Aren't we ALL fat-burners and sugar-burners? What's the difference? page 4

[sbhikes]

I suppose it is the degree of carb tolerance, even in primative groups there are some that get 90% of their calories from dense carbs at times, I wonder whether they would fare as well on a ketogenic diet?

I'm looking forward to when the AHS talks are public. There was something about "acellular" carbohydrate. I have a friend who found his own way to a completely different diet that ONLY eliminates acellular carbohydrate and nothing more. He and his wife have experienced every single positive thing that is described by anyone who does the paleo or primal diet.

[Omni]

Some representing numbers for how much fat vs carb vs lactate one may burn in different exercise states is here The interplay of exercise and ketosis

I stumbled on this site a while back when I was looking at lactate, need to re read though.
The books are being rewritten on Lactate, for a long time it has been considered a necessary evil in high intensity exercise, but recently I read some stuff that indicated lactate was a key part of our day to day metabolism, even at rest.
Some sources indicated it was actually the prefered fuel for the heart, brain and some other tissues, regarding the brain stuff search "George Brooks brain damage recovery", or similar, he has been using a treatment protocol of flooding the brain of accident victims with lactate and getting better recovery results.
Apparantly the skeletal muscle produces a relatively constant supply of lactate under all conditions.
The other key factor to consider is the abscence of Mitochondria in mature Red Blood cells (RBC), this means they have no capability of aerobic respiration and the only way they can get their energy is via the Pyruvate/Lactate pathway and hence are net Lactate producers, all day every day.
So when we talk about essential glucose requirements, it is not only the 90g/day or so required to fuel the brain, the RBC's also have an essential requirement for glucose and there may be other tissues as well that we are not aware of, so as always, the plot thickens.

[Omni]

I'm looking forward to when the AHS talks are public. There was something about "acellular" carbohydrate. I have a friend who found his own way to a completely different diet that ONLY eliminates acellular carbohydrate and nothing more. He and his wife have experienced every single positive thing that is described by anyone who does the paleo or primal diet.

Just did a quick search, "acellular carbohydrates", 2nd listing, here's conclusion from a paper on it, haven't read the entire thing, but from a brief look what they seem to be indicating is seeds are the primary "acellular" culprit, so in order of severity - grains, legumes then other seeds, sounds like another description of Paleo/Primal with dairy.

Conclusion
The increased storage life and convenience of some of our oldest agricultural products may come with a hitherto unrecognized metabolic cost. The foods eaten by hunter-gatherers, non-cereal horticulturalists, and those following a modern Paleolithic or “primal” diet are sharply delineated from modern foods by their lower carbohydrate densities. Consumption of exclusively low-density carbohydrates is suggested to produce a less inflammatory GI microbiota, and may explain the apparent absence of overweight and metabolic disease in two of these groups, and the promising early data from the third. This hypothesis may also explain (1) why obesity incidence scales with refined food intake, but has such confusing correlatory patterns with macronutrients; (2) why calorie-controlled diets of Westernized foods require a perpetual fight with homeostatic correction mechanisms; (3) the link between periodontal disease and systemic atherosclerotic disease and obesity; (4) why the benefits of a diet of fruit and vegetables have not been replicated by supplements of the constituent antioxidants, vitamins, minerals, and fiber alongside a Western diet; (5) why low-carbohydrate diets produce ad libitum weight loss, but low-fat diets do not; and (6) the relative resistance of European people to obesity and diabetes from Westernized diets.
We should not settle for the meager improvements attainable from the consensus dietary advice when it is already clear that so much more might be achieved. Our sights should be set high, to see how close we can move levels of industrialized metabolic health toward those enjoyed by non-Westernized populations. While many will resist making dietary changes of such magnitude, official advice must nonetheless point in the correct direction, allowing individuals to make informed decisions.
The social and financial burden of the epidemic of obesity and metabolic syndrome threatens the long-term viability of our health-care systems and perniciously undermines the other benefits of modern civilization, including redirection of scarce financial resources. If this dietary pattern is confirmed to work, practical policy solutions must be sought. Some grain cultivars may be found to produce less inflammation, sprouting techniques may be found to be of benefit, or grain production may be replaced with root-vegetable cultivation where practical. Over time, the interplay between market forces, attainable agricultural yields, and the practicalities of food-distribution networks may allow shifting demand from a newly informed populace to reshape global agribusiness.
A dietary pattern with carbohydrates exclusively from cellular low-density sources may remove the root cause of a range of our most prevalent diseases. The potential savings in health-care costs should be borne in mind, and the hypothesis tested.

