Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 71

Thread: Rice? Potatoes? page 5

  1. #41
    j3nn's Avatar
    j3nn is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hudson Valley, NY
    Posts
    3,497
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by otzi View Post
    I knew what you were saying...but I think a diet high in refined sugar and flour can lead to things like inflammation and overeating on other foods, where a diet in real foods, even starch, is more in line with good health and weight stability.
    Sure, agreed. Increasing or decreasing the odds of overeating; satiety vs. bottomless pit, etc. but calories still rule. If someone is willing to endure hunger to ingest empty foods in a deficit, they'll still lose. Not smart, but possible.

    I think lean cuisine and snack well clock-watching grazers are evidence of this. I remember those days. Real food <3
    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

    It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. - Samuel Adams

  2. #42
    otzi's Avatar
    otzi Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by j3nn View Post
    I think lean cuisine and snack well clock-watching grazers are evidence of this. I remember those days. Real food <3
    Another huge difference between eating like that and eating PB (with or without carbs) is that people eating Lean Cuisine and counting calories are doing nothing for their nutrition and never really learn to eat right. When they quit counting calories, their body is so starved of nutrients you go into a state of overfeeding to re-supply yourself with the nutrition you need. I think this is what leads to rebound weight gain more than anything. Losing weight slowly on PB gets you in a mindset of seeking out the most nourishing foods with fewest calories and more sensible weightloss.

  3. #43
    j3nn's Avatar
    j3nn is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Hudson Valley, NY
    Posts
    3,497
    Quote Originally Posted by otzi View Post
    Another huge difference between eating like that and eating PB (with or without carbs) is that people eating Lean Cuisine and counting calories are doing nothing for their nutrition and never really learn to eat right. When they quit counting calories, their body is so starved of nutrients you go into a state of overfeeding to re-supply yourself with the nutrition you need. I think this is what leads to rebound weight gain more than anything. Losing weight slowly on PB gets you in a mindset of seeking out the most nourishing foods with fewest calories and more sensible weightloss.
    Yes! Agreed. Losing weight slowly and thoughtfully is best regardless of your protocol. Health is my end game, not numbers on a scale.
    | My (food) Blog | Follow me on Facebook | Pinterest | Twitter |

    It does not take a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men. - Samuel Adams

  4. #44
    Peace x's Avatar
    Peace x is offline Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    44
    Hi Serenity

    What difference did increasing carbs make to your health, mood and energy etc?

    Peace x

  5. #45
    Padz's Avatar
    Padz is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    12
    Quote Originally Posted by not on the rug View Post
    exactly where does mark say that his primal diet is "minimal carbs?" or that carbs "don't give any benefit?" or that they are "counterproductive to weight/fat loss?" if eating potatoes was counterproductive to weight/fat loss, how is it that many people here are having success with (ridiculous) potato diets and whatnot?
    He has certainly said that rice gives very little benefit. Due to all the nutrients being inaccessible by our bodies. He also often states that carbs are not required to live healthy however many foods with other essential nutrients contain carbs.

    He advocates 100 to 150 grams of carbs per day which is approx. 400 to 600 calories. This would be considered low or minimal by most people considering the typical western diet comprises of 50% carbs or more.

    Here's a quote which sort of gets his point across but I can't be arsed to trail through his posts for others :-)

    "Now, I dont hate carbohydrate. They can be useful and even beneficial in certain cases. Eat carbs when you need fuel for endurance activities. Dont eat carbs just because; eat them because you need the energy. Because youre actually active and they wont go to waste."

    People will certainly have success on the "potato" diet or other carb based ones. This is because they are still cutting down on however many carbs they were previously eating and that they're most likely eating better quality carbs rather than processed sugary ones. Generally people with success in these diets are already heavily overweight in the first place, so they will see much more impact than a leaner person.

    The lower your body fat the lower the effectiveness of reducing/changing your carb intake.

  6. #46
    not on the rug's Avatar
    not on the rug is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Padz View Post
    He has certainly said that rice gives very little benefit. Due to all the nutrients being inaccessible by our bodies. He also often states that carbs are not required to live healthy however many foods with other essential nutrients contain carbs.

    He advocates 100 to 150 grams of carbs per day which is approx. 400 to 600 calories. This would be considered low or minimal by most people considering the typical western diet comprises of 50% carbs or more.

