Height: 5'4" (1.62 m)
Starting weight (09/2009): 200 lb (90.6 kg)
No longer overweight (08/2010): 145 lb (65.6 kg)
Current weight (01/2012): 127 lb (57.5 kg)
I can't help but think that ol' Matt just ate too much meat and not enough fat. That's what he said to Jimmy Moore; essentially he just ate a lot of meat. We have an example of a carnivorous society but they're doing 25% protein and 75% fat . Clearly no carbs isn't optimal and even 50g of carbs indefinitely without some sort of a periodic spike and refeed is less than desirable but I'm skeptical that it needs to be all that common to avoid any sort of long-term detriments. And also skeptical of how bad those detriments really are with sufficient fat.
Stabbing conventional wisdom in its face.
Anyone who wants to talk nutrition should PM me!
This topic is of great interest to me, and this article is the third place I've read that eating low carb as a lifestyle will cause long term elevated adrenaline levels which will over time negatively effect the adrenal glands. THe first place I read it was Diana Schwarzbein (endocrinologist and she said that eating too low of carbs over time will burn out the adrenals and "destroy the metabolism"), the second place was the moderator of "Dearthyroid" blog (endocrinologist who talked about the need to balance adrenals and thyroid because of an inverse relationship between their output, so high adrenaline leading to reduced thyroid output), and the third place was this last article posted by Mirrorball.
People may want to cast off these opinions as old school/conventional wisdom but I think that endos who form opinions based on personal observation of their patients are worth listening to. Personally, I am going to try carb cycling with higher carb intake on workout days and low to moderate carb PB on non-workout days. I stopped losing weight on daily 50gm carb PB so I have nothing to lose. I'll report back on how it goes.
@ Razzzwell: Thanks, will be checking out your blog
Well, the sugar rush and crash is a well documented (even by CW) occurence, weather we want to believe it or not, BUT actualy is reduced if that sugar is accompanied by protien / fat, which in most people helps regulate the effect (this from a practicing diabetes educator)
My wife, who is diabetic, can eat an orange (pure sugar) and have a sugar spike that clearly illustrates this effect, but a Snickers bar (gasp) does not, although it does other bad things to her, now that she's gotten fairly Primal. This is not anecdotal but verified via blood glucose monitoring, and the same thing happens to non diabetics, except they don't need to inject insulin to bring the sugar back down. the body does it, and overdoes it,because the spike is so huge, which causes low sugar, and sugar cravings in healthy people. Bread does the same thing.
The reason starches get a bad rap, even primal ones, is that they're STILL a lot of calories in a small package. Take a baked potato off your plate and you can replace it with a at TON of broccoli, Spinache, etc, so cutting back on starches also cuts back on calories automaticaly.
I've not read GCBC, but I have seen the video where he comes out with 'exercise makes you fat'. The whole idea was that, since we used to say about hard work that you 'worked up an appetite', exercise would cause you to 'work up an appetite' and you would then overeat.
Sorry, but that hypothesis is a load of crap. Exercise is good for you, and healthy, as long as it's not overdone. This one idea turned me off so bad I didn't listen to the rest of the vid.
Carbs, for most people, aren't bad. Veggies, even my beloved broccoli and spinache, are carbs. I've heard so many folks say they don't eat carbs and then discuss the veggies they eat, it's sorta funny.
Even Tuabes, in the vid I saw, is dissing carbs, then talks veggies. Realy? You lump carbs together as 'bad' then go back and say 'veggies good' and I'm supposed to take you seriously? Someone who has educated themselves enough to write a book on nutrition should know better.
I'm not old, I'm Vintage!