Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 38 of 38

Thread: Theory of Obesity/Metabolic Syndrome and its treatment page 4

  1. #31
    TheyCallMeLazarus's Avatar
    TheyCallMeLazarus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
    Posts
    1,031
    ^^^^ Nice....like I tell my front desk: Studies have shown I am only 63% as dumb as I look
    "Man is born free.....but everywhere he is in chains."

  2. #32
    magicmerl's Avatar
    magicmerl is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    3,219
    Quote Originally Posted by TheyCallMeLazarus View Post
    ^^^^ Nice....like I tell my front desk: Studies have shown I am only 63% as dumb as I look
    Aw, you're not as green as you are cabbage looking.
    Disclaimer: I eat 'meat and vegetables' ala Primal, although I don't agree with the carb curve. I like Perfect Health Diet and WAPF Lactofermentation a lot.

    Griff's cholesterol primer
    5,000 Cal Fat <> 5,000 Cal Carbs
    Winterbike: What I eat every day is what other people eat to treat themselves.
    TQP: I find for me that nutrition is much more important than what I do in the gym.
    bloodorchid is always right

  3. #33
    J. Stanton's Avatar
    J. Stanton is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    192
    Quote Originally Posted by TheyCallMeLazarus
    The human body is masterful at processing glucose, as it is the most energy dense, preferred fuel of every cell in the body. It yields 36 ATP per cycle of glycolysis, vs I believe 4 ATP for both beta-oxidation (lipid) and anaerobic creatine reactions (sprints).
    You need to go back and read a basic biochemistry text before posting trivially false bunkum. Even a basic physiology text like Kenney will have this information, usually in the first few chapters. For example:

    Berg JM, Tymoczko JL, Stryer L. Biochemistry. 5th edition.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22448/
    "...About 30 molecules of ATP are formed when glucose is completely oxidized to CO 2 ; this value supersedes the traditional estimate of 36 molecules of ATP. Most of the ATP, 26 of 30 molecules formed, is generated by oxidative phosphorylation."

    vs.

    Berg JM, Tymoczko JL, Stryer L. Biochemistry. 5th edition.
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK22581/
    "The complete oxidation of a molecule of palmitate yields 106 molecules of ATP." (This varies by chain length.)

    This is why fat yields appx. 9 kcal/gram, whereas glucose yields only 4 kcal/gram -- and glucose is not "the most energy-dense, preferred fuel of every cell in the body".

    Furthermore, anyone familiar with basic biochemistry would note that, as the above text says, "Most of the ATP, 26 of 30 molecules formed, is generated by oxidative phosphorylation. Recall that the anaerobic metabolism of glucose yields only 2 molecules of ATP." They would also know that oxidative phosphorylation happens in the mitochondria as part of the TCA cycle (aka citric acid or Krebs cycle). Finally, they would know that fat is also oxidized in the mitochondria, also via the TCA cycle.

    So: substantially all of the energy from glucose is created via the same pathway energy is created from fat -- the TCA cycle -- and glucose is not the "preferred fuel of every cell in the body".

    Result: every part of your statement above is either false, meaningless, or misleading. (And while I don't have time to get into the rest of your paragraph, rest assured there's plenty of bunk there too.)
    Last edited by J. Stanton; 10-31-2013 at 01:34 AM.

  4. #34
    Omni's Avatar
    Omni is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    979
    "There are no short cuts to enlightenment, the journey is the destination, you have to walk this path alone"

  5. #35
    TheyCallMeLazarus's Avatar
    TheyCallMeLazarus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
    Posts
    1,031
    @ J Stanton

    1) Your tone is not necessary. I actually enjoy your website, and have given it to my patients before. I especially enjoyed the videos, cartoon and all....now that I have discovered you are not very nice, I will discontinue this.

    2) I was positively wrong with what I said about the ATP yield, which I admitted my lack of knowledge on. With this said, it is also basic biochemistry that glucose is much closer to the TCA cycle than fat is. Oxidation of fats is a necessarily slow process, as I have discovered (as your have, from your site) when hiking while long-fasted. Gram for gram, obviously fats are more energy dense, but CARBON to CARBON, this effect is much exaggerated....adding to this that beta oxidation requires 2 oxygen rather than one, glucose is a much more rapid, short-term use of energy. It is stored for this purpose, with fat as the necessary backup. This is not news. Taking in 300g of fat is very difficult, whereas a single meal can easily take in that amount of carbs, again not accidental. Proving that I am incorrect about phosphylation pathways from biochem of ten years ago is not proof that I am ignorant.

