Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 136

Thread: What are the real weight loss benefits of going primal? page 4

  1. #31
    Katie14's Avatar
    Katie14 is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    14
    Shop Now
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    When I see a "question" by someone who is basing their query on a very specific misinformation or mix of misinformation that is relatively uncommon, a red flag goes up in my mind. The thread starter was intended to start a flame war on "what's wrong with primal" and "CICO works, even if I have to post fake "data" to prove it". It is full of "justify yourself!" attitude, not "I don't quite understand, can somebody pleaseplease help me?" YMMV. Flame trolls love people who are only trying to be helpful.

    Who are you to decide that this forum should nurture trolls?
    I did not come on here to troll. I have actually been following a low carb diet for the past 2 months. I came on this site to get more information about low carb living. I didn't read Mark's book yet but I have read dozens of his blogs. I apologize if my op is worded badly but it isn't my intention to offend anybody or bash his diet. I simply want to understand if this type of diet is really worth it for weight loss and/or weight maintanence if you are not bothered by the increase in hunger on a regular high carb diet

  2. #32
    Leida's Avatar
    Leida is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Posts
    5,800
    If after dropping bread and past you did not notice a significant drop in appetite, you will do fine on a conventional approach. Should that change, you always have the option of dropping it.
    My Journal: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread57916.html
    When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

  3. #33
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,576
    Quote Originally Posted by noodletoy View Post

    there are plenty of 20-something guys on here ( a few in particular) who insist cico is the only undeniable and irrefutable way to lose weight. before i hit my 40s i agreed. my experience over the last few years has shown me the flaws in this simplistic notion. bodies broken by years of cw nutritional advice don't turn on a dime or respond to changes the same way as a healthy ones do.
    What matters for weight-loss for EVERYBODY, or more precise – to lose energy stored in the body - is to be in a calorie deficit – that’s undeniable, and there are no way to bypass that! I know that a calorie is only a measure for energy, and that everybody must spend more energy than assimilated or used by our bodies. So if the concept of CICO or calories are too difficult to understand, then we can use strict portion control instead and systematically reduce the amount we are eating! Losing weight is always about eating less than our body’s needs, so it is forced to tap into energy deposits stored in the body. True story folks; nobody has ever lost weight by eating more than the body needs to maintain its weight...
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  4. #34
    noodletoy's Avatar
    noodletoy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    land of the glass pinecones
    Posts
    2,754
    Quote Originally Posted by noodletoy View Post

    there are plenty of 20-something guys on here ( a few in particular) who insist cico is the only undeniable and irrefutable way to lose weight. before i hit my 40s i agreed. my experience over the last few years has shown me the flaws in this simplistic notion. bodies broken by years of cw nutritional advice don't turn on a dime or respond to changes the same way as a healthy ones do.
    Quote Originally Posted by eKatherine View Post
    I would like to see their n=1 data based on the experiment I outlined earlier or another at least as rigorous.
    Quote Originally Posted by jakejoh10 View Post
    I posted two studies that show no advantage of low carb vs. high carb diets when protein is controlled. I have more if you want.
    and this ^^^ is why i don't give 2 shits about the results obtained by males under 30, nor their insistence that eating low-carb/primal is no different for weight loss than any other.

    i have my own n~1 and improved health as personal and very satisfactory proof.
    As I ate the oysters with their strong taste of the sea and their faint metallic taste that the cold white wine washed away, leaving only the sea taste and the succulent texture, and as I drank their cold liquid from each shell and washed it down with the crisp taste of the wine, I lost the empty feeling and began to be happy and to make plans.

    Ernest Hemingway

  5. #35
    noodletoy's Avatar
    noodletoy is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    land of the glass pinecones
    Posts
    2,754
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    So if the concept of CICO or calories are too difficult to understand, then we can use strict portion control instead and systematically reduce the amount we are eating!
    your condescension is less than charming. ugh.
    As I ate the oysters with their strong taste of the sea and their faint metallic taste that the cold white wine washed away, leaving only the sea taste and the succulent texture, and as I drank their cold liquid from each shell and washed it down with the crisp taste of the wine, I lost the empty feeling and began to be happy and to make plans.

    Ernest Hemingway

  6. #36
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,576
    Quote Originally Posted by noodletoy View Post
    your condescension is less than charming. ugh.
    Yeah, telling the truth can hit hard sometimes! But there are more than enough of "prophets" telling people to "EAT MOAR!" to lose weight, so listen to them instead...
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  7. #37
    Black Timber's Avatar
    Black Timber is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Gorbag View Post
    What matters for weight-loss for EVERYBODY, or more precise – to lose energy stored in the body - is to be in a calorie deficit – that’s undeniable, and there are no way to bypass that! I know that a calorie is only a measure for energy, and that everybody must spend more energy than assimilated or used by our bodies. So if the concept of CICO or calories are too difficult to understand, then we can use strict portion control instead and systematically reduce the amount we are eating! Losing weight is always about eating less than our body’s needs, so it is forced to tap into energy deposits stored in the body. True story folks; nobody has ever lost weight by eating more than the body needs to maintain its weight...
    CICO worked for me. I gained a bunch by eating too much and then lost a bunch by eating less. Where CICO seems to flounder is for the person that is damaged metabolically. It seems like their bodies fight to keep every ounce of fat, no matter what. When they eat less their metabolisms slow down. It makes it very difficult to drop any weight. Many of these types of people also seem to do better when not only calorie restricting but by limiting carbohydrates. CICO puts a cap on the bottle but ignores that there is something inside.

