Diet Thread

[Nobody]

I think that a lot of people on that forum have issues that go way beyond a simple diet problem. In many cases the issues they have manifest themselves in an array of eating disorders. Asking them to adopt this or that "idealised" one simple diet will cure your ills is frankly fanciful.

You or others having food addiction problems doesn't change the ideal diet for human health.

I think you are taking the 5:2 diet and what it can achieve [out] of context.

No doubt fasting has it's merits. Mixing it with the standard AU diet is going to give mixed results at best. Poor results at worst. Other than the weight loss, I haven't been convinced it's a health promoting diet plan.

I'm not sure if your trying to be mischievous or just mean?

Neither. I'm focusing on your results as a person recommending a diet to others on a public forum. Everyone who does that should be open to scrutiny of their results, since they should be following the diet they recommend. Just like the diet book writers. It is one thing to choose a path that may be continuing to damage your own health. Recommending it to others could damage their health, or at least divert them from a healthier eating plan.

Asking many of them to eat just "your proven diet" would be akin to asking them to stop breathing for 5 minutes. Never going to happen.

First, it's not my diet. I'm just a follower of a healthy proven diet plan. I'm encouraging others to also take that path, or move toward a path that should improve their health.
Whether they will change is entirely up to them. I just present the information and/or evidence.

The fact that many of them are attempting to turn their lives around is to be commended on that forum and if the diet helps them get there I think its a great thing.

You thinking 5:2 is a great thing doesn't make it so.

Insisting that one diet will work for everyone, sorry I simply cant subscribe to that, unless Darwin had it all wrong and genetic diversity is a myth.

5:2 isn't really working even for the man who popularised the diet if he needs to be on statins. Like many bogus diet plans, they may give you weight loss. But if they aren't healthy, then the authors are reckless IMO.

I checked into hsCRP as I just don't know enough about it to comment. I got told there was only a moderate correlation with metabolic syndrome. Is there supposed to be a high correlation?

hsCRP is an inflammation marker and is correlated with atherosclerosis.

Same with cholesterol measurements, its the LDL-P rather than LDL-C measurements that provide a better correlation or am I not understanding that properly?

From what I've seen so far, hsCRP is a better indicator of atherosclerosis than any LDL derivative.

[Nobody]

If you want to loose weight by cycling, you also need to cut the fat in your diet. Carbs fuel the body, fats are stores for emergency supplys, but we don't have emergency supplys as we eat to well in the west.

fat is burn't by breathing out as carbon dioxide, and sweat as water. Don't keep replacing it, by eating more fat.

Yes carbs still need to be eating on long rides as it is easier for the body to access as instant fuel.

Oh gee so why didn't I get hungry on a 60km ride with only 42g butter, 3 TBSP coconut oil, 25g cream for calories before my morning ride on Saturday.

Softy didn't mention hunger. Some people feel hungry on rides. I almost never have, regardless of the hours spent or what my diet was.

For people on a more normal diet, where they eat more than 40% of their energy intake from carbs, reducing fat intake will usually reduce body weight. Replacing processed carbs with whole food sources of carbs/starches will also help. I've found reducing protein intake also helps.

In terms of cholesterol you want little of the LDL-P particles and lots of the LDL-L particles which cause no harm.

http://nutritionfacts.org/video/does-ch ... ze-matter/

[barefoot]

Oh gee so why didn't I get hungry on a 60km ride with only 42g butter, 3 TBSP coconut oil, 25g cream for calories before my morning ride on Saturday.

oh gee, when carrying over 5kg of bodyfat, why did you even bother eating more fat before your Saturday ride?

So to your mind, body fat is entirely equivalent to, and interchangeable with dietary fat?

For mine, Baalzamon didn't get hungry because he was still running on the glycogen from the previous night's dinner. And even if that was running out, he'd probably only run out of legs... not get hungry.

[Baalzamon]

Oh gee so why didn't I get hungry on a 60km ride with only 42g butter, 3 TBSP coconut oil, 25g cream for calories before my morning ride on Saturday.

oh gee, when carrying over 5kg of bodyfat, why did you even bother eating more fat before your Saturday ride?

