Page 22 of 27 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 269

Thread: Why can't I look like Mark Sisson!?!?! page 22

  1. #211
    oxide's Avatar
    oxide is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD/VA/DC
    Posts
    1,371
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me.
    Happy to oblige.
    5'0" female, 43 years old. Started Primal October 31, 2011, at a skinny fat 111.5 lbs. Low weight: 99.5 lb on a fast. Current weight: skinny-fat 106.5 lbs because of sugar cheating.

    MY PRIMAL: I (try to) follow by-the-book primal as advocated by Mark Sisson, except for whey powder and a bit of cream. I aim for 80-90 g carb/day and advocate a two-month strict adjustment for newbies. But everybody is different and other need to tweak Primal to their own needs.

  2. #212
    cori93437's Avatar
    cori93437 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    central FL
    Posts
    6,715
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.
    The most valid statement in this entire thread.

    Made in various ways by various people...
    Always right there in red.
    I love it.
    “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. #213
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    No, they say the exact same thing. Glucose must either be dietary or it comes from lean mass. You're trying to turn it into something it isn't my creating assumptions that never existed.


    Nice try with the selective quoting. Read further:

    1500 calories were given total.
    Ketogenic dieters were given 33g of carbohydrate a day, which is 9% of total calories.
    "Low carb" dieters were given 157g of carbohydrate a day, which is 42% of total calories.

    How many people in this thread consider 42% total daily calories a "low carbohydrate diet?" 157g/day is in Mark Sisson's "insidious weight gain" area of the (ridiculous) Carbohydrate Curve. They're eating that much on a massive deficit, and it's being call "low carbohydrate."

    This was nothing close to an "Atkins type of diet" as you attempted to indicate.
    I indicated nothing....that was a lyle mc'd quote...blame your mentor

    And 33g of carbs isn't atkins induction level? Huh, let me go get my book.... Hmmmmmm

    Dude YOU stated ketogenic or low carb levels eat up your lean mass. You HAVE NO PROOF. Again from that study:

    "There was no significant change in fat free mass for either diet."
    I'll give you two guess on what "fat free mass" is....

    That is what we are talking about. I'm not fighting for or against your carb curve or your right to eat what you want. I'm telling you that your continued stance on low carb "eating lean mass" is absurd and not backed by any studies that I've seen.

    You can hang your hat on this study done by Sears on 20 people that shows NO statistically significant difference....but I wouldn't if I were you.

    You know the three things I love most about this study:

    ONE: it totally refutes what you claim
    TWO: it was done by a group financially invested in having the higher carb groups outcome be better
    THREE: you went to an anti-lowcarbers website to find it
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 01-22-2013 at 12:50 PM.

  4. #214
    NDF's Avatar
    NDF
    NDF is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    817
    In the face of a chronic and/or severe calorie deficit (whether from diet alone or from diet and exercise), inadequate protein intake, and no weight bearing exercise, muscle will be catabolized for energy by the body. However, muscle will also be catabolized on a high carb diet where there is no weight bearing exercise and the deficit is chronic and/or severe. While there can be other drawbacks of a ketogenic diet(low thyroid, poor hormonal balance in women), it doesn't necessarily equate to muscle mass loss in all situations. That being said, there isn't any inherent benefit of ketogenic diets over isocaloric or higher carb diets.

    Lyle McDonald actually wrote a very long book called "The Ketogenic Diet" that goes into the physiological impact of a ketogenic diet. Though some of the information is slightly outdated, it is a great read.

    I love the conversation here. I think the big take-away from this thread is "Different strokes for different folks". I wouldn't do a ketogenic diet long term if you paid me to do it, but I won't take you away from it if it works for you and you are thriving on it.
    Last edited by NDF; 01-22-2013 at 04:31 PM.

  5. #215
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    8,086
    Quote Originally Posted by NDF View Post
    I love the conversation here. I think the big take-away from this thread is "Different strokes for different folks". I wouldn't do a ketogenic diet long term if you paid me to do it, but I won't take you away from it if it works for you and you are thriving on it.
    You sound very reasonable .

  6. #216
    Drumroll's Avatar
    Drumroll is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,900
    The body can use dietary protein for gluconeogenesis before it uses lean mass as well. That is why if you are trying to get yourself into ketosis, too much dietary protein can actually prevent it. But you could still be VERY low carb and that glucose in your body is still not coming from your lean mass.

