition and utilize energy differently than those who have never been so. We have several macronutrient studies showing a difference between fat and lean mass accumulation or loss when varied. We also have a few "paleo" studies indicating quality of nutrients rather than just quantity comes to play.

        Its both quantity and quality that have hormonal effect. There is just more work to be done. Nothing in science is "proven", just supported or not supported by the evidence. Thats why these silly little disagreements persist.
        Last edited by Neckhammer; 01-22-2013, 08:41 AM.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by canio6 View Post
          Really? Sounds and looks like a cheese omelet/scramble with hashbrowns to me. Though in this case there are a couple more eggs than the traditional 3 you might get in a restaurant and the hashbrowns are not fried. I'm not sure I would eat it cold, but it certainly doesn't sound outlandish.
          Yeah, I got a microwave....and I ain't afraid to use it.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
            Yeah, I got a microwave....and I ain't afraid to use it.
            You, sir, are a wild man.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
              Yeah, I got a microwave....and I ain't afraid to use it.
              GoRK DINT HAVE NO MICERWAVE, YoU AINT" RILLY PRIMEAL!!!!!!

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                Yeah, I got a microwave....and I ain't afraid to use it.
                Blasphemy! Charcoal is much more primal than any micro-wave...
                "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


                • As to fruit vs. starch.....well search the Perfect Health Diet site for "Ray Peat" and you'll find a very interesting discussion.

                  This study ended up proving the exact opposite it purposed to, which is just plain funny:

                  Green tea extract only affects markers of oxidativ... [Br J Nutr. 2002] - PubMed - NCBI


                  "The overall effect of the 10-week period without dietary fruits and vegetables was a decrease in oxidative damage to DNA, blood proteins, and plasma lipids, concomitantly with marked changes in antioxidative defence."


                  I only link that cause this I think it follows well into what this lady has to say. I think she makes some good points....don't just look at the home page and say "oh she's a carnivore" she does have input on fruits and tubers that ain't all "death by plant" :

                  Vegetables » Diagnosis: Diet

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by oxide View Post
                    Cori, isn't this exactly like Atkins or South Beach or the Zone or other diets which are structured in phases? Phase 1 is low carb. Phase 2,3 are about reintroducing carbs. The idea is that low- carb "fixes" your metabolism, and then you can go back to semi-CW. And aren't these the diets that fail miserably even if you follow them? Of course they fail. Phase 1 is only two weeks, not really long enough to fix the metabolism.* And then in Phase 2 and 3 you just re-break your metabolism anyway. When you go Primal sub 150, it's for life -- FOR A REASON. By the way, which is the "normal" lifestyle? The Grok lifestyle, or the SAD lifestyle? I thought that Primal WAS the normal lifestyle. Humans began to turn turn away from normal when they first planted corn and wheat 10,000 years ago, and went totally haywire with bad wheat and high fucktose corn syrup in about 1975.


                    Anyway, after all the posts on this thread, it's obvious that I missed something big. When did all the anti-CW diets creep back toward more carbs? Good lord, 21-day Transformation is only a year old... did Mark turn away from fat that quickly? I've seen his posts, and youtubes, and definitive guides, where sweet potatoes were for moderation, rice was for heavy duty athletics, and white potatoes were always off-limits. I've already convinced one friend to go Primal and he's lost 45 pounds and decreased his ibuprofin by 80%. Do you honestly think I'm going to back to my low-carb friend and say, oops, all the gurus were all wrong, here's a potato, eat up? Hell no. And now we're back to splitting hairs about which are safe starches and which aren't? Hey, after I've eaten my veggies, I'm already near 90 g carbs. I don't have room for ANY starches, safe or not. So you all can argue over rice vs. tapioca. I'll avoid both, thanks.