    Eat real food and move around a lot!
    Some of you may die, but that is a risk I'm willing to take.

  8. #38
    ChocoTaco369's Avatar
    ChocoTaco369 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Narberth, PA
    Posts
    5,606
    Quote Originally Posted by Katie14 View Post
    With regard to weight lose, gain, or maintenance, a calorie is a calorie. If you eat at a deficit you will lose weight and if you overeat you will gain weight. It does not matter what the composition of those calories are. The only benefits I see from going primal ( strictly from a weight loss perspective. I am not talking about any other health benefits) are :

    1)Increased satiety, so you are more likely to naturally eat less

    2)More of the weight that you lose comes from fat instead of muscle. This preservation of lean mass can probably be accomplished by lifting weights while being in a calorie deficit without going primal.

    I looked at Mark’s pyramid How to Succeed with the Primal Blueprint | Mark's Daily Apple and he says that if you eat over 150 g of carbs per day you will likely gain weight. If you are counting calories and eating at a deficit, how can you possibly gain weight even if 100% of your calories come from carbs? There are plenty of people following conventional eating plans who are maintaining healthy weights or losing weight. I think mark’s approach is interesting and useful for people who have a lot of trouble with hunger while dieting. But, if you can eat at a deficit without going primal, what weight loss benefit does primal eating give you? Let’s say you have 2 twins who are the same weight and gender and are fed the same amount of calories and exercise the same exact amount. If you feed 1 a high carb diet and the other a low carb (primal) diet, they will both lose the same amount of weight.

    I don’t mean to disrespect Mark or anyone else who supports him. I just want to see if I am missing something here.
    Mark acknowledges CICO. Frankly, anyone that doesn't is kidding themselves. Mark's Carbohydrate Curve is satiety-based. He isn't one of these guys that promote the "metabolic advantage" BS lie. Not to speak for him, but I believe he mostly believes that fat is more satiating than carbohydrate, so he thinks if you keep carbs <150g/day, you'll be less likely to overeat and naturally keep calories low.

    Of course, this isn't entirely true. He supports added fats, which are extremely calorically dense and not satisfying. A potato is far more satisfying than butter. Fat makes you overeat as well, with none of the beneficial metabolic rate increase you get from carbs. Eat sausage and bacon versus pork loin and chicken breast. You are almost guaranteed to consume far more calories worth of sausage and bacon. The REAL way to overeat is to pair fat with carbohydrate since it signals your brain to overconsume. If you're going to eat high carb, make sure to keep fats very low and vice versa to minimize overconsumption.

    The real satisfying factor is protein. Meats aren't satisfying because of fat content, but because of large quantities of high quality protein. Sirloin is more satisfying than ribeye, chicken breast is more satisfying than chicken thigh. But you're very wrong on the benefits of Primal. The REAL benefits are not weight loss, but rather severely reducing your intake of food toxins and greatly increasing your nutrition. This diet is about nutrient density and toxin elimination. Weight loss is simply a side effect of a healthy diet.
    Last edited by ChocoTaco369; 07-22-2013 at 10:51 AM.
    Don't put your trust in anyone on this forum, including me. You are the key to your own success.

  9. #39
    Gorbag's Avatar
    Gorbag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Ecuador
    Posts
    3,576
    Quote Originally Posted by Black Timber View Post
    CICO worked for me. I gained a bunch by eating too much and then lost a bunch by eating less. Where CICO seems to flounder is for the person that is damaged metabolically. It seems like their bodies fight to keep every ounce of fat, no matter what. When they eat less their metabolisms slow down. It makes it very difficult to drop any weight. Many of these types of people also seem to do better when not only calorie restricting but by limiting carbohydrates. CICO puts a cap on the bottle but ignores that there is something inside.

    Eat real food and move around a lot!
    Limiting carbohydrates usually also leads to limiting calories by less appetite for food, so CICO still counts...
    Whoever fights trolls should see to it that in the process he does not become a troll - for when you gaze long enough into the computer screen, the computer screen will gaze back into you!
    - Gorbag Nietzsche

  10. #40
    LauraSB's Avatar
    LauraSB is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Delaware Valley
    Posts
    717
    Quote Originally Posted by Katie14 View Post
    But, if you can eat at a deficit without going primal, what weight loss benefit does primal eating give you?
    I'm going to answer just this specific question and say, IMO, probably none. Once you are within the healthy weight range for your height, wanting to lose more fat is the opposite of primal. Paleolithic (wo)man wouldn't have been sad about a little padding, they would have seen that extra fat as insurance against starving to death when food was scarce. If you're naturally inclined to low body fat, then a diet of real, whole food may be all it takes to achieve a super lean look. If you're naturally inclined to carry a little insurance, a primal diet may not be enough.

    Have you looked into something like LeanGains? That is intended to push body fat below what comes naturally. You could do a primal version of it. People do. But it's a different set of rules for a different goal.
    50yo, 5'3"
    SW-195
    CW-125, part calorie counting, part transition to primal
    GW- Goals are no longer weight-related

Page 4 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

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