Printable View
[QUOTE=justyouraveragecavemen;1069342]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.[/QUOTE]
lmao
[QUOTE=Neckhammer;1069317]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 [B][I]only[/I][/B] 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.[/QUOTE]
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 [url=http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/84/13_suppl/E94.full#ref-4]this review.[/url]
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. [B][url=http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC185982/]The insulin hypothesis of obesity[/url] [url=http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/48/2/240.short]is[/url] [url=http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/62/1/19.abstract?ijkey=9223c2f00b559333b3b9283099b8d3bc0ccabad6&keytype2=tf_ipsecsha]not[/url] [url=http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/73/2/253.full]true[/url][url=http://www.journalofanimalscience.org/content/84/13_suppl/E94.full].[/url][/B]
[QUOTE=Knifegill;1068966]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...[/QUOTE]
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.
[QUOTE=Finnegans Wake;1069326]GoRK DINT HAVE NO MICERWAVE, YoU AINT" RILLY PRIMEAL!!!!!![/QUOTE]
I microwaved my white potato this morning. :P
[QUOTE=justyouraveragecavemen;1069342]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.
[/QUOTE]
I think he needs a haircut. The Baywatch look is played.
[QUOTE=Timthetaco;1069364]For someone who claims to read a lot of research, you do bury your head firmly in the sand when it comes to DNL.....[/QUOTE]
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 [B]the way I see it[/B]. 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 [B]you or anyone else[/B] may not arrive at a different conclusion, so please don't take this as an insult to your intelligence or your freedoms ;)
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:
[url=http://thatpaleoguy.com/2012/12/19/calorie-rants-and-ketosis-part-1/]Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 1). « THAT PALEO GUY[/url]
[url=http://thatpaleoguy.com/2012/12/24/calorie-rants-and-ketosis-part-2/]Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 2). « THAT PALEO GUY[/url]
[QUOTE=Neckhammer;1069378]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?
[/QUOTE]
As far as I'm aware, Peter Attia and Gary Taubes believe exactly the same thing, and "the alternative hypothesis" is how Gary refers to his theory on how people get fat. My rant was about his hypothesis. Since you're not familiar with it, I can understand your confusion. Understand, though, that a lot of people transition from low carb (where you hear tons about Gary Taubes and insulin) to paleo, myself included. And those people believe carbohydrates prevent weight loss through the action of insulin.
[QUOTE=sbhikes;1069371]
I think he needs a haircut. The Baywatch look is played.[/QUOTE]
C'mon... it's not like it's a Hoff-mullet. ;)
[QUOTE=cori93437;1069397]C'mon... it's not like it's a Hoff-mullet. ;)[/QUOTE]
It teeters on the edge quite perilously. You have to admit that now that I've pointed out the resemblance it'll be hard not to see him that way.
[QUOTE=sbhikes;1069389]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:
[url=http://thatpaleoguy.com/2012/12/19/calorie-rants-and-ketosis-part-1/]Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 1). « THAT PALEO GUY[/url]
[url=http://thatpaleoguy.com/2012/12/24/calorie-rants-and-ketosis-part-2/]Calorie Rants and Ketosis (part 2). « THAT PALEO GUY[/url][/QUOTE]
Exactly.
There are lots of different tools in my lovely Craftsman tool chest.
One single tool isn't the best for every job.
Some jobs need a wrench.
Some jobs a screwdriver.
Some jobs an Allen key.
It's really OK that people get to chose the tool that best suits the job they are trying to accomplish for their own needs.
Not one kind or the other kind, but any of the tools in that chest.
That awesome tool chest is the Primal/Paleo realm of eating.
Why is this such a controversy? :confused:
[QUOTE=sbhikes;1069403]It teeters on the edge quite perilously. You have to admit that now that I've pointed out the resemblance it'll be hard not to see him that way.[/QUOTE]
Yeah... I chuckled.
That pic if him running on the beach is forever morphed into a Hoff parody now. LOL