Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Thread: Foods to avoid to get a flat stomach page 5

  1. #41
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Primal Fuel
    Quote Originally Posted by Drumroll View Post
    Choco, you keep saying dietary fat is more likely to be stored as fat and carbs and protein not. Yet, I've not ever ONCE seen you offer a SHRED of scientific proof to back up your statement to this effect.

    If it's so worthy of the soapbox you shout it from, find the proof.

    And you know exactly what I mean.
    That is how the body works.

    When you consume dietary fat, you have to burn through that dietary fat until you touch your stored body fat.

    When you consume dietary carbohydrate, your body preferentially burns glucose and the fat is stored.

    You have to consume something like <10% calories from fat for de novo lipogenesis to really occur (conversion of carbohydrate to body fat), and of course, you need to be in a caloric excess.

    What you're saying doesn't make any sense. Fat is already fat. When you eat fat, it's stored until you use it. If you come in at a net caloric deficit, you'll lose weight. If you come in at a surplus, you'll gain weight.

    How We Get Fat | BodyRecomposition - The Home of Lyle McDonald
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  2. #42
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,810
    Nah, what drumroll is saying is your stance is biased. You make a point to keep stating how easily fat is stored (as if we should think this is a bad thing!) without taking into account the increased capacity to also access said fat for energy when fat metabolism is upregulated.

    You say its all about caloric surplus or deficit, but continue to be macronutrient biased in the rest of your response.

    Basically you contradict yourself repeatedly. Quite simply if your stance is that losing weight is all about restricting energy making any further recommendations as to macro breakdown is illogical on your part.

    My stance is that macros matter. They matter for body composition and there are different strategies for each individuals circumstance and goals.

  3. #43
    magno's Avatar
    magno is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    23
    I like how J. Stanton framed the CICO debate in the following.
    Worth a read if you haven't seen it.

    There Is No Such Thing As A “Calorie” (To Your Body) &#45; GNOLLS.ORG

  4. #44
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    4,040
    Quote Originally Posted by magno View Post
    I like how J. Stanton framed the CICO debate in the following.
    Worth a read if you haven't seen it.

    There Is No Such Thing As A “Calorie” (To Your Body) &#45; GNOLLS.ORG
    The usual NONSENSE from people that want to believe in magic! Let me see, we measure the energy in food that a person eat, and we measure the energy that goes out in the poo. What? - there are calories missing from the imput, I wonder where they went, because it's sooo unlikely that some of it was used for energy and maybe some of it stored in the body, oh wait...

  5. #45
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,627
    Quote Originally Posted by Neckhammer View Post
    Nah, what drumroll is saying is your stance is biased. You make a point to keep stating how easily fat is stored (as if we should think this is a bad thing!) without taking into account the increased capacity to also access said fat for energy when fat metabolism is upregulated.
    The reason for my stance is fat upregulates the metabolism much less than carbohydrate and protein, and it generates the least amount of insulin, which is an anabolic growth hormone. Athletes and bodybuilders typically eat a lower fat, high carbohydrate, high protein diet because of these reasons. Carbohydrate and protein has the highest burn rates, generates the most amount of insulin (protein typically generates more insulin than carbohydrate, which is a common misconception) and produces more CO2 in the mitochondria, which indicates a faster metabolism. I'm not a fan of fat because it takes the body next to no effort to process. It slows the metabolic rate comparatively, and lipid peroxidation generates more stress hormones than glucose peroxidation. We burn sugar preferentially for a reason - it supports a healthier metabolism and generates less stress hormones than the oxidation of fat.

    Athletes and bodybuilders know that high fat intakes typically lead to the slowest metabolism and the least desirable body composition. Yes, some of that may be because of poor diets high in unsaturates vs saturates, and tropical societies seem to be immune to this thanks to the huge intake of saturates and MCT's from coconut, but for most of us I don't see that as a sustainable diet. If I were to advocate for a higher fat diet, I'd recommend the fat comes from coconut, grassfed dairy and leaner red meats to minimize PUFA exposure and keep SFA intake higher than MUFA intake. It's just easier to eat lots of leaner red meats, fruits and starches for me (and probably most), so I roll with that.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  6. #46
    sbhikes's Avatar
    sbhikes is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    9,919
    I have found that hiking (which is just walking up hills) actually makes my belly stick out A LOT! Lifting heavy, sprinting and slow movement (walking on the flats) were not making me slimmer, but they were helping a little and a month without them caused me to gain. Belly is huge and ugly all of a sudden. Also detrimental were too much caffeine interfering with sleep, catching a nasty cold, undergoing some stress and getting sicker.

