Do you guys ever doubt low carb?
(94 posts) (37 voices)-
halloweenbinge
MemberOh, about the beans - they have anti-nutrients and need to be prepared in the right ways. They are not optimal, but not the worst offenders if prepped correctly.
Calcium deficiency is a big CW paranoia. Search the site and other primal sites for more on calcium and the dairy issue.
I'm glad to hear you want to stick with it!
Posted 4 months ago # -
I'd certainly recommend reading "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes. You will see the "many studies implicating Saturated Fats as bad" are flawed at best and outright frauds in reality when you look at the study itself. DO NOT trust the media's reporting of the study, or the author's own interpretation of the study. Read THE STUDY.
Dr Eade's blog is also a go to resource to see studies dissected, debunked, and explained. Nutrition is not science (as practiced currently), but is a belief system influenced by special interests and political pull.
Carbs, per se, are not an issue for most people. It is the source of carbs (grains, sugar, alcohol, etc) and the large amount of carbs forcing out the nutrition, found in protein and fats from ideal sources. Carbs offer us nothing in the way of building blocks, repair of tissues, building and maintinence of neuron, signaling pathways, hormones, etc. Remember, carbs provide only a minor bit of energy and nothing else.
No need to obsess on "low carb", just concentrate on eliminating toxins (vegetable/seed oils, sugars, alcohol, grains, processed foods) and eat from whole foods, naturally sourced (vegetables, meat, seafood, fowl, raw dairy if you tolerate it).
Do read "GCBC" by Taubes, "Primal Body, Primal Mind" by Gedgaudas, dig through an old post a day on Dr Michael Eades' Protein Power Blog. It won't take long for you to fully wrap your head around "low carb" and understand the benefits of eating real whole foods, and lots of Saturated Fat, lots of animal sourced foods. Other great blogs, are "Whole Health Source", "Nephropal", DrBG's Animal Pharm", and "Hyperlipid" and "PaleoNu" so many classically medically trained people, laying down the true science behind nutrition.
We stand at the very tip of the spear as the world gets an education to truly proper human nutrition, and it sure ain't grain based.
Posted 4 months ago # -
bobbylight
BlockedYeah Vick, that is what I am thinking. When I do my burpees with a pushup at the bottom now, I feel like I explode out of my pushups with power that I lacked before. Of course that could also have something to do with the 25 pounds less I am pushing up :)
Anyway, I do think that natural seems to be the best way to eat for the most part. But I do think that I will bring back dairy into my diet. At the least, I will start eating yogurt and cheese.
Posted 4 months ago # -
musajen
Memberbobby - personally I think half the battle is cutting out the processed stuff and getting back to real whole foods. Giving up grains and sugar pretty much takes care of 90% (maybe more) of the processed stuff we tend to reach for.
If you do decide to go back to some grains, I'd recommend researching the best ways to prepare them, i.e. sprouting, soaking, etc to make them as body friendly as possible (a good resource for this is the book Nourishing Traditions).
Someone hit on this earlier, but the sugar spikes and crashes in our blood stream is one really good reason to consume as few grains as possible (even if prepared properly). In its digested form, a whole grain is simply sugar and it's going to thrust your system onto that roller coaster that spikes blood sugar, floods your system with insulin, raises blood pressure, and jacks with your mood - all of which make us more susceptible to disease. Revisiting this everyday is going to start a cycle that won't let you off without a fight.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Vick
MemberWhat I find interesting is very few on this board or the research papers I read are really looking at the total package.
Many seem to be diet oriented or fitness oriented instead of finding the real balance and considering the two.
What I find is there is very little doubt on this board that CW has it wrong with diet. But the same members buy into CW when it comes to training.
There are a few here that are opening up to the fact if you train for less then 10 minutes a week at high intensity the gains are stunning.
I'm waiting for someone to say "OK... I'll test it."
I've not posted my results to brag... I've posted them to get your attention to the fact you all can enjoy gains like this too. I didn't blindly buy it the concept. I tried it, recorded my achievements and was stunned by the results.
Posted 4 months ago # -
klcarbaugh
MemberI'm with SerialSinner. If I find any evidence that contradicts what I believe to be true I am willing to reassess what I thought before or even throw it out altogether.
There is no evidence that 5 percent cabs are really any better than 20% carbs or even 30% (if you are insulin/leptin sensitive). For now I think people can adapt paleo to whatever fits them.
