Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 217

Thread: Whats goin' on??? page 16

  1. #151
    Graycat's Avatar
    Graycat is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    1,842
    Primal Fuel
    I'm liking this thread more and more.

  2. #152
    oxide's Avatar
    oxide is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    MD/VA/DC
    Posts
    1,106
    Quote Originally Posted by not on the rug View Post
    Wow...exaggerate much? How about people who eat several hundred grams of carbs daily from dairy, tubers, fruit, etc to eat balanced macros? Why are they "peaties" and not intelligent? Maybe you should stop letting your emotions get the best of you and stop with name calling and derogatory comments? Perhaps thinking with an open mind would do you some good? The common sense has completely gone out of this forum. If people want to get 50/60% of calories from fat, thats ok. But if people want to eat 33% of calories from carbs they are peaties. Where is the logic in that. Even according to mark's pretend carb curve, people should only be under 100g for magic weight loss or whatever. What if people read the pb to be healthy, not lose weight? Can we still follow the pretend carb curve too? Perhaps mark is wrong in his carb curve. After all guys like derp and zach should be suffering from "insidious weight gain." How come choco and I aren't lardasses? Maybe (gasp) calories do matter just a tad?
    If those women are "hormonally destroyed," how did they get that way? Maybe too many carbs and insulin resistance?

    How is several hundreds grams of carbs a "balanced" macro? Maybe according to the 1992 FDA Diabetes Pyramid written by the junk food lobby. If that's your ideal carb curve, you can have it.

    This is a primal forum. If people want to get 50% of calories from fat, that's Primal, and of course that's OK here on this primal forum. Now, 33% of (2000) calories is 166 grams carbs, which -- on a primal forum -- is a deviation from Primal, and does not match the forum philosophy. Therefore, it should be labeled. That's not to say it doesn't work for you, but it's NOT the norm for a Primal forum.

    It works both ways. My Primal macros are not Peat, and therefore my macros would not be OK on a Peat forum. On a Peat forum I would have to identify myself as a deviation from Peat. In fact, I do that label myself that way, even here, if I wander into a Peat thread.

    Is Mark wrong in his carb curve just because it doesn't work for 8-10 people? If he is, then Peat is also wrong because his diet doesn't work for the 8-10 women who are hormonally destroyed and depressed and making excuses. Again, I point to the success stories. For every Derp and Zach, there are dozens of Success Stories of people on who found primal low-carb (~100g).

    Why are you and Choco not lardasses? Because there are plenty of young guys who eat Peatza and kegs and are still not lardasses (yet). Because there people who are genetically blessed to not be as susceptible to the dangers of carbs. Because people have different activity levels. Because people have different levels of stress. There are too many variables to make easy determinations.
    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.

  3. #153
    YogaBare's Avatar
    YogaBare is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    . . .
    Posts
    4,543
    Quote Originally Posted by oxide View Post
    Anyone who says the OP should cut "overall" calories.
    Anyone who says she's eating too much "food."
    Anyone who says that she should keep her macros "the same."

    Any post like that sends a clear message that a calorie is a calorie is a calories. And that the OP should cut her fat, protein, and carbs equally across the board. That's about as CW as it gets. Why don't you tell her to get her butt off the couch and run a marathon too? Then her journey to the CW SAD dark side will be complete.

    The OP doesn't NOT need to cut calories equally across the board. She needs to cut her fat grams IN HALF, while keeping her protein and carb grams THE SAME. That's primal.

    EDIT: OK, I suppose I should clarify. Telling someone to cut fat SOUNDS like CW, but that goes back to what I said about our tummies not feeling full. If the OP had a primal tummy with normal full-signaling, then she would have naturally adjusted to a more primal amount of fat. The main point is that her carb grams -- which are about 1/3 of what CW recommends -- are fine. That's the crux of primal.
    I was asking Joanie.

    Joanie, Please tell me who's advocating junk food? OR maybe you consider fruit to be junk food?

    Quote Originally Posted by lea View Post
    First of all, what is the difference between rice and sushi rice that makes it resistant starch or go I need to actually slog through that thread?

    Second, i think when someone says "I tried that and it didn't work" and Choco says they are either lying confused or too stupid to know what they did that is going to piss them off. That doesn't mean what works for him is not a useful addition to the discussion. (Although his diet basically sound like the zone to me -pufas) Also women are not men.
    Sushi rice is cooled down rice.

