Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

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

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

  • #46
    Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    Don't worry, you don't have to feel sorry for me. I have already reached and exceeded all my goals, I have nothing I'm looking to change or modify at the point in time because it's all working effortlessly. The problem with y'all is you give you typically horrible, backwards advise because you plant your "special flower syndrome" in the back of everyone's minds and it really, really holds them back.

    I just went through an argument with her a few days ago. In that argument, she was on her 3rd week of strict ketosis and had never felt better in her life. Now a few days later she's off keto and eating chicken breast and sweet potatoes. And I need to get a grip? Drop your biases and actually read. Her situation changes as to what is convenient to the argument at the time. Funny how that happens.
    I've reached and exceeded all my goals too. So what?
    It's not about special flowers it's about broad brushstrokes. Your way does NOT work for every BODY. Why do you find that concept so hard to get your head around?

    Also, news flash, it is possible to be in ketosis and eat a small quantity of sweet potato. But you had to call her a liar.

    And I know a lot about Ayla's situation as we are friends, She has been doing really well on ketosis. Why does it bug you so much that someone could be well and happy by another method than yours?

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Knifegill View Post
      I tried to eat starch (three small sweet potatoes) and hurt so bad by day three I actually went to the ER. For the first time in my life. They found nothing, sent me home, and twelve hours later after much labor, I peed brown exploding water out of my butt for a few hours. Haven't felt that terrible in a very long time. So I'm working back up to starch-consumption, having a banana a day only gives me minimal diarrhea and a little bloat. I'm honestly giving this a few more weeks. When it still isn't working, then I'll swear off starch again. Until then, new underwear every day! I'm probably an idiot for listening to you guys and even trying this...
      With your gut in the condition it is in, you may want to seriously consider having your gut flora tested. You really may be a candidate for a fecal transplant.

      Fecal transplants found to be successful in treating gut ailment - Los Angeles Times

      Yea, it sounds gross and all, but a healthy gut is just so important. Swearing off starch doesn't fix the problem, it just gets around the symptom. IMO I'd rather treat the ailment then just try and avoid the biggest trigger because you're probably having other issues you're not realizing.
      Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
        I've reached and exceeded all my goals too. So what?
        It's not about special flowers it's about broad brushstrokes. Your way does NOT work for every BODY. Why do you find that concept so hard to get your head around?
        Thank you for commenting without reading what I've actually written. But to address your concern - if you cannot digest a certain food group (of real food), the fault is your body, not the food. At this point, it is best to explore options to correct this and heal yourself, not just swear off a completely healthy food altogether. And what you don't seem to understand is the typical sentiment around here does not allow everyone to try everything. Most people do not know what works best for them because they haven't found it yet.

        Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
        Also, news flash, it is possible to be in ketosis and eat a small quantity of sweet potato. But you had to call her a liar.
        Read. You cannot consume 75-100g of starch and be in ketosis.

        Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
        And I know a lot about Ayla's situation as we are friends, She has been doing really well on ketosis. Why does it bug you so much that someone could be well and happy by another method than yours?
        Nothing bugs me. As you are always the one coming at me, I can only assume it's me that makes you feel threatened.
        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
          With your gut in the condition it is in, you may want to seriously consider having your gut flora tested. You really may be a candidate for a fecal transplant.

          Fecal transplants found to be successful in treating gut ailment - Los Angeles Times

          Yea, it sounds gross and all, but a healthy gut is just so important. Swearing off starch doesn't fix the problem, it just gets around the symptom. IMO I'd rather treat the ailment then just try and avoid the biggest trigger because you're probably having other issues you're not realizing.
          Yep, Knifegill, you should have a poop transplant just so your body can better digest a substance you don't need in the first place and were doing just fine without.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
            Yep, Knifegill, you should have a poop transplant just so your body can better digest a substance you don't need in the first place and were doing just fine without.
            Substances you don't need to ingest to survive:

            1.) Saturated fat
            2.) Monounsaturated fat
            3.) Cholesterol
            4.) Animal protein
            5.) Vegetables

            Let's all cut those things out of our diet because we don't "need them." You'll be "just fine."

