Page 6 of 81 FirstFirst ... 456781656 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 803

Thread: Why does Danny Roddy recommend sugar to reduce stress/estrogen? page 6

  1. #51
    dannyroddy's Avatar
    dannyroddy is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    93
    @paleobird,

    Believing that there are absolutes in health is likely to give one tunnel vision.

    The data can be manipulated to fit literally any dietary paradigm, which is why I find physiology texts to be more helpful.

    Keep in mind that I'm not trying to convince you of anything.

    Unsaturated body fat: Whole Health Source: Seed Oils and Body Fatness-- A Problematic Revisit

    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    Again asserting that sugar reduces stress=/=proving it.
    I've literally listed several mechanisms in each post about this... I don't know what to say.

  2. #52
    cori93437's Avatar
    cori93437 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    central FL
    Posts
    6,715
    In order to have weight loss fats have to be released into serum and used.
    It is just a fact of the process.
    Basically if you aren't putting food in your mouth, or in the short period after that where the body deals with breaking things down and shuffling them where it wants them... cells are always moving stuff in and out and around, they do not sit idle with a 'on hold' sigh out front... including those pesky fat cells.

    Other studies have indicated that even for people with large fat deposits, fat storage is not so static as you want to claim. It is constantly shifting fat and goodies in and out of the cells. They estimated that there is no fat cell storage anywhere in the body that has any contents more than 6months to 1 year old. Not over two years. So avoiding PUFAs would be beneficial long before you estimate they would.

    When I used to eat a diet high in sugars/carbs as per CW... I had those "low blood sugar attacks" frequently.
    Those low blood sugar attacks certainly felt stressful.
    I haven't had one in a LONG time, like since I stopped following that nonsense.
    Feeling perfectly fine even if I don't get to stop and have a healthy meal, or if I need to fast for doctors appointments is much less stressing.

    Also... back to high sugar diets being associated with a 33% increase in CHD.
    Sugar has been linked heavily to inflammation.
    I don't understand adding more inflammation to the scenario of a person who already has an issue with it, as in "during stress... unsaturated fats released"
    I'm just not sure pouring gas on a fire is the answer...

    Maybe conceding that for the next 6months to 1year you have to use better oils and deal with your body going through the natural process of getting rid of the crap that you already put in it is just as good.
    Last edited by cori93437; 07-05-2012 at 10:54 AM.
    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
    ~Friedrich Nietzsche
    And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.


  3. #53
    Apex Predator's Avatar
    Apex Predator is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,354
    Quote Originally Posted by dannyroddy View Post
    @paleobird, consider this: unless one has been meticulously avoiding PUFA for several years, has a very healthy thyroid, and a resilient liver, they are likely to have an abundance of unsaturated fats in their tissue.

    During stress (low blood sugar, low glycogen), these unsaturated fats are released into the serum, causing inflammation and intensifying stress.

    Sugar intake and promoting the storage of glycogen (fructose, thyroid) are very important factors in reducing stress.

    You can see how running on fatty acids is problematic (reducing blood sugar and glycogen stores).
    Ah, is this the explanation behind the studies that link inflammation to LC, such as

    Good Science/Bad Science: Contrasting Papers On Dietary Compositon In JAMA And BMJ - Forbes (Yes, everyone, I'm sure there are other studies proving the opposite, I'm interested in the mechanism, not re-fighting the carb wars over again.)

    Also, thanks for continuing to contribute politely to this forum. I think the hostile tones you received were quite unwarranted. Usually this forum is polite to those with other views when the new member is also polite(I've seen vegans treated much more politely when being respectful). I'm not sure why there was this aberration, other than the carb issue making some people see red.

  4. #54
    dannyroddy's Avatar
    dannyroddy is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    93
    @Everyone,

    Apex brings up a good point.

    I'm not pro-carb, or anti-carb, I'm anti-STRESS.

    The physiology of stress is not a mystery and is well understood.

    @cori93437

    We continuously burn fats, even when using sugar as a main source of fuel, in a process known as beta oxidation.

  5. #55
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Everyone has an opinion on health and nutrition. Here is mine. Physiology texts are great for understanding mechanisms. I dont believe we can micromanage those mechanisms based on our own presumptions as to what the "optimal" ranges are. This is where recognizing that just observing healthy humans and mimicking their eating patterns comes in. Follow the examples provided by traditional societies of hunter gatherers. That is the paradigm I follow. I rely more heavily on innate intelligence than on our own "current knowledge". If I eat in accordance with what is/has been used as sustenance by healthy, wild humans then we have the building blocks of health and homeostasis. Add a bunch of crap in, or severe levels/disproportionate amounts of things not normally found at those levels and you have disease.