So to your mind, body fat is entirely equivalent to, and interchangeable with dietary fat?

For mine, Baalzamon didn't get hungry because he was still running on the glycogen from the previous night's dinner. And even if that was running out, he'd probably only run out of legs... not get hungry.

I'm giving my body an alternate fuel source. Need to provide fat to it so it will use that instead of it going down the gluconeogenesis path. And as to my glucose stores. Friday night 4.0 mmol/l , Saturday morning 3.5 mmol/l with a very high 4.1 ketone level. So I was running on ketones and not glucose.

[Nobody]

I thought the below video was interesting as it showed how he gradually went vegan. He also lost the extra weight before he even gave up cheese because he didn't eat it regularly (03:48).



I suddenly went vegan and lost most of my weight over about the first 3 months. I moved on to WFPB (WFV) about a year ago when I ditched bread and (for the most part) salt and sugar too. Oil was already long gone. The interesting part about that is I only lost another 1kg over a year by doing so.

So if it's just about the weight, you could do that by just being vegan if you're careful and watch your macro nutrient ratios. Or as CK would say, get enough serves of veg. Of course WFV is healthier, which is why I'm still doing it.

[CKinnard]

So to your mind, body fat is entirely equivalent to, and interchangeable with dietary fat?

For mine, Baalzamon didn't get hungry because he was still running on the glycogen from the previous night's dinner. And even if that was running out, he'd probably only run out of legs... not get hungry.

the body doesn't recognize the difference between body and dietary fat, once both are in the blood stream.
the smarts is in readily mobilizing body fat, considering fat is the body's preferred fuel at low METs.

as for hunger, that's a lot more complicated than low blood glucose.

[Nobody]

Are you testing blood glucose Nobody? I am and I'm averaging around 3.8 and I'm keeping under 4.4 with spikes of less than 0.5 points after eating low carb high fat foods. My ketones are producing nicely as well.

As WH1 said, no point me being concerned about blood glucose since I'm not even close to diabetic and not doing low carb. But I did go back through my blood tests to find "Glucose Random" (non-fasting) was 4.8 mmol/L, less than 3 hours after eating fruit in Sept 2014. Seems fine to me since the middle of the range is 5.7 mmol/L. I'll request glucose in my next fasting 6 monthly blood test in April.

[Baalzamon]

Are you testing blood glucose Nobody? I am and I'm averaging around 3.8 and I'm keeping under 4.4 with spikes of less than 0.5 points after eating low carb high fat foods. My ketones are producing nicely as well.

As WH1 said, no point me being concerned about blood glucose since I'm not even close to diabetic and not doing low carb. But I did go back through my blood tests to find "Glucose Random" (non-fasting) was 4.8 mmol/L, less than 3 hours after eating fruit in Sept 2014. Seems fine to me since the middle of the range is 5.7 mmol/L. I'll request glucose in my next fasting 6 monthly blood test in April.

Ok so my blood glucose is lower than yours with an average of 3.7 mmol/l

So to your mind, body fat is entirely equivalent to, and interchangeable with dietary fat?

For mine, Baalzamon didn't get hungry because he was still running on the glycogen from the previous night's dinner. And even if that was running out, he'd probably only run out of legs... not get hungry.

the body doesn't recognize the difference between body and dietary fat, once both are in the blood stream.
the smarts is in readily mobilizing body fat, considering fat is the body's preferred fuel at low METs.

as for hunger, that's a lot more complicated than low blood glucose.

Not for people in ketosis. I'm in a ketosis state confirmed using a Freestyle Neo Optium glucose/ketone meter. I'm soundly in nutritional ketosis. When I eat fat it gets converted to Ketones. http://www.ketogenic-diet-resource.com/ketones.html

[CKinnard]

Not for people in ketosis. I'm in a ketosis state confirmed using a Freestyle Neo Optium glucose/ketone meter. I'm soundly in nutritional ketosis. When I eat fat it gets converted to Ketones. http://www.ketogenic-diet-resource.com/ketones.html

Ketosis doesn't treat dietary fat different to fat mobilized from body stores.

