Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Storing fat WITHOUT insulin - ASP

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

  • #76
    Although, like pklopp, I sort of agree with you quite a bit, but often defer to your signature:
    I don't put my trust in you, that is your experience and does not reflect the rest of the human population.

    We must remember that the laws of thermodynamics are just representative of what often happens in our world, but until physicists can work out why the universe is still expanding without using the "fudgy" dark matter explanation and when medical science actually has some idea of how the human body operates, the laws of thermodynamics remain as just the best hypothesis we have to date for energy transfer.
    "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

    Comment


    • #77
      Originally posted by pklopp View Post
      A whole bunch of well-said, really informative stuff
      PKlopp, I have read pretty much everything Gary Taubes ever wrote, and I don't remember him ever claiming that the laws of thermodynamics don't apply to a human body. Can you provide a citation? I read him as saying basically what's summarized here:

      The Black Box – the REAL thing | Escape From Caloriegate

      and here:

      Do calories matter? « The Eating Academy | Peter Attia, M.D. The Eating Academy | Peter Attia, M.D.

      It's beyond the scope of my Saturday morning to go through Good Calories, Bad Calories exhaustively, but these are two writers who regularly quote/cite/agree with Taubes and who apparently read him as I do, that calories 100% are the measure of units of energy, and that weight loss is defined as a calorie deficit being created.

      Other than that, really great post and thanks for taking the time.
      The Champagne of Beards

      Comment


      • #78
        Are the internal workings in the human body a closed system?

        Is there thermal equilibrium in the internal human body and if there is a calculable number is that number equal to zero?

        Is the internal workings in the human body always striving its way towards thermal equilibrium or homeostasis?

        Comment


        • #79
          Originally posted by RichMahogany View Post
          PKlopp, I have read pretty much everything Gary Taubes ever wrote, and I don't remember him ever claiming that the laws of thermodynamics don't apply to a human body. Can you provide a citation? I read him as saying basically what's summarized here:

          The Black Box – the REAL thing | Escape From Caloriegate

          and here:

          Do calories matter? « The Eating Academy | Peter Attia, M.D. The Eating Academy | Peter Attia, M.D.

          It's beyond the scope of my Saturday morning to go through Good Calories, Bad Calories exhaustively, but these are two writers who regularly quote/cite/agree with Taubes and who apparently read him as I do, that calories 100% are the measure of units of energy, and that weight loss is defined as a calorie deficit being created.

          Other than that, really great post and thanks for taking the time.
          Taubes sends a mixed message on this topic, which adds yet more to the confusion, but here is the man himself on his blog (emphasis mine):

          Originally posted by Gary Taubes blog post of 8/16/2012
          What I found most fascinating about the conference was how beliefs shifted over the course of the three day event, from unconditional faith in the conventional wisdom to openness and scientific curiosity about the kinds of alternative hypotheses put forward by myself and others. On the first day of the conference I was having arguments/discussions with researchers about the laws of thermodynamics and how they apply to obesity (or don’t, as I believe) only to find myself sitting with them on a panel on day three as they agreed that the role of refined grains and sugars in cancer and cancer therapy had to be taken seriously.
          I'm not sure how to interpret that part in bold in any way other than "I don't believe the laws of thermodynamics apply to obesity."

          Here he goes again:


          Originally posted by Taubes, Gary (2010-12-28). Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It
          The very notion that we get fat because we consume more calories than we expend would not exist without the misapplied belief that the laws of thermodynamics make it true. When the experts write that “obesity is a disorder of energy balance”—a declaration that can be found in one form or another in much of the technical writing on the subject—it is shorthand for saying that the laws of thermodynamics dictate this to be true. And yet they don’t.
          He eventually backpedals and rephrases things in terms of thermodynamics applying to obesity, but not explaining why there is a positive energy balance, which is fair enough, but you can see how the above quotes serve only to muddy the waters.

          -PK
          My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

          Interested in Intermittent Fasting? This might help: part 1, part 2, part 3.

          Comment


          • #80
            Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
            No.
            So you've secretly hacked my hand-written exercise log. From 2400miles away. Touche!
            "It's a great life, if you don't weaken.". John Buchan

            Comment


            • #81
              Insulin is correlation not causation for weightgain/weightloss! Gary Taubes seem to make that unclear or even denying that in his writings. Some people are obsessing about what may be written in the small letters of dieting and forgets about what is really important for a sound and healthy diet. So, excess food makes you gain weight, and a food deficit makes you lose. Everything else is footnotes to that simple thruth…
              "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


              • #82
                Originally posted by itchy166 View Post
                So you've secretly hacked my hand-written exercise log. From 2400miles away. Touche!
                You're purposely being vague with your lifestyle, and frankly your logical fallacies aren't helping. If you are truly eating more calories now than before and you lose weight, then you simply have changed your lifestyle so significantly that it is now a deficit. There is no other options. Your TDEE is higher now than it was before.