    Argue about glucose, fructose, sugar, what does or does not effect catecholamines and cortisol all you want, but if it is not have a precedence in the above paradigm I'm just not interested in the debate.

  6. #56
    dannyroddy's Avatar
    dannyroddy is offline Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    I dont believe we can micromanage those mechanisms based on our own presumptions as to what the "optimal" ranges are.
    @Neckhammer,

    I work with people all the time how manipulate these numbers with dietary tweaks.

    I don't suggest anyone blindly follow some "optimal diet", but rather they let self-diagnostics (pulse, body temperature, susceptibility to stress, mood/tendency towards depression) and lab work (whole blood serotonin, TSH, T3, T4, rT3, prolactin, lactic acid, aldosterone, etc.) guide the show.

    This strategy, along with understanding that health problems are the result of a defect in energy metabolism, allows for simple dietary and sometimes pharmaceutical intervention (thyroid).

  7. #57
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    I'm not being hostile or "seeing red", Apex. What I'm seeing is BS and I'm calling it out for what it is. It needs to be said before someone with severe metabolic problems (a large part of the newbie readership on MDA) puts themselves into a diabetic coma by following this Ray Peat off the edge of a cliff.

    Danny, you say you are anti-stress. Cool. But you have yet to address the differences in the metabolisms of a sugar burner and a fat adapted person. I agree that lack of sugar is very stressful to a sugar burner. Those of us who are fat adapted are burning ketones and glucose as the need arises with no stress at all.

    The solution is not to eat more sugar. The solution is to not be a sugar burner.

  8. #58
    Apex Predator's Avatar
    Apex Predator is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,354
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    I'm not being hostile or "seeing red", Apex. What I'm seeing is BS and I'm calling it out for what it is. It needs to be said before someone with severe metabolic problems (a large part of the newbie readership on MDA) puts themselves into a diabetic coma by following this Ray Peat off the edge of a cliff.

    Danny, you say you are anti-stress. Cool. But you have yet to address the differences in the metabolisms of a sugar burner and a fat adapted person. I agree that lack of sugar is very stressful to a sugar burner. Those of us who are fat adapted are burning ketones and glucose as the need arises with no stress at all.

    The solution is not to eat more sugar. The solution is to not be a sugar burner.
    I think this is a helpful discussion. He's speaking to the type of symptoms that more than a few of us have had when we went VLC. I would describe the end of my ketogenic experience as stressful on my mind and body to be sure. I used starches to exit that state, but it very well may be sugar/fructose may be more efficient in that, and that is an excellent thing to know. Plenty of people on MDA have recovered from negative long term VLC experiences by eating fruit.

    How exactly is responding to polite opinions(after being attacked to some degree) with "Sorry, dude, you and your guru Ray are full of it." not hostile? He's not spamming, trolling or committing any other offense, and was contributing to the knowledge of the forum in general. Having a different opinion, expressing it politely, and explaining it is the lifeblood of this forum. We need threads like this a lot more than 99% of what's posted here.

  9. #59
    joe2.0's Avatar
    joe2.0 is offline Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    71
    Danny-like many here, I have researched and researched metabolic issues and by far, (not even remotely close) folk eating low carb and high fat have the best success. I just don't see a lot of diabetics having real success with Peat's or Barnard's approach. I further have seen where the success they claim to have is from folk with A1C's of 6.8, 6.9-as in what the ADA incorrectly calls good control. For every 1 ice cream eating diabetic following Peat that is "controlling" their disease, their are dozens doing it via LCHF.

    The ADA is absolutely criminal in their diet recommendations to diabetics and the failure rate and complication rate of diabetics are proof to that. You surely aren't arguing with their own statistics are you? Sure there are other factors, non compliance, current progression, fitness and other lifestyle issues, but it starts with diet. Your blog is continuing with their bad advice and based on theory that is not balanced with the overwhelming experience of real world diabetics. It sounds nice and trust me, most diabetics would love to be able to have that ice cream that Peat says is ok and the sugar that you say is good, but what seems like good science to you has bad and often catostrophic results in practice.

  10. #60
    cori93437's Avatar
    cori93437 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    central FL
    Posts
    6,715
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    I'm still confused as to why/how an intake of significantly more sugar specifically, which is linked in many studies to greatly increasing inflammation levels, would help an already stressful/inflammatory situation due to PUFAs.
    “You have your way. I have my way. As for the right way, the correct way, and the only way, it does not exist.”
    ~Friedrich Nietzsche
    And that's why I'm here eating HFLC Primal/Paleo.


Page 6 of 81 FirstFirst ... 456781656 ... LastLast

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
  •