                    -------------
                    *I personally use carb flu as the metric for signs of a changing metabolism. Sometimes carb flu doesn't kick in until 3-4 weeks. If you go back to carbs after two weeks you're back at square 1.
                    Personally speaking I believe that to have the impact that is often necessary to have the change in the relationship to foods that the initial period needs to be on the order of a few months, not a few weeks just as you state. One of the fabulous things that Choco mentions repeatedly but always washes over in regards to HFLC is the satiety. People with weight to lose need to learn that feeling. Some of them got to where they are because their body has a problem recognizing it. Relearning it is invaluable. Many just can't get there on a middle of the road plan full of carbs and using only will power. But I also believe that new eating habits can become just that, habits... if we don't just throw them under the bus all at once at "x" goal point.
                    And no I was not speaking to going back to any CW type diet after HFLC, simply slowly reintroducing higher carb Primal foods once their system was healed... such as fruits and starches.
                    So, no... not Atkins or SB "diet" style where you pick a date and got just dive in, but where it's a journey and you really pay attention and listen to your body.

                    I do not think that once a person reaches their goals of losing weight that adding a few pieces of fruit and or potatoes back into their diet each week is going to put them right where they started in regards to weight. But it does give them more latitude to eat and be healthy and happy... and not feel restricted to LC foods all the time.

                    I am strictly against HFLC as a "DIET" to lose weight then tossing it... just as much as I am anything else around here as far as hacks.
                    Anytime one does "x" until "x" and then stops the end result is usually that things get away from you.
                    There has to be an after plan.
                    I always encourage the long haul/journey perspective.
                    Slow and steady people. It's the journey, not the destination... and all that.
                    Because you're really going to be doing this for the rest of your life. Eating that is...
                    So finding a way to lose weight and keep it off while feeling both satisfied/satiated AND satisfied with food choices in the long term is very important.

                    I do firmly believe that as long as people are sticking to whole foods that they can slowly transition to more fruits and tubers from HFLC and be just fine.
                    “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


                    • You don't look like Mark because he won't give out his secrets to the most awesomest head of hair known to the civilized world.

                      I've asked him for it, he told me to have relations with myself.

                      Keep dreaming.
                      If I just said LOL, I lied. Do or do not. There is no try.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by justyouraveragecavemen View Post
                        You don't look like Mark because he won't give out his secrets to the most awesomest head of hair known to the civilized world.

                        I've asked him for it, he told me to have relations with myself.

                        Keep dreaming.
                        lmao

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                          I still like to look at it as "the alternative hypothesis":

                          "Obesity is a growth disorder just like any other growth disorder. Specifically, obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation. Fat accumulation is determined not by the balance of calories consumed and expended but by the effect of specific nutrients on the hormonal regulation of fat metabolism. Obesity is a condition where the body prioritizes the storage of fat rather than the utilization of fat."

                          May change the second sentence to say: "Fat accumulation is determined not only by the balance of calories......", but otherwise I think its spot on.

                          ...

                          Its both quantity and quality that have hormonal effect. There is just more work to be done. Nothing in science is "proven", just supported or not supported by the evidence. Thats why these silly little disagreements persist.
                          For someone who claims to read a lot of research, you do bury your head firmly in the sand when it comes to DNL. It's worth reiterating that Gary Taubes proposed specifically that this hormonal influence you're talking about is the effect of insulin which is stimulated primarily by carbohydrates. He did a big media tour explaining that it's not the fat that makes us fat, it's the carbs! As the story goes, carbohydrates go down, insulin goes up (true), glucose is stored as fat (untrue), insulin prevents body fat from being release (true in the short term, untrue in the long term), rinse and repeat. Do this too often and you become hyperinsulinemic (untrue), at which point you won't have any access to stored body fat at all (untrue).

                          His entire theory is based on a cursory glance at a few biochemistry textbooks (and misinterpretations of basic concepts) and rodent research.