                - OR -

                You don't accurately measure your calories, and you just think you eat more now because you aren't consciously dieting. Overweight people think they consume up to 50% less calories than they actually do. Underweight people think they consume up to 50% more calories than they actually do. Going from a lifestyle full of foods that provide little satiety to a lifestyle of foods that provide lots of satiety make people believe they eat more now than they ever did before because their hunger signals are naturally working and they don't have to actively restrict food. In reality, they're eating less than ever before.

                You're one of the two or a combination of both.
                Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                Comment


                • #83
                  Originally posted by Gorbag View Post
                  Insulin is correlation not causation for weightgain/weightloss! Gary Taubes seem to make that unclear or even denying that in his writings. Some people are obsessing about what may be written in the small letters of dieting and forgets about what is really important for a sound and healthy diet. So, excess food makes you gain weight, and a food deficit makes you lose. Everything else is footnotes to that simple thruth…
                  Based only on my personal experience, I agree with this 1000%. For about 6 months, I have been tracking calories consumed vs daily weight gain/loss against a very steady exercise program. With the exception of obvious water weight gains/losses associated with carbs, I can predict with great accuracy what adding/subtracting a couple hundred calories will do on a daily basis.

                  Comment


                  • #84
                    In general the health of the system dictates its ability to adapt to different environments (in this case the presence of excess calories). A healthy system may very well have a greater capacity to increase metabolic rate and conversion of calories to useful matter or dissipate through energy use. An unhealthy system may be unable to accomplish such a feat in a healthy manner leading to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer.... ect.

                    I've witnessed at least a few occasions when people adopted Paleo, lost the weight and got healthy, then went back to their SAD diet. When they returned to their SAD ways some continued to express the health and energy they found in Paleo for quite some time. In my wife's case I'd say it was over a year before some of her old symptoms started to come back and her weight went up by about 5 lbs. Now she's back to eating like she should again, and responded even quicker in terms of getting healthy than she did the first time around.... hope she sticks with it in recognition that symptoms are a poor indicator of health.

                    So sure CICO works. CO is dictated by quality/quantity of CI and the health of the system in question. See, its easy.

                    Comment


                    • #85
                      Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                      In general the health of the system dictates its ability to adapt to different environments (in this case the presence of excess calories). A healthy system may very well have a greater capacity to increase metabolic rate and conversion of calories to useful matter or dissipate through energy use. An unhealthy system may be unable to accomplish such a feat in a healthy manner leading to obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular disease, cancer.... ect.
                      Yep. A person who is replete nutritionally and not inflamed is going to have a better metabolic rate than someone starving themselves on grains and limiting their fat intake to rancid PUFA-based oils and incidental fat on white meat, as typical on the SAD when trying to lose weight. That being said, a healthy body is also more likely to want to get up and move around - I can't sit still very long. My feet tap, my mind wonders, I get restless...I am able to relax much more clearly once I've kicked my ass at the gym. I'm about to do this now. This all plays a roll. It is always CICO, but this is where the variance comes in.

                      Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                      I've witnessed at least a few occasions when people adopted Paleo, lost the weight and got healthy, then went back to their SAD diet. When they returned to their SAD ways some continued to express the health and energy they found in Paleo for quite some time. In my wife's case I'd say it was over a year before some of her old symptoms started to come back and her weight went up by about 5 lbs. Now she's back to eating like she should again, and responded even quicker in terms of getting healthy than she did the first time around.... hope she sticks with it in recognition that symptoms are a poor indicator of health.
                      Isn't the human body amazing? It can recover from decades of abuse in a few years, or even a few months in some cases. It'll all return again eventually if you go back to your exact old ways, though. I don't understand how anyone can abandon this lifestyle after adopting it though. The food now is so much better, the energy is addicting...I'd be purposely eating crappy food and feeling like crap. I don't get it.

                      Originally posted by Neckhammer View Post
                      So sure CICO works. CO is dictated by quality/quantity of CI and the health of the system in question. See, its easy.
                      Yep. It really is easy. People overcomplicate it. It's as simple as eating real food and moving around. The rest will take care of itself in time. You just have to be patient and realistic.
                      Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

                      Comment


                      • #86
                        Originally posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
                        Isn't the human body amazing? It can recover from decades of abuse in a few years, or even a few months in some cases. It'll all return again eventually if you go back to your exact old ways, though. I don't understand how anyone can abandon this lifestyle after adopting it though. The food now is so much better, the energy is addicting...I'd be purposely eating crappy food and feeling like crap. I don't get it.
                        Hahah. Its a slippery slope. It doesn't happen all at once. A cheat here and a cheat there.... But, if you wanna stay married (as I currently do) then though shalt not badger the hell out of thy wife about her food choices. She's back on track now though.

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X