            "Surviving" versus "thriving." There is a difference between living and living optimally. You will not achieve your maximum potential on an exclusionary diet. If you want to be a fraction of what you could be, then remove perfectly healthy food from your diet and avoid your problems instead of fixing them. I choose to give my body what it needs in whole form so it is not forced to use secondary metabolic pathways to convert an overabundance of something it doesn't need into something it needs desperately to survive. If you choose to run on half a tank of gas and survive on life processes your body doesn't prefer to survive on, it's your freedom to do so. I choose to perform as well as I can, look as good as I can and minimize stress. That's why I do what I do.
            Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

            Comment


            • #51
              It doesn't matter if humans don't "need starch". There's no reason sweet potatoes would give a healthy individual explosive diarrhea. Whether it's something simple like gut flora or a more serious disease of the bowel, the guy needs a fucking doctor.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                Thank you for commenting without reading what I've actually written. But to address your concern - if you cannot digest a certain food group (of real food), the fault is your body, not the food. At this point, it is best to explore options to correct this and heal yourself, not just swear off a completely healthy food altogether. And what you don't seem to understand is the typical sentiment around here does not allow everyone to try everything. Most people do not know what works best for them because they haven't found it yet.

                Nothing bugs me. As you are always the one coming at me, I can only assume it's me that makes you feel threatened.
                Faulty assumptions are your continuous M.O. Assuming that everybody needs every kind of food and that the inability to digest one is a pathology. We developed symbiotic bonds with our friendly little gut flora buddies to digest food that is not optimal human food. We can digest meat and fat just fine without their help. So, if you are going to continue feeding your body sub optimal food, then yes, getting a thriving colony of bacteria to help you out with that difficult to digest food is a good thing. But WHY?

                ...you are always the one coming at me", But, Teacher! She started it! Yeah, yeah. Quit whining you little wuss.

                Comment


                • #53
                  Sweet potatoes causing explosive diarrhea is pathology. Starch is not difficult to digest.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                    "Surviving" versus "thriving." There is a difference between living and living optimally. You will not achieve your maximum potential on an exclusionary diet. If you want to be a fraction of what you could be, then remove perfectly healthy food from your diet and avoid your problems instead of fixing them. I choose to give my body what it needs in whole form so it is not forced to use secondary metabolic pathways to convert an overabundance of something it doesn't need into something it needs desperately to survive. If you choose to run on half a tank of gas and survive on life processes your body doesn't prefer to survive on, it's your freedom to do so. I choose to perform as well as I can, look as good as I can and minimize stress. That's why I do what I do.
                    Surviving vs thriving is my point exactly. You are making the unsubstantiated assumption/claim that it is not possible to thrive while excluding certain things that can theoretically be food. My reality begs to differ. I thrive by maximizing my intake of the optimal foods for my body (Notice I did not claim it was optimal for your body too. This is where you need to back off.)

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Timthetaco View Post
                      It doesn't matter if humans don't "need starch". There's no reason sweet potatoes would give a healthy individual explosive diarrhea. Whether it's something simple like gut flora or a more serious disease of the bowel, the guy needs a fucking doctor.
                      Right. Thank you for understanding. This is potentially a serious medical condition, which is why it needs special attention. Simply avoiding the food isn't going to correct the issue, only lessen the side effects.

                      GET HEALTHY is the main takeaway here!
                      Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                        Surviving vs thriving is my point exactly. You are making the unsubstantiated assumption/claim that it is not possible to thrive while excluding certain things that can theoretically be food. My reality begs to differ. I thrive by maximizing my intake of the optimal foods for my body (Notice I did not claim it was optimal for your body too. This is where you need to back off.)
                        You spend most of your time working out of a secondary metabolic pathway. Being that you are a cancer survivor and have epilepsy, it makes sense for you to do what you do because for you, it is medicinal. Protecting your overall health and well-being at this point is probably more important than becoming a world class sprinter. The point I'm trying to make is you make up a very, very small slice of the pie. Very few people will function better doing what you're doing, and it doesn't make sense for them.

                        This is why context is so important. Is the average person more like you or more like me?

                        And no, it is not an assumption. It is a fact that ketosis is a secondary metabolic process. It is not ideal for the human condition. It only becomes preferable if you have been compromised in a very specific way. If we were made to function best running on ketosis, that would be our preferred metabolic process. How a community can embrace the "evolutionary eating" paradigm of avoiding grains and vegetable oils but have trouble grasping this is beyond me.
                        Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Originally posted by Paleobird View Post
                          Faulty assumptions are your continuous M.O. Assuming that everybody needs every kind of food and that the inability to digest one is a pathology. We developed symbiotic bonds with our friendly little gut flora buddies to digest food that is not optimal human food. We can digest meat and fat just fine without their help. So, if you are going to continue feeding your body sub optimal food, then yes, getting a thriving colony of bacteria to help you out with that difficult to digest food is a good thing. But WHY?

