Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: Fat preferred fuel over carbohydrates - Why? (Biochemically) page 3

  1. #21
    StackingPlates's Avatar
    StackingPlates is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    456
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    What makes you feel that this is a bold statement?
    With all the uncertainties that leading researchers continue to have to this day, how can someone so definitively state that "grains, sugars, legumes, etc" are the real killers? Compound this with the fact that entire civilizations thrive upon these very things.

    Quote Originally Posted by Einz
    Also, the foods he mentioned are clearly not optimal and the statement was not bold at all.
    What makes you think that these things are "clearly not optimal"? These type of statements too frequently and easily get passed off as facts around here...

  2. #22
    magicmerl's Avatar
    magicmerl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    2,903
    StackingPlates, you seem to be spoiling for a fight.

    Why does Choco's couching of his criticism of those foods with "might" turn into a "bold statement" that is used "definitively".

    Please take a chill pill.

  3. #23
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,529
    Quote Originally Posted by StackingPlates View Post
    Your source for this bold statement?
    Certainly not your blog. You won't find a single fact on that rag.

    http://www.marksdailyapple.com/categ...initive-guide/

    Quote Originally Posted by magicmerl View Post
    StackingPlates, you seem to be spoiling for a fight.

    Why does Choco's couching of his criticism of those foods with "might" turn into a "bold statement" that is used "definitively".

    Please take a chill pill.
    Well, it's very simple really. Let's assume for a second that you were God and had all the answers. If you were God and someone asked you to explain your intentions, you'd probably say something like this:

    Quote Originally Posted by God
    How did I get to this point? Well, I ask myself that question all the time. I’ve been involved with health and fitness for close to two decades, and have coached numerous individuals upon request over the years. It was never for money and was normally either a co-worker, family member, or friend who was just looking for some motivation to develop a consistent workout and nutritional plan. Honestly, I really enjoy watching people transform their lifestyle, body composition, diet, and seeing the joy it brings them when they realize what truly being healthy feels like.

    Lately, I’ve really just developed an insane irritation at all the misinformation and horrible training methodology that I’m witnessing at an alarming rate. I’m irritated at doctors who want to prescribe medication instead of a change in lifestyle. Most of all, I’m irritated at people who appear to have just lost their zest for life as evident by the morbid obesity they’ve accumulated. I’ve been picking up more clients, and have even started working with folks that are not local to me for the first time which provides some new, unique, and exciting challenges. This should provide a little insight on the reason for the site, and where my mindset is currently.
    God not only knows everything, but is completely self-righteous and pure, in it only for the good that comes from helping others. Sure, a mere mortal that would claim such a thing that's written above would be universally recognized as a prick, but we're not talking about a mere mortal. We're talking about God, here. That makes it ok.
    Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 06-12-2012 at 08:51 PM.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  4. #24
    pklopp's Avatar
    pklopp is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    London
    Posts
    512
    A little bit of perspective, please.

    The optimal nutritional substrate for the body is the one that is most readily available and enables it to survive. We have been down this reductionist path before and we are seemingly hell bent on making the same mistakes again: fat is the enemy, or maybe protein is the enemy, hang on, it's actually carbohydrate that we should steer clear of.

    As has been mentioned previously, glucose undergoes glycolysis which produces 2 net ATP molecules and 2 pyruvate molecules. If there is no oxygen available at this point, you're done. Pyruvate accumulates, gets converted to lactic acid which is shunted to the liver to undergo gluconeogenesis and that gets you glucose that you can use in glycolysis ... and then you rinse and repeat. This is anaerobic respiration.

    If you have sufficient oxygen, then you can process the pyruvate into Acetyl CoA and feed that into the TCA / Krebs cycle to get about 30 more ATP molecules for your trouble.

    How about free fatty acids? Well, you first have to beta oxidize them to produce Acetyl CoA and then you can run that through the TCA / Krebs cycle, always with the proviso that you have enough oxygen to act as an electron acceptor.

    So, how is fat derived Acetyl CoA different from the glucose derived Acetyl CoA? It isn't. Even if a cell were capable of caring about the source ("preferring one substrate over another"), there is no way it can chemically differentiate them. Further, your body will always strive to have glucose in reserve precisely for those times that insufficient oxygen is available to drive the Krebs cycle. In addition, your body will always have some adipose tissue in reserve for those times that you have plenty of oxygen available, but are subject to a temporary interruption in your external energy supply.

    Is it possible to be happy, healthy, and fit while eating even moderate amounts of carbohydrates? Yes, it is. How about fats and proteins? Yup. Do you need to be judicious about which fats or carbohydrates, or protein sources you decide to eat? Well, duh!

    -PK
    My blog : cogitoergoedo.com

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

  5. #25
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Awwww. PK! There you go being all reasonable and actually knowing what you are talking about and stuff. Way to ruin a perfectly good carb-war, dude.