                          "The use of deuterated water has overcome this problem. In an elegant experiment designed to assess the relative contributions of hepatic vs. adipose DNL to adipose fatty acids, Diraison and collegues (2003) gave subjects both [1,2-13C2]acetate, which is efficiently taken up in the liver but not adipose, and 2H2O, which will equilibrate rapidly with the entire body water pool. By subtracting liver DNL from measured adipose DNL they estimated true adipose DNL, which (as with hepatic DNL) was quantitatively insignificant in humans, even under conditions of carbohydrate excess (Diraison et al., 2003). Another study (Strawford et al., 2004) investigated DNL, from any source–liver or adipose, in adipose tissue in humans using 2H2O. The advantage of this study was that the labeling was over the course of many weeks under normal living conditions, which should allow for the evaluation of DNL under usual ad libitum dietary conditions. Although absolute values for DNL were not presented, one can estimate that at most, whole body DNL accounted for 1 g/d of fatty acid synthesis. "

                          "In contrast with humans, DNL appears to be very active and quantitatively significant in other animals. In rodents, DNL in adipose and liver can account for over 50% of fatty acids (Lee et al., 1994a; Brunengraber et al., 2003)."

                          From this review.

                          The reason it's the alternative hypothesis is because it's not supported by any established scientific research. Carbohydrates are not inherently more fattening than fat. The insulin hypothesis of obesity is not true.
                          Last edited by Timthetaco; 01-30-2013, 09:22 PM.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Knifegill View Post
                            For evidence, I just found out I can bench 205 as my starting point. First time I've done one to find out my max. I understand it's not terribly impressive, but I only weigh 175-ish and have only done body-weight for years. On low-starch! I'll be improving that number rapidly, without starch! Just watch...
                            Way to go, Knifegill! I'm impressed. I'm 135lbs and was able to bench exactly 1/2 my bodyweight today for 5 sets of 3. I'm pretty stoked, being a flabby old lady and all.

                            Originally posted by Finnegans Wake View Post
                            GoRK DINT HAVE NO MICERWAVE, YoU AINT" RILLY PRIMEAL!!!!!!
                            I microwaved my white potato this morning. :P

                            Originally posted by justyouraveragecavemen View Post
                            You don't look like Mark because he won't give out his secrets to the most awesomest head of hair known to the civilized world.
                            I think he needs a haircut. The Baywatch look is played.
                            Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
                              For someone who claims to read a lot of research, you do bury your head firmly in the sand when it comes to DNL.....
                              Must say I'm not sure what your little tirade was about???

                              Thought my post was quite clear....but let me try again just to make sure your calling me out for the right reason, then we can proceed I suppose.

                              That by proposing that I like the "alternative hypothesis" I mean you can take into consideration the entire hormonal cascade of lifestyle and food beyond simply calling it the "insulin hypothesis".

                              While this may not jive with Taubes 100% this is the way I see it. Hell, I'll admit it...I've never even read GCBC. I got the gist of it from everywhere else. If it does not take into consideration the other hormones (leptin for instance) then it's an oversimplification and thats why I never read it. I actually read the exact quote of "the alternative hypothesis" from Peter Attai's web page and thought it was a much better hypothesis to work under than the simple "insulin hypothesis".

                              So are you disagreeing with that or just ranting about why you hate Taubes?

                              I personally eat what you may consider a restricted carb diet based on many other reasons besides "the insulin hypothesis". There really are more than a couple of ways you can arrive at the conclusion that SAD levels of carbs or even too many from Primal sources may not be optimal. A hint is I'm not doing it to lose weight . Not to say you or anyone else may not arrive at a different conclusion, so please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence or your freedoms
                              Last edited by Neckhammer; 01-22-2013, 09:48 AM.

                              Comment


                              • I think That Paleo Guy has some of the best stuff on the web regarding all of this. Here are his two latest, which are some of his better blog posts:
                                Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 1). « THAT PALEO GUY
                                Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 2). « THAT PALEO GUY
                                Female, 5'3", 50, Max squat: 202.5lbs. Max deadlift: 225 x 3.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X