  7. #217
    otzi's Avatar
    otzi Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by NDF View Post

    Lyle McDonald actually wrong a very long book called "The Ketogenic Diet" that goes into the physiological impact of a ketogenic diet. Though some of the information is slightly outdated, it is a great read.
    Freudian slip, there?

  8. #218
    otzi's Avatar
    otzi Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumroll View Post
    The body can use dietary protein for gluconeogenesis before it uses lean mass as well. That is why if you are trying to get yourself into ketosis, too much dietary protein can actually prevent it. But you could still be VERY low carb and that glucose in your body is still not coming from your lean mass.
    I've toyed with a ketogenic diet and could never get into ketosis. When I ate nothing but potatoes for 2 weeks, I was in super-ketosis. I'm sure too much meat was keeping me out, and on potatoes, the super low calories were keeping me in.

  9. #219
    Drumroll's Avatar
    Drumroll is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,900
    Quote Originally Posted by otzi View Post
    I've toyed with a ketogenic diet and could never get into ketosis. When I ate nothing but potatoes for 2 weeks, I was in super-ketosis. I'm sure too much meat was keeping me out, and on potatoes, the super low calories were keeping me in.
    Only one type of ketone, acetone appers on a ketostick. The primary ketone we make, beta-hydroxybutyric acid does not even register on the stick. This is why ketosticks are poor at measuring ketosis. You might have actually been in ketosis, running off of BHBA but it doesn't show on the stick so you wouldn't know. On the other hand, the potato diet may have specifically had a larger effect on spurring acetone production, so you may have had lots of that to register on the stick but actually been less "deep" into ketosis than you think. Tough to say.

  10. #220
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Dude YOU stated ketogenic or low carb levels eat up your lean mass.
    No, you stated that. What I've stated is that during a significant caloric deficit, a ketogenic diet is more likely to reduce lean mass than a diet equal in protein with a balanced amount of fat and carbohydrate.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    You HAVE NO PROOF.
    You don't want to admit fault. There is a difference.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Again from that study:

    "There was no significant change in fat free mass for either diet."
    There was a change in weight and fat lost in the diet. However, it was close enough that it could fit inside a margin of error. Statistical significance =/= significance. That depends on the reader.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    That is what we are talking about. I'm not fighting for or against your carb curve or your right to eat what you want. I'm telling you that your continued stance on low carb "eating lean mass" is absurd and not backed by any studies that I've seen.
    Actually it is.

    The moderate carbohydrate diet of equal caloric value slightly outperformed the ketogenic diet in both weight loss and fat mass reduction. The value not accounted for in the study is the additional water weight and glycogen that must have been lost in the ketogenic dieting group, which should further skew the study in the moderate carbohydrate diet's favor. The ketogenic diet came up a little short (though not "statistically significant"), but when accounting for a major confounding factor...well...this is where you have to be a scientist and analyze the data. I consider this significant, especially since the general formula for very overweight, sedentary people is to keep carbs as low as possible. Well, these were very overweight, sedentary people, which again proves that the success of a diet depends on two things: the caloric deficit, and the sustainability of that deficit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    You can hang your hat on this study done by Sears on 20 people that shows NO statistically significant difference....but I wouldn't if I were you.
    I will take a well-controlled small study over a mass epidemiological study with an infinity of confounding factors. This is as perfect of a study as you can get, especially since the biggest gripe you can come up with is sample size.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    ONE: it totally refutes what you claim
    It supports it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    TWO: it was done by a group financially invested in having the higher carb groups outcome be better
    It was controlled. Even protein was kept fairly constant. If anything, it gave the advantage to the ketosis group since it was marginally higher for them! This argument is an ad hominem fallacy, so it's not valid anyway.

    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    THREE: you went to an anti-lowcarbers website to find it
    Lyle McDonald literally wrote the book on ketogenic dieting. He was the one that mainstreamed it in the bodybuilding culture. Not only is this a straw man fallacy (which again makes it invalid), but you put your own foot in your mouth there. Lyle is the Lord of Ketosis
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

Page 22 of 27 FirstFirst ... 122021222324 ... 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
  •