[cantare]

I'm looking forward to when the AHS talks are public. There was something about "acellular" carbohydrate. I have a friend who found his own way to a completely different diet that ONLY eliminates acellular carbohydrate and nothing more. He and his wife have experienced every single positive thing that is described by anyone who does the paleo or primal diet.

Do you know who gave this particular talk? Re: cellular carbs (baby?) vs acellular carbs (bathwater?)--it's been linked here before, but you might be interested in this recent article by Ian Spreadbury...ETA, of which Omni just posted part of the discussion.

[Omni]

Just found this as one of the references in the study, couldn't resist, just loved the title.

Cafeteria diet is a robust model of ... [Obesity (Silver Spring). 2011] - PubMed - NCBI

[magicmerl]

I'm looking forward to when the AHS talks are public. There was something about "acellular" carbohydrate. I have a friend who found his own way to a completely different diet that ONLY eliminates acellular carbohydrate and nothing more. He and his wife have experienced every single positive thing that is described by anyone who does the paleo or primal diet.

Interesting.

[BestBetter]

So regarding insulin sensitivity, its like turning a switch on, being the difference between a light press with your finger or hitting it with a hammer, if you keep using a hammer (high sugar SAD diet) to turn it on, eventually you will break the switch and T2 diabetes steps in.

What a great analogy, I love this visual!

note though I do not think continuous snacking is a good idea as our intestinal tract also needs downtime for repairs

I agree with this, which is why the idea of IF really appeals to me. Unfortunately, I discovered that eating really huge meals is a trigger for my IBS. So when I was fasting for 24 hours with one gigantic meal a day, I often ended up with terrible abdominal pain. Even eating 2 big meals per day was too much for my system to deal with. I wasn't able to get my IBS under control until I went back to several smaller meals throughout the day (in addition to some Fiber Menace help). Because I still think the downtime for the digestive system is a good thing, I try to keep these small meals within a 10-12 hour window. This got me thinking:

Is IF valuable if it takes the form of several smaller meals within a certain window, rather than 2 larger meals in the same window? Is having the same fasting window 12-14 hours) the most important aspect of IF in terms of repair and blood sugar/insuin control? If so, then couldn't a 'sugar-burner' i.e. someone eating a high carb diet' theoretically prevent insulin resistance by having a daily fasting period of 14+ hours?

[Leida]

I am not big on theory, but there are two things I have noticed:
-below a certain weight point I lose the ability to fast >12 hrs without binging afterwards, and I feel much better if I do not IF. Above a certain weight I can go for 16-20 hrs, no problems.
-when I stick with fats, proteins and vegetables, but no fruit my hunger goes down dramatically, I get energetic, my interval between needing meals increases from 4 hrs to up to 7 hrs and I lose weight easily. However, I become depressed after a few days. Once I add fruit on a daily basis, I experience a spike in appetite and my weight goes up, interval between needing meals goes down.
-while I do not carve candy, chocolate, bread, grains, potatoes, I continue to crave fruit.

Go figure.

[Omni]

I agree with this, which is why the idea of IF really appeals to me. Unfortunately, I discovered that eating really huge meals is a trigger for my IBS. So when I was fasting for 24 hours with one gigantic meal a day, I often ended up with terrible abdominal pain. Even eating 2 big meals per day was too much for my system to deal with. I wasn't able to get my IBS under control until I went back to several smaller meals throughout the day (in addition to some Fiber Menace help). Because I still think the downtime for the digestive system is a good thing, I try to keep these small meals within a 10-12 hour window. This got me thinking:

Is IF valuable if it takes the form of several smaller meals within a certain window, rather than 2 larger meals in the same window? Is having the same fasting window 12-14 hours) the most important aspect of IF in terms of repair and blood sugar/insuin control? If so, then couldn't a 'sugar-burner' i.e. someone eating a high carb diet' theoretically prevent insulin resistance by having a daily fasting period of 14+ hours?