For those that have sensitivity to carbs, dropping them usually yields significant improvement.Posted 4 months ago # -
Niklas
Memberon Lyle McDonald forum you won't find much acknowledgement of what an healthy diet can do. I mean Lyle is very knowledgeable but not what you would consider an example of great health. He doesn't believe that diet and lifestyle can change your entire life so much and is probably laughing at holistic people who think they can improve their health drastically. We're used to people claiming the health they obtained changed their perspective in life and made them more optimistic, easy-going, confident, lively and probably Lyle would think they're all self-deluded pansies. In his forum health is all about weight and being thin is the only thing they think diet can do for you, if you can be thin and eat all the tex-mex you want, all the better.
By the way: I still can't understand how come diet and lifestyle changes are so powerful for certain people, to the point that they credit every positive change on them (finding a job, believing in yourself, learning to play an instrument, winning at sport, loving life again, feeling never tired...) and so irrelevant for others to the point they think the only thing healthy eating can do for you is removing fat from your frame; even though both have applied and studied the effect of nutrition extensively. Weird.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Vick, I'm currently testing Body by Science. I bought the book a couple of weeks ago and have done two workouts so far. I'm a 42-year-old woman, 5' 5", 130 pounds, not overweight but not in shape either. I've gotten stronger since August doing bodyweight exercises, but now have stopped those for the most part and am hitting the gym once a week. It's hard making the mental adjustment that once a week is enough, but I'm a fundamentally lazy person so I'm willing to give it a shot. ;)
Posted 4 months ago # -
meatman
MemberRead Lyle's recommendation with a little more atention to detail.
His base line for carbs is 100gm a day. With in this level he states the following:
- first get your vegetables and fibre
- have 1 serving of dairy
- If you have anything left of the 100gm, eat a serving of fruit.I doubt if you would have much left over from doing that and the 1-2gm you get with nuts, condiments etc..certainly not enough for anything other than perhaps a Wasa cracker
Posted 4 months ago # -
Mr B
MemberI've been doubting 'low carb-zero carb' for the almost 2 months i've been experimenting with it.
aside from the few beers i've had 2 or 3 times and the jalapeno poppers i've had twice...the only things i've eaten are meat, eggs, cheese, butter, coconut oil, olive oil and fish (spices, etc).
dunno about long term affects, but so far...i've never felt better. at least not in a LONG time. and even though i have a ways to go physically, i've been showing more definition and my strength is improving.
doubt it all the time...but i'm going to keep doing it indefinitely.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I tell you what, after being pretty "carby" the last couple weeks, and going back to Carnivore today, I feel SO much better eating Carnivore. I still have produce in the house, but I'm going to spread it out for sure. Saves money too.
Posted 4 months ago # -
*waves madly* cooeee! I can totally agree with Vick. I've had an enforced change of exercise regime due to my back problems. Weights are off the agenda for me right now so I've been reduced to very limited HIIT - couldn't bear the no exercise thing at all. Well, given my suddenly reduced activity, I am stunned to see that my arms are more muscular than they were, my quads are more defined, my back is sculpted... And that's just from the bike and odd session on the rowing machine, over a 10 day period. I'm still eating the same, am a lot less active but look great (IMHO!).
Posted 4 months ago # -
lil_earthmomma
MemberOh ya, my routine right now. Squats holding weights, lunges holding weights, bench press etc. I do everything till I can't do one more, and try to keep it between 8-10 reps. So if I do 12, I up the weight next week. I've just started this.
I also do yoga and some cardio.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I sometimes have days when I feel a little nauseous and dizzy for no apparent reason, and those are the days I doubt whether this diet is truly healthy. I'm also very underweight for my height, and finding it difficult to comsume enough calories each day. I'm just not that hungry any more, and I can only eat so much fat, you know?
But then I remember the chronic heartburn I used to have, and the hunger-induced shaky hands, and the huge mid-afternoon energy crashes, and I don't want to go back to that roller-coaster either.
So right now, I'm trying to find a healthy balance. I've added sweet potatoes back in several times a week, and I'm thinking of occasionally having some quinoa or a slice of Ezekiel bread now and then.
I'm just taking it one day at a time, and trying to let my body tell me what it needs.
Posted 4 months ago # -
@pellegrina - and I think that's the key - being able to listen to our bodies is something that seems to be more difficult on a non-primal diet - all the processed food and (for me) over-abundance of grains/gluten had me in a right old state.