    3) I am a die-hard of the benefits of fat metabolism, through carb cycling or fasting, in overall health. I am part of a study group at Dartmouth College funneling patients with metabolic syndrome to study the effects on glucagon upregulation in regards to fasting or severe caloric restriction. Again, your tone was condescending to someone you know nothing about.

    4) Regarding the rest of my post on the systemic effects, I am assured I am quite well-versed. I am a medical doctor that has treated over 10,000 patients with the pathology, and run a successful practice treating it under its ocular complications. I have personally reversed the disease process in over 80% of the patients I have counseled long-term, and am booked solid through next June. When you have treated more than that, with your livelihood on the line if you screw up, you can come and tell me how YOU think it really works in your arrogant tone. Until then, try being a little more humble and civil.

    Good day.
    Last edited by TheyCallMeLazarus; 10-31-2013 at 01:22 PM.
    "Man is born free.....but everywhere he is in chains."

  6. #36
    J. Stanton's Avatar
    J. Stanton is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    192
    Lazarus:

    I apologize for my sharp tone. I've seen so much factually incorrect Peatarian dogma thrown around here on MDA -- and persisting despite repeated debunkings -- that I assumed you were under its spell too. I hope you'll let me back up a step and we can have a factual discussion.

    Yes, humans can oxidize glucose more quickly than they can oxidize fat. AFAIK this is not because mitochondria can spin ATP out of pyruvate more quickly than they can spin it out of acetyl-CoA: the rate-limiting step is (again, AFAIK) in the carnitine shuttle, though there is a theoretical limit of around 70% VO2Max due to fat oxidation consuming more oxygen than glucose oxidation.

    However, even this is not the whole story. (I apologize if I sound didactic here: I'm doing my best to explain it so the rest of the board, which doesn't have your training, can follow along.)

    It's instructive to remember that in a healthy human (and most other animals), every tissue in the body that can oxidize fat preferentially does so when conditions allow. Glucose is only oxidized under the following conditions:
    1. Tissues can't use it or don't have access to it, like RBCs and the brain.
    2. We are so close to our VO2Max that we can't oxidize fat any faster, and must begin oxidizing glucose to compensate. (AFAIK this begins somewhere around 50% VO2Max,more for someone extensively aerobically trained. I can find a chart from Kenney et.al. if necessary.)
    3. We are in the post-prandial state and need to defend our blood glucose level.

    I don't like using intentional language like "preferred", because it implies that we have a choice -- when what we're talking about is biochemistry, not human decisions. However, given the above, it's fair to say that:

    1. Fat is the "preferred" fuel of our bodies when at rest, or active at low intensity (and the preferred fuel of our heart).
    2. Glucose is the "preferred" fuel of our bodies when active at high intensity, or in the post-prandial state.

    It's a generalization either way -- but since only a tiny percentage of our time is spent in high-intensity activity (> 50% VO2Max), and the post-prandial blood glucose spike is over in a few hours (depending on the meal), it seems that:

    1. "Fat is the preferred fuel" is true more often than "glucose is the preferred fuel".
    2. The default state of a healthy human body is to burn as much fat as possible. Glucose is only burned when absolutely necessary. (No doubt this is because our storage capacity for glucose, as glycogen, is very small -- perhaps 1000-2000 kcal, with perhaps 200-300 kcal available to the brain and RBCs via the liver -- so our bodies conserve it in favor of fat as much as possible.)

    Result: Glucose is neither the most energy-dense nor the "preferred" fuel of the body -- and I can't make any sense out of the idea that we are "masterful" at processing glucose but not "masterful" at processing fat. Perhaps you can clarify what you mean by that?

    Furthermore, I'm not sure you're making a fair comparison re: fat vs. glucose absorption. 300g of carbohydrate is equivalent in energy to about 130g of fat, not 300g -- and it's absolutely possible to absorb that in its natural state. (Ten tablespoons of olive oil may not be absorbed perfectly: neither will 40 tablespoons of dextrose. However, I bet you could eat just over two packs of bacon if you had to, and digest it without a problem.)

    Finally, I hope it is unnecessary to note that I don't believe this means no one should eat carbs, nor that they are sufficient by themselves to cause obesity or the metabolic syndrome! (I personally consume a roughly Perfect Health Diet amount, though I don't count calories or grams.)

    Again, I apologize for my sharp tone in the previous message.

    JS

  7. #37
    Sweet Leilani's Avatar
    Sweet Leilani is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    183
    Quote Originally Posted by J. Stanton View Post
    Lazarus:

    I apologize for my sharp tone. I've seen so much factually incorrect Peatarian dogma thrown around here on MDA -- and persisting despite repeated debunkings -- that I assumed you were under its spell too. I hope you'll let me back up a step and we can have a factual discussion.