    The only issue I have with Choco is that he's preachy, and sometimes people who preach have a hammer and see a nail everywhere. Other than that, I think he's a smart guy who does a lot of research, and he helps A LOT of people. His mantra is moderation at the end of the day. What's wrong with that?

    BTW Zach - lookin' good!
    "I think the basic anti-aging diet is also the best diet for prevention and treatment of diabetes, scleroderma, and the various "connective tissue diseases." This would emphasize high protein, low unsaturated fats, low iron, and high antioxidant consumption, with a moderate or low starch consumption.

    In practice, this means that a major part of the diet should be milk, cheese, eggs, shellfish, fruits and coconut oil, with vitamin E and salt as the safest supplements."

    - Ray Peat

  4. #154
    moluv's Avatar
    moluv is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    West Texas
    Posts
    1,033
    Zach you workin those carbs 😻

  5. #155
    Rattybag's Avatar
    Rattybag is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Norwich UK
    Posts
    405
    Quote Originally Posted by Missimia View Post
    OP, from a nutrition standpoint, obviously you are eating too many calories. That is really the only answer to your question.If you feel good while eating at your current macro percentages, then keep those the same and just decrease total calories to lose weight.

    If I were you, I would increase my activity before decreasing my calories.
    FINALLY!!! Someone with plain and simple advice without aggressive, viscious comments! Thank you Missimia.
    Why cant other people here reply politely like this?

    I have butter with my coffee because of what I read when it first came out about it, and I put the cream in my other coffees because I need to keep low carb for seizure control, and this is what my consultant told me to do as cream has lower carbs than milk.
    I cant do IF because of medications.

    If I had ANY idea that my question would end up as a verbal 'punch-up' I would never have said anything in the first place and certainly wont ask or reply to anything else on this forum in the future!
    I felt attacked from all sides "eat carbs, dont eat carbs" "cut fat, up protein, carry trees" etc etc etc.
    And yes, I'm middle-aged, menopausal and struggling with my weight, but verbal abuse is uncalled for and hurtful.
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but there are better ways of putting things than some of you have on here!

    As Thumper used to say and something to remember, "If you cant say somethin' nice, Dont say nothin' at all!"
    I'm not a complete idiot! There's parts missing!!

  6. #156
    not on the rug's Avatar
    not on the rug is online now Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,262
    Quote Originally Posted by oxide View Post
    If those women are "hormonally destroyed," how did they get that way? Maybe too many carbs and insulin resistance?

    How is several hundreds grams of carbs a "balanced" macro? Maybe according to the 1992 FDA Diabetes Pyramid written by the junk food lobby. If that's your ideal carb curve, you can have it.

    This is a primal forum. If people want to get 50% of calories from fat, that's Primal, and of course that's OK here on this primal forum. Now, 33% of (2000) calories is 166 grams carbs, which -- on a primal forum -- is a deviation from Primal, and does not match the forum philosophy. Therefore, it should be labeled. That's not to say it doesn't work for you, but it's NOT the norm for a Primal forum.

    It works both ways. My Primal macros are not Peat, and therefore my macros would not be OK on a Peat forum. On a Peat forum I would have to identify myself as a deviation from Peat. In fact, I do that label myself that way, even here, if I wander into a Peat thread.

    Is Mark wrong in his carb curve just because it doesn't work for 8-10 people? If he is, then Peat is also wrong because his diet doesn't work for the 8-10 women who are hormonally destroyed and depressed and making excuses. Again, I point to the success stories. For every Derp and Zach, there are dozens of Success Stories of people on who found primal low-carb (~100g).

    Why are you and Choco not lardasses? Because there are plenty of young guys who eat Peatza and kegs and are still not lardasses (yet). Because there people who are genetically blessed to not be as susceptible to the dangers of carbs. Because people have different activity levels. Because people have different levels of stress. There are too many variables to make easy determinations.
    Maybe they are destroyed from bad food choices, birth control, etc?

    If someone eats 200g of carbs, 200 grams of protein, and 50-100g of fat daily, how is that not balanced? Check your math. 166g of carbs is perfectly primal. It's people like you who have poor reading comprehension skills who say it isn't. Kindly explain how it is not primal according to mark's book.

    You don't know how old I am, so im flattered that you think I am a young guy. But you saying thing like "dangers of carbs" is exactly the same thing as telling someone to chug soda. Exactly the same. It's sad that you can't see that.
    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. #157
    turquoisepassion's Avatar
    turquoisepassion is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    NYC (and ATX)
    Posts
    2,777
    Quote Originally Posted by Rattybag View Post
    FINALLY!!! Someone with plain and simple advice without aggressive, viscious comments! Thank you Missimia.
    Why cant other people here reply politely like this?

    I have butter with my coffee because of what I read when it first came out about it, and I put the cream in my other coffees because I need to keep low carb for seizure control, and this is what my consultant told me to do as cream has lower carbs than milk.
    I cant do IF because of medications.

    If I had ANY idea that my question would end up as a verbal 'punch-up' I would never have said anything in the first place and certainly wont ask or reply to anything else on this forum in the future!
    I felt attacked from all sides "eat carbs, dont eat carbs" "cut fat, up protein, carry trees" etc etc etc.
    And yes, I'm middle-aged, menopausal and struggling with my weight, but verbal abuse is uncalled for and hurtful.
    Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but there are better ways of putting things than some of you have on here!

    As Thumper used to say and something to remember, "If you cant say somethin' nice, Dont say nothin' at all!"
    ...what?
    No one attacked you. They were suggestions.... Constructive criticisms maybe. There were personal attacks on this forum but they were directed at others, not you.

    Secondly, you did not mention your medical condition and the low carb requirement that stems from the condition.

    Lastly, welcome to the Internet. Not everyone is able to pick posies and hold hands.



    Journal: www.marksdailyapple.com/forum/thread87464.html
    ------
    HCLF: lean red meat, eggs, low-fat dairy, bone broth/gelatin, fruits, seafood, liver, small amount of starch (oatmeal, white rice, potatoes, carrots), small amount of saturated fat (butter/ghee/coconut/dark chocolate/cheese).

    My Journal: gelatin experiments, vanity pictures, law school rants, recipe links


    Food blog: GELATIN and BONE BROTH recipes

    " The best things in life are free and the 2nd best are expensive!" - Coco Chanel

  8. #158
    lea's Avatar
    lea
    lea is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    348
    So sushi rice is a resistant starch because its cold? Interesting.

  9. #159
    L0kI's Avatar
    L0kI is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    112
    Quote Originally Posted by thriveful View Post
    You are obviously unaware that carb intake is not the thing that makes you , primal/paleo or whatever u want to call it. How about calling it eating real food with am ancestral/evolutionary perspective?

    This is about eating real food, unprocessed, unadulterated by human processing and umhealrhy oils etc.

    This can be low fat or high fat, low carb or high carb.

    I was tied up on the low carb 'dogma', thinking this was the only way.

    Im now playing with higher carb amd still leaning out. Im male, but 45 not 25. Im monitoring calories and it is working. Perhaps both can work for me but intake is important, calories count.

    Spare us the low carb is , THE primal way dogma. It is not!! Mark talks regularly about 'ancestral eating' and high carb low fat is deffo part of our history for some cultures.

    Those who go berserk at the mention of higher carb from real food are as bad as those who spout that HFLC can never work



    Sent from my GT-I8190N using Marks Daily Apple Forum mobile app
    Mark specifically notes staying below 150g if carbs MANY times in the book and on his board. And staying below 100g for weight loss... So unless you're eating extremely low amounts of food, high-carb doesn't fit into the model. Sorry, that part is pretty clear.
    Last edited by L0kI; 08-25-2013 at 10:18 AM.

  10. #160
    jakejoh10's Avatar
    jakejoh10 is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    California
    Posts
    882
    Quote Originally Posted by oxide View Post
    This is a primal forum. If people want to get 50% of calories from fat, that's Primal, and of course that's OK here on this primal forum. Now, 33% of (2000) calories is 166 grams carbs, which -- on a primal forum -- is a deviation from Primal, and does not match the forum philosophy. Therefore, it should be labeled. That's not to say it doesn't work for you, but it's NOT the norm for a Primal forum.
    Who cares if it's not the norm? 166 grams of carbs is a deviation from Primal? Lol, you've just lost it.
    My nutrition/fitness/critical thinking blog:

Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 61415161718 ... 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
  •