  6. #26
    yogashmoga's Avatar
    yogashmoga is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    city-o-salt
    Posts
    23
    interesting thread. i've always wondered if eating a high-fat diet plays a role in in limiting non-metabolic acid buffering capabilities...perhaps more plasma bicarbonate? i guess i've assumed that we are limiting our exercise periods above ventilatory threshold for this reason; to spend less time in stressful, anaerobic pathways. is there any merit to these take-home messages i seem to be accumulating?
    this wounded bear is gonna find ALL the answers...health, reveal thyself!!

  7. #27
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,529
    Quote Originally Posted by pklopp View Post
    A little bit of perspective, please.

    The optimal nutritional substrate for the body is the one that is most readily available and enables it to survive. We have been down this reductionist path before and we are seemingly hell bent on making the same mistakes again: fat is the enemy, or maybe protein is the enemy, hang on, it's actually carbohydrate that we should steer clear of.

    As has been mentioned previously, glucose undergoes glycolysis which produces 2 net ATP molecules and 2 pyruvate molecules. If there is no oxygen available at this point, you're done. Pyruvate accumulates, gets converted to lactic acid which is shunted to the liver to undergo gluconeogenesis and that gets you glucose that you can use in glycolysis ... and then you rinse and repeat. This is anaerobic respiration.

    If you have sufficient oxygen, then you can process the pyruvate into Acetyl CoA and feed that into the TCA / Krebs cycle to get about 30 more ATP molecules for your trouble.

    How about free fatty acids? Well, you first have to beta oxidize them to produce Acetyl CoA and then you can run that through the TCA / Krebs cycle, always with the proviso that you have enough oxygen to act as an electron acceptor.

    So, how is fat derived Acetyl CoA different from the glucose derived Acetyl CoA? It isn't. Even if a cell were capable of caring about the source ("preferring one substrate over another"), there is no way it can chemically differentiate them. Further, your body will always strive to have glucose in reserve precisely for those times that insufficient oxygen is available to drive the Krebs cycle. In addition, your body will always have some adipose tissue in reserve for those times that you have plenty of oxygen available, but are subject to a temporary interruption in your external energy supply.

    Is it possible to be happy, healthy, and fit while eating even moderate amounts of carbohydrates? Yes, it is. How about fats and proteins? Yup. Do you need to be judicious about which fats or carbohydrates, or protein sources you decide to eat? Well, duh!

    -PK
    I like this guy. A lot.

    "Preferred fuel" is a marketing term. Your body doesn't care. Just make sure the source is low toxin. Fat, carbs, whatever. If you're eating a high fat diet simply because you like eating bacon, butter and steak in front of CW-minded people to provoke a shocked reaction out of them, reassess your goals. The same thing goes with those scared of fat because of caloric density or some cholesterol-heart disease myth. Listen to your body. It's pretty much Primal Blueprint Principle #1. If you listen hard enough, it'll tell you what you want.
    Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 06-13-2012 at 04:21 PM.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  8. #28
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,127
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Awwww. PK! There you go being all reasonable and actually knowing what you are talking about and stuff. Way to ruin a perfectly good carb-war, dude.
    So annoying isn't it....lets get back to the theoretical debate! Low insulin levels have been shown to increase life span. Carbs produce twice as much insulin as protein per calorie and protein releases glucagon in addition. Hence high fat low carb with the proportionately needed protein is the optimal diet.....DANCE!!!

    BTW you don't actually have to respond to this I'm F'ing with you ...kinda.

  9. #29
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,127
    Quote Originally Posted by StackingPlates View Post
    With all the uncertainties that leading researchers continue to have to this day, how can someone so definitively state that "grains, sugars, legumes, etc" are the real killers? Compound this with the fact that entire civilizations thrive upon these very things.



    What makes you think that these things are "clearly not optimal"? These type of statements too frequently and easily get passed off as facts around here...

    Actually, your quite right. Nothing in science is definitive. Studies may indicate something but they can not definitively state anything. There are a lot of epidemiological research that indicates more sugar and more wheat correlate with reduced health. If you find a civilization where they did not consume these things...upon which the introduction of such IMPROVED health then you truly have something of interest in disputing the claim.

    And I think we all understand that traditional preparation of these items makes a helluva lot of difference in their structure when consumed vs. modern methods with genetically modified product.
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 06-13-2012 at 04:37 PM.

  10. #30
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    PrimalCon New York
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    So annoying isn't it....lets get back to the theoretical debate! Low insulin levels have been shown to increase life span. Carbs produce twice as much insulin as protein per calorie and protein releases glucagon in addition. Hence high fat low carb with the proportionately needed protein is the optimal diet.....DANCE!!!

    BTW you don't actually have to respond to this I'm F'ing with you ...kinda.
    But why does it always devolve to LC/HF vs. LF/HC as if those are the only possible combinations? What about the poor left out and neglected protein?

    When I told people I was dialing back the fat intake to lose weight, everyone jumped to the conclusion that I was replacing it with carbs. Not so. I replaced it with lean protein and watched the pounds drop off.

    Now that I am at maintenance my protein and fat are about equal but I still keep the carbs low. It's optimal *for me*.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •