[QUOTE=sunsis;1045827]I'm not sure if anyone has posted this link yet but there actually has been a total starvation diet done by doctors:
[URL="http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=1161598#References"]JAMA Network | JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association | Prolonged Starvation as Treatment for Severe Obesity[/URL][/QUOTE]
Interesting! I think the diet that I propose will avoid some of the health issues they got on a pure starvation diet or waterfast. Also, see what I wrote to [B]Paleo-bunny[/B]...
[QUOTE=Gorbag;1045851]Did you see the diet I proposed in the OP? Protein equivalent to 3 canned tuna in water, or whatever lean protein that gives around 100 – 120 gram of protein, more than most people get on a typical CW diet! Also, large amounts of stored bodyfat are protein sparing, so no need to fear excessive muscle loss when you have enough bodyfat to lose. The diet also prescribes EFA and fibrous vegetables ad libitum, multivitamins and a cube of broth per day, so this is not a strict starvation diet or waterfast, but a modified fast, with sufficient protein…
Yep, obviously on an ultra-low-carb ultra-low-cal diet most protein is squandered on gluconeogenesis. Hence muscle-wasting is inevitable.
That's OFF topic for the thread, we are only dealing with metabolic issues related to the one year experiment here, what happens whithin the experiment and the finishing result after one year...[/QUOTE]
Well you didn't state that. Ongoing health outcomes matter to anyone who isn't a facist.
I don't see the point of your "thought experiment". Weight is irrelevant without health. I also think your tone and phrasing make you sound like a douche.
With that said however...
Vitamins are important and relevant as they affect the ongoing chemical reactions, and metabolism is just a set of chemical reactions. Vitamins will affect how the body uses the protein, fat etc available to it.
Also, as you are finding with this thread, people do not stick to your rules. I would expect dominant individuals within the camp to take extra food, others to trade food for favours, etc etc. That would make your pointless results even more pointless.
If you are really curious I suggest swotting up on basic anatomy/physiology/biochemistry and doing some actual thinking with a bit of actual science.
[quote]Also, as you are finding with this thread, people do not stick to your rules. I would expect dominant individuals within the camp to take extra food, others to trade food for favours, etc etc. That would make your pointless results even more pointless.[/quote]
I suggest looking up quelsen and reading some of his stuff. He made me rethink any assumptions I had about the morbidly obese. I wish he posted more. The stuff he knows is incredible.
[QUOTE=sbhikes;1045972]I suggest looking up quelsen and reading some of his stuff. He made me rethink any assumptions I had about the morbidly obese. I wish he posted more. The stuff he knows is incredible.[/QUOTE]
Agreed. He comes across as a very strong character.
[QUOTE=paleo-bunny;1045902] Yep, obviously on an ultra-low-carb ultra-low-cal diet most protein is squandered on gluconeogenesis. Hence muscle-wasting is inevitable.[/QUOTE]
Why? If the body uses dietary protein for gluconeogenesis, then it will recycle it's own amino-acids. I don't think all dietary protein will go to gluconeogenesis either, since the body will prefer to use fat and there will be no hard physical activities involved. And no big deal if some lean mass are lost either, that happens on most diets anyway...
[QUOTE=paleo-bunny;1045902]Well you didn't state that. Ongoing health outcomes matter to anyone who isn't a facist.[/QUOTE]
Like many other posters here you don't seem to distinguish between a hypothetical "thought-experiment" and what would be done in real life! Those participants are NOT real persons, so we do not have to make a plan for what is going to happen after either - that’s the good thing by dealing with this on a purely theoretical level only! But if you want to make that a topic in another ad-hoc thread, please be my guest.
And you and others can spare me any fascist insinuations, you are only showing your own immature childishness by doing so...
[QUOTE=NorthernMonkeyGirl;1045945] I don't see the point of your "thought experiment". Weight is irrelevant without health. I also think your tone and phrasing make you sound like a douche.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, whatever, blah, blah...
Also, as you are finding with this thread, people do not stick to your rules. I would expect dominant individuals within the camp to take extra food, others to trade food for favours, etc etc.
And become cannibals and all that? Yeah, you are not the first on this thread to insinuate that obese people will not behave civilized! What do you think happened in similar controlled real life experiments on more extreme fasting then? Don't let your morbid fantasy overshadow clear thinking, just saying...
If you consume higher amounts of protein (at least as a percentage of your diet), then you still have plenty of protein for both gluconeogenesis AND muscle building/sparing. Whether this is optimal or not is another debate for another time.
I still believe personally, that ketosis spares muscle mass. The transition over to ketosis when the body burns sugars preferentially to fat, even though you are consuming extremely low carb levels might cause you to lose a little muscle mass to gluconeogenesis, but this is easily recovered with some solid weightlifting once the transition is complete.
[QUOTE=Gorbag;1045750]Maybe, but why do you think so? The obese Scotsman as referenced by Mark Sisson seem to have done well?
No! Vitamins to my knowledge does not have energy or calories, but maybe you know something that I don't? The energy from a energy-drink comes from the sugars and the B-vitamins function as a [I]catalyst[/I] only, so I don’t get your point at all!
OK, the biggest coffee and green tea drinkers may[I] possible[/I] lose a few pounds more weight throughout the year, so for the sake of the experiment we may use descaffinated coffe and tea instead, just to make everything the same.
Yes, there will be som individual differences as I also wrote to[B] otzi[/B], but I don't think those will overshadow that every participant will lose huge amounts of weight. That's what I believe anyway.
And, I never used the word "concentration camp" in my OP! I said let’s put armed guards to prevent food to be smuggled in. It was only meant to illustrate a controlled environment, but if this is still an thorn in the eye of everybody, let’s put the thought-experiment to a beautiful paradise island instead, with all the facilities, and medical staff necessary. The main point is only that only the prescribed diet will be an issue in the experiment and no other “secret” food! No caretaker or other staff creating a black-marked kitchen inside the camp etc…[/QUOTE]
I think so because that is how every experiment goes. You have the average....the ones that do not do well....and the ones that do exceedingly well. There are obviously individual factors at play based on hormonal and metabolic health prior to the experiment and in response to the experiment. Yours is a very stressful enviroment for almost an entire year. I expect a lot of problems due to that.
As to the vitamins...the point was micronutrients are an important factor in health of the organism. They may not contain a caloric load, but our bodies are NOT calorometers. We are biological entities and changes in micronutrient composition will change our metabolic and hormonal functions.
Actually changing to decaf still presents issues. Decaf is a toxic substance IMO. But, thats beside the point of your little project I suppose.
Will everyone lose weight? Sure should. That has never been the real question though has it? Who wants to lose weight at the expense of health and quality of life? And given there is ample evidence on how to lose weight while retaining almost all your lean mass why would you chose another way?
The ultimite goal has always been to make weight loss less dependant on will power by working with our genes rather than against them. This equates to providing our bodies with the BOTH the micronutrients and macro calories to optimize our hormonal system. Fixing that system is paramount to achieving [B]healthy[/B]
weight loss that is sustainable.
If I haven't stuck to your rules....well too bad. You can't decide to confine peoples responses just because you wish to simplify an exceedingly complicated issue.