Page 12 of 175 FirstFirst ... 210111213142262112 ... LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 1743

Thread: Shangri-La Diet - setpoint success at last page 12

  1. #111
    fiercehunter's Avatar
    fiercehunter is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    the world
    Posts
    1,940
    Primal Fuel
    Coconut oil also boosts the thyroid and raises body temperature. It boosts the metabolism. The 100+ grams of carbs a day probably helps the thyroid also.

  2. #112
    Drumroll's Avatar
    Drumroll is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Urban Forager View Post
    I guess Cod Liver Oil would have too strong of a flavor to work, it would be nice to kill 2 birds with 1 stone. I tried it today with the CO I had on hand and found that unrefined is too good tasting, I had to really pinch my nose not to taste it.
    Yep, I'd use refined for this reason.

    And I'd pass the light olive oil option up for the obvious reasons.

  3. #113
    zoebird's Avatar
    zoebird is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    8,090
    i also have doubts about the set point theory, but i also don't understand the set point theory, so . . .

  4. #114
    marthat's Avatar
    marthat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,053
    All of the functions in our bodies are regulated by strict homeostatic-inducing mechanisms. We have a "setpoint" for our body temperature, our circulating blood sugar levels, electrolytes, hormones, rate of hair and skin growth, rates of tissue regeneration and tissue death. Why would it be such a stretch to think that we have a "setpoint" for our weight as well?

    We just haven't figured out how it works yet. I don't know how my computer works on the inside either, but I can still use it...

  5. #115
    Paleobird's Avatar
    Paleobird Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by marthat View Post
    All of the functions in our bodies are regulated by strict homeostatic-inducing mechanisms. We have a "setpoint" for our body temperature, our circulating blood sugar levels, electrolytes, hormones, rate of hair and skin growth, rates of tissue regeneration and tissue death. Why would it be such a stretch to think that we have a "setpoint" for our weight as well?

    We just haven't figured out how it works yet. I don't know how my computer works on the inside either, but I can still use it...
    I'm not saying that the setpoint thing couldn't be possible. I just think that Occam's razor would say that a perfectly straightforward explanation of appetite suppression=eating less=weight loss doesn't need to have the setpoint aspect to be plausible.

  6. #116
    zoebird's Avatar
    zoebird is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    8,090
    again, not saying it's impossible either, just confused about it.

    right now, i set around 128 with no real effort. my body just sort of naturally goes there. during 'bad times' such as bad diet and/or emotional eating (with some controls), I'll get up to 135 or so.

    So, say set point is right here. My appetite is adequately suppressed through IF (or whatever mechanism is doing that), such that I'm eating 15-1700 calories per day.

    If this lowers my set point, how low will it go? What is reasonable and/or likely? Also, would this mean consuming less -- such as going down towards 14-1600 or even lower?

    Calorie restriction -- you know, those who do it for longevity -- are looking at anywhere from 1000-1500 cals/day depending upon the person, and i was just wondering what this was doing. or if that is part of it or what. IDK. Just ideas in my head.

  7. #117
    emmie's Avatar
    emmie is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,299
    I think our body's 'set point' is the level at which we're most comfortable eating in terms of calories. That is, WE regulate our weight by how we eat.

    For example, I have a friend who has lost some weight, and is currently 120 lbs. She looks and feels great at this weight, but she had a desire to get back to her college weight (she's 48 now), and so she lost to 115 lbs. She felt fine, but she realized that she wasn't willing to eat at the caloric level that would allow her to maintain at 115 lbs. At 120 lbs, she's comfortable with her eating.

    I suspect that most people who don't have weight issues and disregard calories eat at a similar caloric level from habit, so their weight stabilizes at a weight consistent with their food consumption. That isn't a 'set point' for the body; if the person ate a lot more, he/she would gain weight and similarly by restricting, the person would lose.

    As to 'how low' a person can go, the stories I've read of anorexia suggest that if a person limits eating enough, the body will respond accordingly--to the point of death if there's no intervention.