This way of eating is definitely for tweaking, to suit each of us individually.
I hope you get to a good balance soon.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Bobby,
Let me get this straight - you've lost 30 or so pounds in six weeks, you feel great, your endurance is getting better, you love how PB makes you feel, and you understand the concepts. And then you doubt low carb? How do you think you're losing the weight? Magic?
You can't doubt low carb AND say that you 'understand the concepts' - because if you really do understand the concept, the part about carb limits, then you won't doubt.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Yes... long term health... what lies beneath. That's the unseen and often unfelt factor in all this. As the person stated many posts ago his relative in his 70s felt fine, ate well, walked 2 miles a day but had to have triple bypass surgery. If feeling and "the mirror" are your only barometers, they are also the only part of the iceberg you can see.
Posted 4 months ago # -
I've been working on a certificate program in natural treatment of insulin resistance/metabolic syndrome and so have had to study a lot about low carb diets and ketogenic diets. Ketogenic diets are very safe. According to my course materials neurologists have been using ketogenic diets for over 70 years to treat seizures with no adverse effects. And yes, the person must stay on that type of very low carb diet lifelong. Los of blood glucose tends to excite the brain and then cause seizures.
BTW, treatment for metabolic syndrome is basically PB.
Posted 4 months ago # -
Pikaia
MemberBobby, you have to define what you mean by "long term health" in terms of things that can be quantified. So far I've seen you mention longevity and possible risks associated with saturated fat intake. If there are other measures that interest you, list 'em. And I hope you'll check out the links I'm going to provide.
LONGEVITY is an easy one. So far, the most promising possibility for extending lifespan is calorie restriction. It hasn't been proven in humans yet (studies are ongoing), but a whole lotta animal models back this up. They're too numerous to list, so Pubmed it if you want examples.
There seem to be many possible paths to calorie restriction: low carb (due to higher satiety), high fiber, raw food (effective calorie restriction due to decreased absorption), calorie counting, etc.
Limiting sugar intake may be another significant factor in longevity, as shown in recent paper out of Cynthia Kenyon's lab. (Worms? Relevant? Why yes, actually they are.)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/11/091103121605.htm
Regarding SATURATED FAT: don't believe everything you've read. Most of it probably was either untrue or was poorly done science. Check out this column by Taubes. It is a few years old, but it is a heck of a lot shorter than his book. He's a journalist, not a scientist or diet plan guru, so there's no reason to think he went into this with a vested interest in a specific outcome.
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html
On a related note, I'll mention LIPID PROFILES. Lipid profiles are predictive for heart disease risk, and we're just now finally seeing results from large studies intended to compare various dietary strategies. Despite high saturated fat intake, Atkins is soundly beating low-fat diets (and the SAD) in terms of lipid profile improvement. A summary of these study results can be found in a talk given by UCSF nutritionist Andrea Garber titled "Fad Diets: Do They Really Work?" (This is from the same lecture series as the excellent talk on sugar that has already been recommended to you.)
http://www.uctv.tv/search-details.aspx?showID=16715
The whole talk is worthwhile, but the discussion of clinical studies comparing diets begins at 1:07:00. She begins with weight loss results, and then moves into lipid profiles. Pretty compelling results, aren't they?
Garber seems to have a soft spot for the Mediterranean diet, even though Atkins appears to trounce it in terms of heart disease risk factors. Her main concern re: Atkins seems to be lack of micronutrients, which I can agree with. But Primal/Paleo-type diets make this a non-issue, right? Hopefully someday we'll see a Paleo-type diet in these studies.
Posted 4 months ago # -
bobbylight
BlockedI have watched the fad diet video, as well as the video on the youtube by the stanford professor that did the study she focuses on...anyway, those studies are all short term. We don't really know what it will be like for the long term.
Also, for all the people saying "well we don't know how people's insides look and if you feel good that doesn't mean you are healthy"...yeah, well that applies to people that feel good on the PB too. It seems there is a double standard in that regard.
Posted 4 months ago # -
It seems we have people on one side saying SUGAR is the enemy and on the other, FATS are the enemy. I'm wondering if they're both right and wrong at the same time... that maybe the real enemy is when BOTH sugars and fats get together. Maybe it's the magnetic attraction of each to the other that forms the sticky goo that hardens into plaque in your arteries.
Posted 4 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.