Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 227

Thread: The Potato Diet....criticisms and metabolic theory page 3

  1. #21
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,760
    Primal Fuel
    TBH gopintos why mess with a good thing? If you are progressing and happy with how things are going why throw in an unknown? Usually a fast is an alright sorta idea....but, you seem to already be on a healthy path. Why not just accept it as your normal?

  2. #22
    JoanieL's Avatar
    JoanieL is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    It's not the heat, it's the stupidity.
    Posts
    7,541
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    But....but....drugs and puking was half the fun!!! Oh, ok ...I'll just eat the potatoes then.......
    Oh gosh, thank you! I thought I was the only one who enjoyed.... puking. heh.

  3. #23
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Mono-food diets are all about some combination of satiety and boredom causing people to eat at a caloric deficit thereby causing weight loss. No magic involved.

    And no, it won't do you irreparable harm to subsist of spuds for a couple of week but that is all you will be doing, subsisting. That is not optimal or healthy.

    If you want to eat at a caloric deficit you could always just try----wait for it-----eating less food. You could have optimal balanced nutrition and still lose weight. (That's what I did.)

    Doing hacks like this to basically "trick" yourself into eating less, seem intellectually dishonest and just plain silly to me. Just eat less.

    And, Neckhammer, thank you for creating this safe haven for those of us who who have a deep and abiding personal hatred for taters to come out of the closet and be proud "Tater Haters".

  4. #24
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,760
    Quote Originally Posted by JoanieL View Post
    Oh gosh, thank you! I thought I was the only one who enjoyed.... puking. heh.
    Now legal in two states .....least some of em are.

  5. #25
    gopintos's Avatar
    gopintos is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    We all know that glycogen depletion and water weight loss is an inherent portion of the 14lbs you may lose in the first 14 days of a VLC diet....why would you question this any less? Could it be all fat? Just wondering.
    I dont know but seems like most of us, we have already lost the big numbers of water weight from already having been VLC. So I would not think it would be water weight. If anything, I would think carbing up you would gain a bit instead of losing like most ppl do with the tator.
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

  6. #26
    gopintos's Avatar
    gopintos is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    And no, it won't do you irreparable harm to subsist of spuds for a couple of week but that is all you will be doing, subsisting. That is not optimal or healthy.

    If you want to eat at a caloric deficit you could always just try----wait for it-----eating less food.
    I totally respect the Tater Haters Unite and all. Just the flip side might be... it is also pretty unhealthy to be obese. We are not talking about months on end and drastic weight loss. But if it can help get you out of the danger zone a little faster, I would think it would be okay health wise. And maybe I am way off on that one also. I know ppl lose weight fairly fast after bariatric surgery also, and I dont know if that is better or worse than just being obese or taking 5 years to get the weight off vs one year. I would have to think that your joints and knees and heart would thank you for getting it off a little sooner, but again, what do I know. I just know this is not bariatric fast, but a little faster than your standard 2lbs per week... or the 1-2 lbs per month, I was getting on 75% fat or even the 4-5lbs I was getting on about 60% fat.

    And the point on eating less food at a deficit, while valid..... when ppl do that, many times they are hungry, and with tators you are not hungry. So if given the choice to be hungry, or even totally satisfied on food but losing 1 lb per week, or be totally stuffed on a tator and lose one pound every day or every couple of days....... well that seems to me like the first one might be the silly one.

    Now some ppl might be totally happy being obese and taking forever to get the fat off, so long as they are eating till satisfied and all that jazz. They are repairing healthy along the way also, just slow. And maybe with the tators it is not all fat that is coming off, but I think that is what we are trying to determine. How much of it is really fat? I have to tell you, I loved putting on a size smaller jeans and on the path I was on and the rate I was losing by being a good primal girl, I would not have been in that pair of jeans for about 7 more months.

    The silly thing for me to do would have been to continue eating the way I was eating, regardless how primal, and not try to shake it up. But that's JMO.

    And I know the point of the thread is for something more substantial than just my opinions, so I am hoping to have something proven one way or the other.
    Last edited by gopintos; 11-12-2012 at 01:50 PM.
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

  7. #27
    PrimalJosh's Avatar
    PrimalJosh is offline Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    87
    I've tried the potato hack and lost 3.7kg in a week.
    The first day was a little tough, then it was a breeze - for me anyway.
    However, a few things irk me.
    My problem with all of this is calling it a diet. It's not. It's just a little hack to make intermittent fasting easier and go for longer. It is a once in a blue moon approach to help bust through a plateau or lean out.
    It should not be used consistently.
    If for a second you think potatoes give you an excuse to eat shit food or be lazy, because a week of taters can undo the weight gain, then you're an idiot.
    We all found our way to MDA because we are seeking true health. Being at a lower weight will be a big health improvement for many - including me (who once weighed 150kg, lost 40kg CW then another 10kg primal and got into double digits with potato fast).
    At the end of the day there is no substitute for eating good, unprocessed food and following PBF principles of moving slowly, lifting heavy and sprinting.
    Believe and achieve.