Just did a search to confirm, you have been diagnosed with MS as well, yes?
So I imagine your order of priority, as in do no harm, would be MS, IBS and then weight.
The MS side is quite difficult, I spend a little bit of time on an MS forum as well, and it seems to me the bulk of the diet protocols promoted by individuals who cured their MS through diet are generally Paleo/Primal, but often with a lean away from saturated fats, so they are often in the pescetarian style. I suspect this may be the influence of the Swank diet, which was primarily based on reducing intake of saturated fats and his was the only long term trial & follow up to show some degree of verifiable data.
But from what I have read there is a lot of conflicting Hypothesis on the etiology of MS, my suspicion is that Dairy plays a significant role in the expression of MS, but not necesarily a causal factor, it is more than likely that as with all autoimmune diseases there is a combination of factors, the first of them being epigenetics, what your mother was doing when you were just a wee little foetus. So like your user name, the best bet is an overall healthy diet base and you are probably in the right ballpark, I imagine you will most likely have checked vitamin D as this seems to be a big player there.
Regarding the IBS & IF, tough balance there to keep a light load in the intestinal tract, but trying to extend some fasting period. From what I have been reading the morning is the major clean up time for the digestive system, I have been trying to gather some data on the circadian rhythems and there is some indications that morning is the tail end of a repair cycle, so leaving digestive tract empty may allow all energy to be focussed on repair, also our bodies do not ramp up metabolism, as expressed by basal body temp, until after 10am after melatonin levels have fallen. There was one study I read regarding mice & skin cancer, where they exposed them to UV at different times of their circadian rhythems and found there was major difference in incidence of cancer. If exposed during DNA repair cycle, then cancer incidence was low, if exposed during replication cycle then incidence was high, this primarily relates to sun exposure for vitamin D, which for humans would translate to morning sun to noon being a much safer time to get your Vitamin D than the mid to late afternoon and they have started looking at this effect in cancer treatment as to what time of day is chemo going to be most effective as there have been some anecdotal reports coming out that seem to confirm this.
How does all this relate to diet?
For me I think everything seems to point to morning fasting and sun exposure to early afternoon, being the most beneficial approach as indications are this is when our bodies are in clean up & DNA repair phase. The bulk of our energy requirements & building blocks are in the afternoon when body goes into DNA replication, so I imagine this is the time we would take shelter and start consuming food to support the body building process. I am still on the look out for more info on body cycles, but it is quite scant.
So in a very long winded way I think you can definately get some IF benefits by just holding back food in the morning, and maybe this is the maximum point for some anyway and going longer may be less beneficial, no one really knows. I think most would agree that there is a difference between male & female responses to IF and this should not be ignored, generally women seem to be more comfortable in the 16/8 range. I think you will see most of the benefits with your proposal of a 10-12hour feeding window and it will not make much difference how you spread your meals out in that time even if you just nibbled a bit every 30 min. Doing the smaller meals will definately help with keeping Insulin at a lower average level particularly if you are in the higher carb end.

[Omni]

I am not big on theory, but there are two things I have noticed:
-below a certain weight point I lose the ability to fast >12 hrs without binging afterwards, and I feel much better if I do not IF. Above a certain weight I can go for 16-20 hrs, no problems.

Regarding the "certain weight" how close is that to what you see as your ideal and can you be comfortable physically/emotionally in that range? I wonder if that is what the whole weight plateau thing is about our bodies telling us this is where I want to be weight wise until you attend to other lifestyle or diet factors, is this the equilibrium point and is this the healthiest place?

-when I stick with fats, proteins and vegetables, but no fruit my hunger goes down dramatically, I get energetic, my interval between needing meals increases from 4 hrs to up to 7 hrs and I lose weight easily. However, I become depressed after a few days. Once I add fruit on a daily basis, I experience a spike in appetite and my weight goes up, interval between needing meals goes down.

The depressed part, I imagine this may be transitioning into a more ketogenic state as glycogen stores would be getting to the lower end, but the increase in apetite with fruit may be suggesting that insulin sensitivity is still less than optimal and consuming greater carbs may be powering up the rollercoaster a bit. It may be you just need more time to stabilise Insulin levels, personally I think for most it would take atleast a few years to regain their normal range of Insulin sensitivity.

-while I do not carve candy, chocolate, bread, grains, potatoes, I continue to crave fruit.

For me, I do also like my fruit, but used to consume plenty of chocolate/bread/sweets etc. in the past, I think that it is a psychological effect, your body is calling for sugar, your brain deep down has reset the paramaters of what is not allowed, so between body & brain they agree to express a craving for sugar in the form of fruit. That's my theory.
I said to my partner the other night, I was really bad, just had a bowl of fruit, nuts & yoghurt, how twisted is that, in the past I would have been proud of myself for not demolishing the entire chocolate box.