    The macro ratio matters little to nothing for me, but I have found that if I eat an avocado I usually feel I don't need any dinner, but if I don't eat one and eat other things instead, I get hungrier for dinner.
    Female, 5'3", 49, Starting weight: 163lbs. Current weight: 135 (more or less).
    Starting squat: 45lbs. Heaviest squat: 180 x 2. Heaviest Deadlift: 230 x 2

  7. #47
    Neckhammer's Avatar
    Neckhammer is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    7,810
    Quote Originally Posted by ChocoTaco369 View Post
    The reason for my stance is fat upregulates the metabolism much less than carbohydrate and protein, and it generates the least amount of insulin, which is an anabolic growth hormone.

    Insulin just so happens to completely inhibit lipid oxidation even in minute amounts. So no burnny your body fat while its around.

    Athletes and bodybuilders typically eat a lower fat, high carbohydrate, high protein diet because of these reasons.

    They also "typically" go through cycles of changing this ratio to achieve the composition and performance they are looking for. This is not a steady state strategy. They also are notorious for using illegal drugs. How is their long term health "typically". My understanding is its not so hot.


    Carbohydrate and protein has the highest burn rates, generates the most amount of insulin (protein typically generates more insulin than carbohydrate, which is a common misconception) and produces more CO2 in the mitochondria, which indicates a faster metabolism. I'm not a fan of fat because it takes the body next to no effort to process.

    Have no clue what logic you use to come to the conclusion that better efficiency in processing is actually a bad thing....

    It slows the metabolic rate comparatively, and lipid peroxidation generates more stress hormones than glucose peroxidation. We burn sugar preferentially for a reason - it supports a healthier metabolism and generates less stress hormones than the oxidation of fat.

    Pure conjecture based on a faulty premise IMO. There is just as much evidence to prove the exact opposite is true.


    Athletes and bodybuilders know that high fat intakes typically lead to the slowest metabolism and the least desirable body composition.

    I sincerely doubt that you know any of this for certain. You may have some insight into what the brobuilders in the gym think, but your extrapolation into what all athletes in general know and do is quite suspect.

    Yes, some of that may be because of poor diets high in unsaturates vs saturates, and tropical societies seem to be immune to this thanks to the huge intake of saturates and MCT's from coconut, but for most of us I don't see that as a sustainable diet. If I were to advocate for a higher fat diet, I'd recommend the fat comes from coconut, grassfed dairy and leaner red meats to minimize PUFA exposure and keep SFA intake higher than MUFA intake. It's just easier to eat lots of leaner red meats, fruits and starches for me (and probably most), so I roll with that.

    Roll with whatever you enjoy and works for you. I don't believe for a second that PUFA is all that ails us. I don't mind natural occurring sugars, but I also don't see a shred of evidence that they or additional sugar aid in body composition or that high fat low carb is detrimental to body comp. And studies have been done that show that.
    in bold

    But ultimately I don't care what people decide to do. This is the interwebs and I'm not responsible for any of you . Just throwing out what evidence I've seen and pointing out that you can't say "only CICO matters" immediately followed by "but carbs are more thermogenic so eat those instead of fat".... Its contradictory and largely an oversimplification that isn't even shown to be true based on peer reviewed studies to boot.
    Last edited by Neckhammer; 04-20-2013 at 03:41 PM.

  8. #48
    smartuko's Avatar
    smartuko is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    110
    Been seeing real results in the last week eating primally combined with the Warrior Diet (eating one large meal a day and then fast until the next day). Might be worth a try.

  9. #49
    KimchiNinja's Avatar
    KimchiNinja is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Seoul
    Posts
    1,944
    ...LOL, back into the "calories in / calories out" madness.

  10. #50
    Drumroll's Avatar
    Drumroll is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    3,900
    Primal Blueprint Expert Certification
    "That's how the body works," is a bit of a weak arguement Choco. Scientific evidence would be nice.

    Remember, logical as it may sound, we all have learned that logic and nutrition don't always go hand-in-hand.

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Posting Permissions

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