Surely the goal is to avoid ketosis by increasing your body's ability to use acetoacetic acid.
I don't know whose advice you are following but moving to a very high fat diet is best done slowly, because the body's metabolism adapts slowly.

What advantage do you see in eating a high fat low carb diet?

[Nobody]

Ok so my blood glucose is lower than yours with an average of 3.7 mmol/l

Low carbers should have lower blood glucose, trigs and a higher HDL. Doesn't mean much in reality. My glucose is well within the healthy range.
Since we're comparing, what's your BMI and WHtR? There is more to assessing health than just blood numbers.

While you're concentrating on how good your glucose, trigs and HDL are, you're probably ignoring LDL. I'd be interested to see your posted results for hsCRP and cholesterol. But somehow I don't think that will happen. Most GPs seeing the average keto/low_carber's cholesterol results would want to put them on statins.
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/jimm ... 2013/18256

Also I wouldn't want to sacrifice performance on the bike.

Don't let others deceive you into thinking you have a healthy diet. There isn't a body of legitimate science to back it up.

[Nobody]

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health ... 27f04504d3

Dietitians Association of Australia spokeswoman Charlene Grosse said you couldn’t get all the necessary nutrients from one food...From eating just potatoes, a person will not consume enough fatty acids, omega-3 or protein.

We shall see. McDougall believes you can. Andrew Taylor has already done over a month, so surely the cracks should be starting to appear if you can't get all the essential nutrients.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC1jo7m ... GS1JS7QpxQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Data sheets:
http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/veg ... cts/2556/2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://nutritiondata.self.com/facts/veg ... cts/2948/2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Aussiebullet]

Will be watching this with some interest, blood tests would be interesting.

[Baalzamon]

Ok so my blood glucose is lower than yours with an average of 3.7 mmol/l

Low carbers should have lower blood glucose, trigs and a higher HDL. Doesn't mean much in reality. My glucose is well within the healthy range.
Since we're comparing, what's your BMI and WHtR? There is more to assessing health than just blood numbers.

While you're concentrating on how good your glucose, trigs and HDL are, you're probably ignoring LDL. I'd be interested to see your posted results for hsCRP and cholesterol. But somehow I don't think that will happen. Most GPs seeing the average keto/low_carber's cholesterol results would want to put them on statins.
http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/jimm ... 2013/18256

Also I wouldn't want to sacrifice performance on the bike.

Don't let others deceive you into thinking you have a healthy diet. There isn't a body of legitimate science to back it up.

Off to the doctors today for bloodwork and a good chat. And the fact that there isn't a massive body of legitimate science you can blame big pharma and the food industry for that. They are too invested in the current scheme. Just go back in history and look what scientists referred an anti fat diet to the US government and who's pockets they were deep in.... Big pharma and the food industry.

[Nobody]

And the fact that there isn't a massive body of legitimate science you can blame big pharma and the food industry for that. They are too invested in the current scheme.

Why? The food industries have been actively funding studies to try to whitewash dietary cholesterol and saturated fat. They have been trying to get us to eat more fat, since even lean meat is 20% fat by calories. Standard milk is 48% fat by calories. The 2015 dietary recommendations even lists cholesterol as not a nutrient of concern, despite the findings (see below), so they are succeeding.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/how-the ... g-studies/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yW7ljppz5JQ" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
https://youtu.be/q1oB569xq88?t=3m35s" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Just go back in history and look what scientists referred an anti fat diet to the US government and who's pockets they were deep in.... Big pharma and the food industry.

The McGovern report was the start of the industries' intervention in US government dietary recommendations. The objectors were primarily the dairy, meat, egg, sugar and salt industries.
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/the-mcgovern-report/

Obesity has significantly increased since the '80s. The post below shows the highest dietary increase over that period was fat, followed by (mainly processed) grains.
viewtopic.php?f=49&t=83496&start=650#p1312459" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[CKinnard]

Here's more food for thought in the LCHF vs HCLF wars!

The argument between the two diets is generally in the context of which is better to lose weight, and keep it off.

I want to spell out something about the fundamental biochemistry of energy metabolism.
When you are trying to lose weight, you are presumably in a Calorie deficit.

