Good Calories. Bad Calories
My wife found the book Good Calories. Bad Calories. by Gary Taubes at the local library. Mr Taubes did 7 years of research for the book and supports the Paleo diet. The bibliography is 66 pages in itself. I have not read the entire book, she has, but what I have read appears to be a more sicentific study in nutrition than the conventional wisdom, food pymirid types that we have all been taught. It is not a bad read and it does provide lots of evidence, in the form of medical papers/research, to support his conclusions. If you need to convince someone who is on the fence about the Paleo diet, this may be the information you need.
Originally Posted by OneDeltaTenTango
I think Taubes did an excellent job in GC/BC of deconstructing the problems with conventional wisdom's view of obesity. I also think he messed up by attaching himself to the insulin resistance theory and now he's getting unnecessary ridiculed for it. I think it is a shame what is happening in the Paleo world right now with all the drama. We have all these really intelligent people who have worked hard and have the story 80% right and instead of trying to get the other 20% figured out lets just bash each other. Its frustrating because not only is it turning people away from paleo the other 20% is going to have to be figured out before paleo will go mainstream and that is what is going to really change peoples lives.
Originally Posted by CMHFFEMT
Though actually, what I liked best about GCBC was the first half (regarding heart disease mainly).
My main concern had to do with CW and my diabetes. His book helped me feel better about the switch to Paleo concerning blood sugar, blood pressure, and cholesterol. Still not sure I buy it all, but his logic seems sound to me.
"...the mobilization of fat from adipose tissue is inhibited by numerous stimuli. The most significant inhibition is that exerted upon adenylate cyclase by insulin."
Originally Posted by CMHFFEMT
Obesity is only one expression of insulin resistance. Taubes has been more right than most. Even Mark Sisson himself have stuck to talking about insulin sensitivity.
Two basic filters:
Originally Posted by JimN
- Burning fat is healthy.
- Being sensitive to the signaling of insulin is healthy.
Last edited by js290; 12-23-2011 at 08:06 PM.
He's one interesting data point, but is not in the least comprehensive.
For instance, I would seem to contradict his entire theory: I was overweight, lost weight on LC primal, then added back in starches and got leaner. *For me* it seems to simply be a matter of avoiding gluten, xfructose and O6 oils. My situation may not be typical(though at 30 I'm not sure I qualify as young anymore, metabolically speaking) but it would certainly seem to disprove the black and white view of carbs being all that matters. For that matter, Zero Carb with O6 oils will fatten me up much faster than High Carb without them, or even HC with a lots of sugar.
At the same time, the person who went primal with me is very sensitive to carbs.
These things are complex when you are dealing with a population of 6 billion.
puzzle pieces... so nice when they all fit together, so nice that so many are sharing the pieces with us!