  8. #28
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by gopintos View Post
    I totally respect the Tater Haters Unite and all. Just the flip side might be... it is also pretty unhealthy to be obese. We are not talking about months on end and drastic weight loss. But if it can help get you out of the danger zone a little faster, I would think it would be okay health wise. And maybe I am way off on that one also. I know ppl lose weight fairly fast after bariatric surgery also, and I dont know if that is better or worse than just being obese or taking 5 years to get the weight off vs one year. I would have to think that your joints and knees and heart would thank you for getting it off a little sooner, but again, what do I know. I just know this is not bariatric fast, but a little faster than your standard 2lbs per week... or the 1-2 lbs I was getting on 75% fat or even the 4-5lbs I was getting on about 60% fat.

    And the point on eating less food at a deficit, while valid..... when ppl do that, many times they are hungry, and with tators you are not hungry. So if given the choice to be hungry, or even totally satisfied on food but losing 1 lb per week, or be totally stuffed on a tator and lose one pound every day or every couple of days....... well that seems to me like the first one might be the silly one.

    Now some ppl might be totally happy being obese and taking forever to get the fat off, so long as they are eating till satisfied and all that jazz. They are repairing healthy along the way also, just slow. And maybe with the tators it is not all fat that is coming off, but I think that is what we are trying to determine. How much of it is really fat? I have to tell you, I loved putting on a size smaller jeans and on the path I was on and the rate I was losing by being a good primal girl, I would not have been in that pair of jeans for about 7 more months.

    The silly thing for me to do would have been to continue eating the way I was eating, regardless how primal, and not try to shake it up. But that's JMO.

    And I know the point of the thread is for something more substantial than just my opinions, so I am hoping to have something proven one way or the other.
    2 lbs a week is about the max that is sustainable (short of stomach stapling). Your body needs time to adjust to the changes along the way. If you rush it you are doing damage.

    I lost about 2.5 lbs per week eating at a caloric deficit. It took me five months to get to my goal. But the weight stayed off. I was not hungry because I was eating adequate protein and fat. I basically had six eggs for breakfast and then about a pound of meat with a salad for dinner. It worked.

    I have serious reservations about this diet as do Neckhammer and PK in re the weight loss coming from organ and/or muscle catabolism. Why would you do that to yourself?

    And, no, the benefits of fasting, the "housecleaning" of autophagy does NOT happen on a "spud fast". You can't compare the two. Actually, if you want a "crash diet" I think fasting for a week would be healthier than this tater nonsense.

  9. #29
    gopintos's Avatar
    gopintos is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,787
    Quote Originally Posted by Paleobird View Post
    2 lbs a week is about the max that is sustainable (short of stomach stapling). Your body needs time to adjust to the changes along the way. If you rush it you are doing damage.

    I lost about 2.5 lbs per week eating at a caloric deficit. It took me five months to get to my goal. But the weight stayed off. I was not hungry because I was eating adequate protein and fat. I basically had six eggs for breakfast and then about a pound of meat with a salad for dinner. It worked.

    I have serious reservations about this diet as do Neckhammer and PK in re the weight loss coming from organ and/or muscle catabolism. Why would you do that to yourself?

    And, no, the benefits of fasting, the "housecleaning" of autophagy does NOT happen on a "spud fast". You can't compare the two. Actually, if you want a "crash diet" I think fasting for a week would be healthier than this tater nonsense.
    I guess cuz I am just not convinced that is what is happening. I am glad you lost 2.5 and reached goal at 5 months. But since going primal, my weight loss has slowed down. CW dieting, I was 2.5 pounds. Primal was more like .25 - 1lb per week. At this rate, it will take me 3 - 5 more years to reach my goal. It would seem like I would be better off going back to CW of dieting, to which I had already cut the sugar, breads, pasta, fast food, and processed food) and then once I get the weight off, settle into primal lifestyle. About the only difference is that I was eating legumes now and then along with..... drumroll.... tators, sweet tators. Oh, and keeping my fat to 30%. CW way, I would be like you and reach goal in 5 more months also. I have already been at it a year. I am just tired gf. I am still not at the goal that I set for myself for last.... LAST memorial day, while things were moving at a steady clip until they started slowing down after March then screeching to a halt.

    Maybe the spud fast is not the same as an autophagy fast, (would like to see the science on that since the hang up with tators is it goes after your muscle in the absence of protein and a fast cleans house in an absence of protein but maybe neckhammer answered that, I should go back and read again) but it still seems like fasting with no food, even if only for weight loss benefits and many say they lose up to a pound a day on a no food fast also and I dont know about others, but I am damn hungry when I fast with no food, still seems like you can still compare that to eating a monofood to satiety. For some ppl, that does not even mean a calorie deficit, yet they were still losing, or at least not a very large one.

    I think diet is the hang up word here also. I keep it in my bag of tricks right along with IF and fasting, to be used on an as needed basis. Call it carb refeeding, that seems to be more acceptable than calling it anything with the word tator in it.
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

  10. #30
    gopintos's Avatar
    gopintos is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    1,787
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    In general though we are looking at a diet of potatoes for 14 days. How would it affect you. That is the question.
    Yal I dont even know why I am arguing. I havent done it for 14 days. I dont know if I could. I have only done it a couple of days, and now I use it for a day here and there. I just like using it as a tool to help keep things moving along. So I probably just need to go sit on the STFU couch and wait for some real results
    65lbs gone and counting!!

    Fat 2 Fit - One Woman's Journey

Page 3 of 23 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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