  8. #118
    mikebike's Avatar
    mikebike is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    495
    I started yesterday with two tablespoons of virgin pressed unrefined coconut oil. One when I got home from work (3pm) and another at 8pm. I couldn't believe how well the appetite suppression worked. I chased both doses with water and so it I tasted nothing. I've never lost weight in over two years of primal so I'm really curious how this will work for me.

  9. #119
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,522
    I wasn't saying I would EAT macadamia nuts. I would swallow them like pills with a glass of water. Maybe halves. I tried swallowing beef tallow like pills this morning but it got stuck in my throat. Chunks too big.

    It doesn't bother me to skip a meal, but it does bother me to be hungry. I am interested in appetite suppressant. I don't know if I like the whole flavorless thing. I mean, as soon as you open the container you can smell it so trying to completely avoid taste and smell seems like an exercise in futility.

    By the way, Enig's book is titled Eat Fat, Lose Fat.

    You can download a free PDF of Eat Fat and Grow Slim, a book by Richard Mackarness written in 1960. It is a low carb/high fat book.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Current squat: 180 x 2. Current Deadlift: 230 x 2

  10. #120
    otzi's Avatar
    otzi Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by emmie View Post
    I think our body's 'set point' is the level at which we're most comfortable eating in terms of calories. That is, WE regulate our weight by how we eat.

    For example, I have a friend who has lost some weight, and is currently 120 lbs. She looks and feels great at this weight, but she had a desire to get back to her college weight (she's 48 now), and so she lost to 115 lbs. She felt fine, but she realized that she wasn't willing to eat at the caloric level that would allow her to maintain at 115 lbs. At 120 lbs, she's comfortable with her eating.

    I suspect that most people who don't have weight issues and disregard calories eat at a similar caloric level from habit, so their weight stabilizes at a weight consistent with their food consumption. That isn't a 'set point' for the body; if the person ate a lot more, he/she would gain weight and similarly by restricting, the person would lose.

    As to 'how low' a person can go, the stories I've read of anorexia suggest that if a person limits eating enough, the body will respond accordingly--to the point of death if there's no intervention.
    In a fully functional animal, including humans, there are several feedback mechanisms to let the brain know the body is 'full', it isn't a conscious decision. Sure, a person can consciously overeat and get fat, or be force fed and get fat, and in essence, when eating a SAD high in sugar and seed oil, we are force feeding ourselves beyond what the brain can compensate for--so it does the best it can...the brain initiates survival strategies like physiological insulin resistance, for instance.

    The feedback in the hunger-driven systems is normally accomplished by those things that are hard to understand--insulin, leptin, ghrelin, cortisol, melatonin, etc...

    Any normally functioning animal, including humans, should be able to be fed ad libitum or 'free choice', meaning that you should be able to live in a banquet hall full of all the foods in the world and you'd only eat what you need to thrive. It's also well known that there is an internally controlled weight setpoint. The normally functioning body wants to stay at a certain weight and has ways to make minor changes...most of the excess calories you consume are burnt at night while you sleep through the manipulation of uncoupling proteins and increased body temp. I don't think this can keep up, though, with constant overfeedings on poor nutrition foods.

    The weight setpoint is more obvious in animals...take a flock of pen-raised chickens; feed them ad libitum, with allowances for sex and breed, they will all be the same weight. Look at a herd of deer or a troop of monkeys--they are all weight normalized within a narrow band. I think if you could go back in time, you'd see the same thing in a village of paleolithic people.

    Dogs, cats, hamsters, birds, chickens, pigs, cows, horses, monkeys...the list goes on, can all be fed 'free choice'. Humans are capable of this as well, but just as with animals being fed free choice, if you throw them a treat, they will eat it despite being full. Throw your dog enough treats and eventually he will become tired of them and they are no longer a treat and he will stop eating them.

    Humans are constantly being bombarded by treats that lead us to overeat. Most of us have broken feedback loops on hunger, whether from out-of-synch circadian cycles, improper nutrition, psychological issues, medical issues, etc...

    It seems to me the SLD may be a way to circumvent some of the normal feedback signals and help a person 'get their groove back' so to speak concerning a weight set-point.
    Last edited by otzi; 01-06-2013 at 09:02 AM.

Posting Permissions

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