                          ...you are always the one coming at me", But, Teacher! She started it! Yeah, yeah. Quit whining you little wuss.
                          It's posts like this that severely hamper your credibility.
                          Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Lets agree that it's pathology.

                            A person has options:

                            Option 1: don't eat starch -- it's easy enough to avoid and not required for nutrition. This doesn't assert that it's categorically unhealthy, it simply asserts that the *individual* chooses not to eat starch.

                            Option 2: individual takes pre/pro-biotic (and or goes through a gut-flora recolonization process) and slowly introduces starch -- easy enough to do in a variety of ways

                            Option 3: person goes for expensive, experimental medical procedure called a "fecal transplant" because a ya-hoo on the interwebz is completely freaked out that someone would choose option 1 or 2.

                            Here is a simple reality: Humans are omnivores.

                            There is a lot of information about the fact that humans can survive and thrive on a variety of diets from the largely-carnivorous maasai diet (milk, blood, meat/organs/bones plus a modest amount of tubers/veg) to a kitivan diet (mostly vegetarian with some seafood). And, there are lots of diets "in between."

                            Truly, there's a miracle in neolithic foods as well. That miracle is the ability to support large populations and create in the way that Ancient Egypt did. Likely wouldn't have been possible without the miracles of pastoralism and agriculture.

                            Thus, is wheat/grain "evil poison -- don't eat!!!!?" Only for people who are pathological, really. After all, we are omnivores and human society has been graining-it for several thousand years.

                            What we know is that it is a sub-optimal food. It's less nutrient dense and it requires a fair amount of processing in order to overcome it's anti-nutrients. And, according to some rat studies, creatures will eat more of nutrient-poor foods, increasing calorie intake, in order to get the nutrients that they need. When food source is limited, they likely "feel hungry" and when food source is unlimited, they are likely to eat to "satiety" -- which is likely greater than their caloric need (but not their nutrient need). Whereas, when the animals eat nutrient-rich foods, then they eat fewer calories and tend to maintain normal weight (and/or loose weight to normal weight). (sources at WAPF web site, Seth Robert's website -- available in shangrila diet thread).

                            So, a person can simply choose to eat less nutrient poor foods (or no nutrient poor foods) in favor of nutrient rich foods -- which is really the underlying "science" or "theory/idea" behind paleo/primal, as opposed to some "brain washing" or "special flower syndrome" or "caveman reenactment. "

                            I have noticed since going from vegan (where I was lean and healthy until hypocholesterolemia) that I ate more calories as a vegan than I do now as a paleo/primal. I'm currently consuming about 1500 cals/day of nutrient rich foods. It's very satiating. As a vegan, I was usually hungry, ate around 2200-2500 calories per day. And, as I said, ran into some health problems.

                            The reality is that I don't think that I"m a "special flower." Instead, I am observing what works for me and what I like. I look at my son and how healthy he is, and my husband and how healthy and lean he is since we went paleo (and he does have a health issue that we are treating/solving at the moment and this is facilitating the process -- I've been open about this as well).

                            There is nothing wrong with a person making their own choices about their diet and espousing those choices to others to assert what they do and how it works for them. No one is "phobic" about fat or carbs (or protein for that matter).

                            We are just making choices and sharing what works for us. And, we can make decisions tha tmake our lives easier. For me, it's easy enough to avoid grains or starch or meat or whatever I want to avoid for whatever reasons than it is for me to go "you know what, that's a pathological problem. I need medical assistance!" Why not just avoid what gives me tummy troubles when it is possible to be *just as healthy* or healthier on something else?

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                              Right. Thank you for understanding. This is potentially a serious medical condition, which is why it needs special attention. Simply avoiding the food isn't going to correct the issue, only lessen the side effects.
                              Oh boy, that sounds dire! Or it could be that his digestive system is just not used to having to extract nutrition from such a bio-unavailable source.

                              Why do you need to make anyone who doesn't do it your way into a pathological case?

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                                It's posts like this that severely hamper your credibility.
                                hehe....Lighten up, kiddo! You take yourself way too seriously.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X