    Here's a quote which sort of gets his point across but I can't be arsed to trail through his posts for others :-)

    "Now, I don’t hate carbohydrate. They can be useful and even beneficial in certain cases. Eat carbs when you need fuel for endurance activities. Don’t eat carbs just because; eat them because you need the energy. Because you’re actually active and they won’t go to waste."

    People will certainly have success on the "potato" diet or other carb based ones. This is because they are still cutting down on however many carbs they were previously eating and that they're most likely eating better quality carbs rather than processed sugary ones. Generally people with success in these diets are already heavily overweight in the first place, so they will see much more impact than a leaner person.

    The lower your body fat the lower the effectiveness of reducing/changing your carb intake.
    so.. you can't answer any of my questions. thats what i thought. 150 grams, like you said, is 600 calories. certainly not minimal carbs. your last 2 statements are utter nonsense. much like the other nonsense you're spouting here. "carbs" are different than rice or potatoes or wheat or even the carbs from vegetables. confusing those terms is half of the problem. the other half is that mark's carb curve is complete arbitrary pseudoscience at its finest. there is nothing inherently unhealthy, dangerous, or fattening about a carbohydrate. period. wheat has antinutrients, gluten, etc. rice is relatively innate. i don't think people here are eating it for its nutrient content. they are eating it to consume more carbohydrates. so yes, it does have a benefit. i think a lot of people on this forum are missing the point with this carb debate, which really shouldn't even be a debate. yes, some people do well on low carb diets, vlc diets, etc. some do it for medical reasons. some do it just to experiment with their body. too many people are stuck in the "if some is good, then less must be better" mentality. the average person does not to be in ketosis in order to lose weight or be healthy. hell, the average person could eat mcdonalds all day long, but as long as they created a caloric surplus, they would lose weight. they might not be as healthy as a guy eating salmon and leafy greens and potatoes, but they would still lose weight the same. for the majority of people, carbs have nothing to do with this equation.
    I have a lot of hard miles on my body from before I realized I'm not 100% invulnerable. Now I just think I'm 75% invulnerable. -Mr. Anthony

    Give me a spouse/life-partner who I don't want to punch in the throat when she talks. -Canio6

  7. #47
    Padz's Avatar
    Padz is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Isle of Wight
    Posts
    12
    I'm sure I answered a few of your questions. I'm not saying carbs are inherently unhealthy or fattening, what I am saying is that carbs (of any type) which go unused by the body for energy will be stored as fat. As will most protein or fat if not used, however carbs will convert to fat much easier. This is widely regarded as fact.

    I may be new to this forum but I'm not new to this way of eating or indeed to nutrition and biology. Rather than instantly stating what I'm saying is wrong, why not attempt to discuss this in a more friendly manor?

  8. #48
    Darz's Avatar
    Darz is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Observable Universe
    Posts
    270
    Quote Originally Posted by Padz View Post
    however carbs will convert to fat much easier. This is widely regarded as fact.
    Fats convert to body fat more easily than carbs; de novo lipogenesis is somewhat rare unless you consume extremely large amounts of carbs.

  9. #49
    not on the rug's Avatar
    not on the rug is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Padz View Post
    I'm sure I answered a few of your questions. I'm not saying carbs are inherently unhealthy or fattening, what I am saying is that carbs (of any type) which go unused by the body for energy will be stored as fat. As will most protein or fat if not used, however carbs will convert to fat much easier. This is widely regarded as fact.

    I may be new to this forum but I'm not new to this way of eating or indeed to nutrition and biology. Rather than instantly stating what I'm saying is wrong, why not attempt to discuss this in a more friendly manor?
    wrong. you clearly are demonstrating that you do not know what you are talking about. at all. if that offends you, i apologize. but the things you are stating are wrong.
    I have a lot of hard miles on my body from before I realized I'm not 100% invulnerable. Now I just think I'm 75% invulnerable. -Mr. Anthony

    Give me a spouse/life-partner who I don't want to punch in the throat when she talks. -Canio6

  10. #50
    not on the rug's Avatar
    not on the rug is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    4,316
    Quote Originally Posted by Darz View Post
    Fats convert to body fat more easily than carbs; de novo lipogenesis is somewhat rare unless you consume extremely large amounts of carbs.
    yup
    I have a lot of hard miles on my body from before I realized I'm not 100% invulnerable. Now I just think I'm 75% invulnerable. -Mr. Anthony

    Give me a spouse/life-partner who I don't want to punch in the throat when she talks. -Canio6

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... 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
  •