    Yes, humans can oxidize glucose more quickly than they can oxidize fat. AFAIK this is not because mitochondria can spin ATP out of pyruvate more quickly than they can spin it out of acetyl-CoA: the rate-limiting step is (again, AFAIK) in the carnitine shuttle, though there is a theoretical limit of around 70% VO2Max due to fat oxidation consuming more oxygen than glucose oxidation.

    However, even this is not the whole story. (I apologize if I sound didactic here: I'm doing my best to explain it so the rest of the board, which doesn't have your training, can follow along.)

    It's instructive to remember that in a healthy human (and most other animals), every tissue in the body that can oxidize fat preferentially does so when conditions allow. Glucose is only oxidized under the following conditions:
    1. Tissues can't use it or don't have access to it, like RBCs and the brain.
    2. We are so close to our VO2Max that we can't oxidize fat any faster, and must begin oxidizing glucose to compensate. (AFAIK this begins somewhere around 50% VO2Max,more for someone extensively aerobically trained. I can find a chart from Kenney et.al. if necessary.)
    3. We are in the post-prandial state and need to defend our blood glucose level.

    I don't like using intentional language like "preferred", because it implies that we have a choice -- when what we're talking about is biochemistry, not human decisions. However, given the above, it's fair to say that:

    1. Fat is the "preferred" fuel of our bodies when at rest, or active at low intensity (and the preferred fuel of our heart).
    2. Glucose is the "preferred" fuel of our bodies when active at high intensity, or in the post-prandial state.

    It's a generalization either way -- but since only a tiny percentage of our time is spent in high-intensity activity (> 50% VO2Max), and the post-prandial blood glucose spike is over in a few hours (depending on the meal), it seems that:

    1. "Fat is the preferred fuel" is true more often than "glucose is the preferred fuel".
    2. The default state of a healthy human body is to burn as much fat as possible. Glucose is only burned when absolutely necessary. (No doubt this is because our storage capacity for glucose, as glycogen, is very small -- perhaps 1000-2000 kcal, with perhaps 200-300 kcal available to the brain and RBCs via the liver -- so our bodies conserve it in favor of fat as much as possible.)

    Result: Glucose is neither the most energy-dense nor the "preferred" fuel of the body -- and I can't make any sense out of the idea that we are "masterful" at processing glucose but not "masterful" at processing fat. Perhaps you can clarify what you mean by that?

    Furthermore, I'm not sure you're making a fair comparison re: fat vs. glucose absorption. 300g of carbohydrate is equivalent in energy to about 130g of fat, not 300g -- and it's absolutely possible to absorb that in its natural state. (Ten tablespoons of olive oil may not be absorbed perfectly: neither will 40 tablespoons of dextrose. However, I bet you could eat just over two packs of bacon if you had to, and digest it without a problem.)

    Finally, I hope it is unnecessary to note that I don't believe this means no one should eat carbs, nor that they are sufficient by themselves to cause obesity or the metabolic syndrome! (I personally consume a roughly Perfect Health Diet amount, though I don't count calories or grams.)

    Again, I apologize for my sharp tone in the previous message.

    JS
    Wow thank you. I really enjoyed reading this. And thank you for writing in plain English
    I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for everybody, and I don't believe there is one correct way of eating for a person through every stage of their life

  8. #38
    TheyCallMeLazarus's Avatar
    TheyCallMeLazarus is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Northeast Kingdom, Vermont
    Posts
    1,031
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    I enjoyed your post very much, and it is always human nature to come off pretty intense when you feel strongly about something....but it takes a real man to admit a mistake. I have been too strong on here before too, so I get it. Apology more than accepted.

    I too have battled a lot of outright garbage from the Peatsheep on here before, to the point that I usually steer far clear of any physiological discussion, as it will usually turn into a pointless pissing match.

    I agree with your statement entirely. It makes it difficult to discuss these things, because you will get hit hard by two camps: the "carbs are evil for everyone" crowd, and the Peatsheep. I was stating that there is nothing inherently wrong with taking in carbs, especially in certain conditions. We are masterful at making very fast work of it, as it is necessary for any prolonged glycolytic-fueled activity. We are also very masterful at burning fat....I would know. I commonly fast over my weekends, hiking at the end of them on 48 hours sans food

    In my own professional life, I am much more interested in the hormonal effects of all of these factors. I am becoming a strong believer in the likelihood that constant glucagon repression, through various mechanisms all pushed on by the SAD, is at the heart of the meatbolic syndrome epidemic.....but that is another 5 paragraphs.
    "Man is born free.....but everywhere he is in chains."

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

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