Paleo Diet Experiences?

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by r2473

Exercise seems to be at best no help but probably a hindrance / negative to their weight loss (or weight maintenance) efforts.

Have I said anything about this? I love to exercise, and have done so most of my life. Never considered it a hindrance for weight loss. Please stop putting words in my mouth thank you...

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

Carb consumption has not increased, quality of food has decreased, our environment has changed.

I would say that a part of or result of this decreasing of food quality is a rise in carb consumption, and a change to more refined carbs. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr...304a3.htm#fig1

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

Some people may be driving their hunger by overconsumption of poor quality carbs and a diet lacking in protein but a lot of people just make bad choices too.
This is not carbs driving hunger, this is just people choosing to eat higher calorie foods. I don't think people gain weight because they are too lazy to exercise, I think people gain weight because they are too damn lazy to make their own food.

A burger menu has an obscene amount of carbs imo. So does a pizza, especially if it is accompanied by a soft drink.

[r2473]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

Have I said anything about this? I love to exercise, and have done so most of my life. Never considered it a hindrance for weight loss. Please stop putting words in my mouth thank you...

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

I think the point is that Joe Blow unregulated will eat more as a result of exercising. In many cases it would take regulating to keep him from doing so.

That was your response to Itagaki in post #312.

[r2473]

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

It seems to me like Taubes thinks his idea applies to everybody, carbs raise insulin, insulin drives hunger and causes fat gain, everybody has insulin so therefore this applies to everybody. If Taubes is saying this idea applies to a limited specific group of people, then I agree, but that's not what I get from what he is saying -

At this point in the thread, I think to understand what Taubes says, you would have to take the time to carefully read Taubes. I don't trust that his ideas have been presented accurately in this thread.

But thanks for the articles and links Pitmiksovc. My "gut feeling" is that people are different and will react differently to different dieting styles.

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

I think people gain weight because they are too damn lazy to make their own food.

I think that's at the heart of it. I'm not sure if I would say its 100% laziness. I'd say part lifestyle, part lack of skill / knowledge, not having a home that is organized toward cooking for yourself, and part just plain laziness.

Your "what people eat" and "where people eat" charts do coincide with drastic social changes. The way we choose to live our lives simply isn't conducive towards good health IMO, no matter how many health club memberships you buy or how many books you read on eating healthy and dieting.

[Pitmiksovic]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

I would say that a part of or result of this decreasing of food quality is a rise in carb consumption, and a change to more refined carbs. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwr...304a3.htm#fig1

Carb consumption has risen since the 50s but it never exceeded the amount consumed in the early 1900s. Consumption of sugar specifically has skyrocketed since the 70s. Grain consumption while higher than it was in the 50s is actually less than in the early 1900s, when obesity rates were lowest.

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

A burger menu has an obscene amount of carbs imo. So does a pizza, especially if it is accompanied by a soft drink.

But it also has an obscene amount of fat. It just has a ton of calories overall. Soft drinks are loaded with added sugars, you can't compare that to quality carbs. Yes sugar is part of the problem, but not sweet potatoes, squash, and rutabaga. Lets be specific about what carbs we are talking about and not just lump all carbs into one category.

Originally Posted by r2473

At this point in the thread, I think to understand what Taubes says, you would have to take the time to carefully read Taubes. I don't trust that his ideas have been presented accurately in this thread.

But thanks for the articles and links Pitmiksovc. My "gut feeling" is that people are different and will react differently to different dieting styles

No prob

I do think the taubes ideas in this thread are accurate, like I said before, i really looked into this idea for awhile. GuyClinch does know what he's talking about when it comes to Taubes, I just disagree with the premise. Just like there is no correlation between saturated fat and heart disease, there is no correlation in the food data records between carb intake and obesity.

[OTMPut]

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

Just like there is no correlation between saturated fat and heart disease, there is no correlation in the food data records between carb intake and obesity.

It is quite difficult to draw useful conclusions from population-wise food data. There are lag effects (which is difficult to quantify) and per capita consumption of food obtained from a simple division by population is useless at best.

[r2473]

deleted. dskslkjss

[kevin-af]

All the answers that most of you guys are looking for are in that 1h38 video presentation by Doug McGuff, MD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2PdJFbjWHEU

He uses solid biochemistry model supporting his science.

P.S. In the industry, sugar (Glucose) from plant has been replaced for monetary reasons by high fructose corn syrup, which price is fairly more stable in the markets. Unfortunately, fructose goes straight to bodyfat when the body is overfed with glucose and glycogens reserves are full. (about 12 hours per day for the average american)

[Bartelby]

HFCS is definitely a huge part of the obesity epidemic:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2...-making-us-fat

[Bartelby]

I once had an excited argument with a teenager who was obsessed with 'fat' and highly agitated by my use of olive oil and unpersuaded by my pointing to the sugar content of all her foods:


'"When you take the fat out of a recipe, food tastes like cardboard, and you need to replace it with something – that something being sugar.""

[Bartelby]

All this is undoubtedly correct except for the moralizing ending about people to lazy to prepare their own food.

The surest way to never solve a problem is to moralize about it.

Syrup-laden fast food is addictive.

It has to be strictly regulated.

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

It seems to me like Taubes thinks his idea applies to everybody, carbs raise insulin, insulin drives hunger and causes fat gain, everybody has insulin so therefore this applies to everybody. If Taubes is saying this idea applies to a limited specific group of people, then I agree, but that's not what I get from what he is saying - People either need to cut carbs to lose weight, or they are "lucky" and can eat carbs. So explain to me how I am "lucky" because I can't just cut my carbs and trust my body to regulate my food intake and not exercise and have lbs magically fall off. Instead I have to track my calories and work my *** off to get my body to respond, which GuyClinch says is the difficult way. How is that "lucky"?

While cutting carbs may be a good solution for some, it still does not mean that carbs as a whole are the cause of obesity. I don't understand how you can look at the food data for the last 100 years and pin the blame on carbs. Carb consumption has not increased, quality of food has decreased, our environment has changed. As a % of total calories carbs have actually decreased. Higher quality carbs have been replaced by sugar. The increase in carb intake from the 70s on in the graph coincides with the rise in sugar intake in the 70s. The decrease in carb intake from 1909 to the 50s is most likely the decrease in grain intake I mentioned earlier in this thread, but remember while grain and carb intake was decreasing at this time, obesity was on the rise.






Some people may be driving their hunger by overconsumption of poor quality carbs and a diet lacking in protein but a lot of people just make bad choices too.

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.co...ulin.html#more



"The data come from USDA figures; fast food expenditures were not tracked before 1929. There are a few things to note here:
93 percent of food was consumed at home in 1889, and most of that was homemade from scratch.
In 2009, barely half (51%) of food was consumed at home, the rest was consumed in either full-service or fast food restaurants. Probably a high proportion of what was consumed at home was actually processed food.
Fast food was not a significant expenditure before 1960, after which it rapidly gained in popularity. Today, fast food accounts for 18 percent of total food expenditures."

This is not carbs driving hunger, this is just people choosing to eat higher calorie foods. Crisco oil came about around the 1920s, tv dinners in the 30s, fast food in the 40s and 50s, and the surge in sugar intake was from the 70s on. All the while people started working more sedentary jobs and living more sedentary lifestyles, all in an environment of easy access to crap *** quality foods. I don't think people gain weight because they are too lazy to exercise, I think people gain weight because they are too damn lazy to make their own food.

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by r2473

That was your response to Itagaki in post #312.

I was trying to clarify a post that you seemed to have misunderstood, sorry if that was not clear. To conclude from that like you did is not warranted imo.

[Povl Carstensen]

Yes it takes effort to eat well. But to say the problem is just being lazy is too vague imo. And really does not make it any easier for people. To me it is more about being informed than willpower. By taking out the soft drink and fries from a fast food meal and replacing it with more protein (chicken wings?) and milk or juice (in a smaller serving than the ridiolous sizes of soft drinks) you move the emphasis from carb towards protein. And it seems conducive to weight maintenance and loss. This is more constructive than just saying people are lazy. But of course I am not against well- and home made food. I am a strong advocate of ecological products also, which you rarely get in fast food. But there are tactics that seem to work in the real everyday world also. Its not all or nothing. Its about applied knowledge and experience imo.

[r2473]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

I was trying to clarify a post that you seemed to have misunderstood, sorry if that was not clear. To conclude from that like you did is not warranted imo.

Well, what is your view of exercise with respect to weight loss / maintenance?

Sorry, I thought that you were in agreement with Taubes on this. I guess I shouldn't have used you as part of my example.

It doesn't really matter by the way. I just used you in the example because you seemed to be as sympathetic with Taubes view on everything as Clinch. My only point was to just say that people are different and react differently (exercise, carbs, etc). Pitmiksovic has provided some studies concerning exercise and weight loss and different diet methods and weight loss.

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by r2473

At this point in the thread, I think to understand what Taubes says, you would have to take the time to carefully read Taubes.

Heureka! I have a bad consience that I have not yet watched the lecture. Maybe we should do it before posting gain? I will try...
Edit: Oh, now there are two lectures to watch...

[r2473]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

Yes it takes effort to eat well. But to say the problem is just being lazy is too vague imo. And really does not make it any easier for people. To me it is more about being informed than willpower.

This I can't agree with. I don't think it has anything to do with lack of information or understanding. It could apply to a few people, but find any overweight person you want and start asking them health and diet questions. I bet you'll find that they understand things pretty well. They may not understand all the nuances of insulin rollercoasters and fat storage, but they probably have a pretty intuitive sense of what is healthy and what isn't.

And they probably really don't care. Other things take priority.

So I'm not sure if "lazy" is a good way of putting it either. People just (implicitly) prioritize "goods" (meaning, things that are considered "good" by the agent in question). Do I want good taste? Convenience? Health? Taste and convenience are immediately gratified. "Health" is a bit abstract and long term. Nobody notices any health problems "immediately" after eating fast food. It take a while.

Just basic lifestyle choices.

[Bartelby]

Taubes seems to make it clear in his NYT article that sugar is a very particular type of carb and that seems to be a distinction that can not be lost sight of.

[Povl Carstensen]

Originally Posted by Pitmiksovic

Carb consumption has risen since the 50s but it never exceeded the amount consumed in the early 1900s. Consumption of sugar specifically has skyrocketed since the 70s. Grain consumption while higher than it was in the 50s is actually less than in the early 1900s, when obesity rates were lowest.

Yes, perhaps sugar is a worse culprit than grains, especially wholegrain, (nonindustrialized).

[r2473]

Originally Posted by Povl Carstensen

Heureka! I have a bad consience that I have not yet watched the lecture. Maybe we should do it before posting gain? I will try...
Edit: Oh, now there are two lectures to watch...

No bad conscience. I simply don't know if what I'm getting second hand in this thread is an accurate rendering of his ideas.

That said, I doubt I will read his book. But that just simply means that I won't really know for sure what he says. My knowledge will be based on second hand information and I'll be at the mercy of the bias of the messenger.

I can live with that.