Now the thing is, if you are eating HFLC and also on a Calorie deficit, then it is very likely you are not getting adequate carbohydrate to keep your brain and red blood cells supplied with glucose (their primary fuel source).

Does anyone know how the body creates glucose when eating HFLC and on an energy deficit? (let's keep in mind although the brain can be trained to use a higher % of fat, this is only a small % change).

- It doesn't create glucose from carbs, because there isn't enough.
- It doesn't create glucose from fat, because this is not an efficient source. Why so? although triglycerides (stored fat) can be broken down into glycerol and fatty acids, and glycerol can be converted to pyruvate, which can be converted to glucose, this pathway creates way too much fatty acid for human health.
- Hence, the preferred pathway for glucose production on a HFLC diet is the breakdown of protein, and half the resulting amino acid pool can be converted to glucose. So the downside of HFLC diets is body lean tissue is heavily broken down to keep the brain and red blood cells in glucose, via the pyruvate pathway.

HFLC advocates have guidelines on getting a minimum amount of carbs. However, if your job requires a lot of mental energy, and you also do a lot of cardio exercise requiring your red blood cells to carry a lot of oxygen, these guidelines are very likely to be inadequate. Hence, you are very likely to break down way too much lean tissue on a HFLC diet.

This metabolism 'trap' is something I rarely see covered properly in populist diet books. However, a physiology lecturer and good friend spelt out the details of this common bro science misconception to me over the holidays.

So those using HFLC diets for weight loss will lose a higher percentage of lean tissue.

[Baalzamon]

Tell me how many calories I need to eat
6 foot, 103kg.

I'm eating 2300 calories and losing weight...

[CKinnard]

Give me your age as well, and I can tell you your approx BMR based on the above.
If you give me your approx bodyfat % I can give you an even more accurate BMR estimate.
If you give me your activity breakdown in METs, I can tell you how much to eat to maintain weight, or lose a kg a week.

[Baalzamon]

Give me your age as well, and I can tell you your approx BMR based on the above.
If you give me your approx bodyfat % I can give you an even more accurate BMR estimate.
If you give me your activity breakdown in METs, I can tell you how much to eat to maintain weight, or lose a kg a week.

39 on sat
My scales reckon I'm around 29% bodyfat
My scales reckong my BMI is 31
Scales are Tanita BC-1000
Walk about 6km per day
Cycling 100km per week

[CKinnard]

If you spread your activity evenly over each day of the week, on average you require 3000 Calories/day to maintain current bodyweight.
If you want to lose 1kg a week, you would eat 2000 Calories a day.

However, this calculation needs to be re-done every 5kg of bodyweight loss, as your energy burn will decrease significantly.

[Nobody]

Will be watching this with some interest, blood tests would be interesting.

I sent him an e-mail at spudfit[at]gmail.com and asked him to post blood test results somewhere when he's finished. I suspect I won't be the only one to ask. His results should add to the body of evidence that shows it can be done.

[Gassy]

Rethinking the Calorie

So - is there any point counting calories?

The gut Microbiome & how if affects our health

This is was is intriguing me at the moment- How do we ensure we have a diverse and healthy gut? A whole host of factors seem to have led to a decline in the diversity and 'effectiveness' of our guts - processed foods -antibiotics, lack of fiber,breastfeeding, cesarean births etc.
This seems to be playing such a large role in our overall health.

[Baalzamon]

Has anyone heard of Leaky Gut?

[Nobody]

Rethinking the Calorie

So - is there any point counting calories?

It's more useful to count calories in respect to the ratio of intake rather than outright numbers.

From the article:

“If we cut back on some of these things,” [sugars], he says, “it seems to revert our body back to more appropriate, arguably less efficient metabolism, so that we aren’t accumulating fat cells in our body.”

Simply, a calorie isn't a calorie because the body (or gut microbiom) absorbs/processes different foods differently. The type of food you eat regularly also changes your gut microbiom. So for the same calories ingested with a western diet causes a higher average insulin level and therefore adds more weight. A whole food vegan diet (with the correct maco-nutrient ratio) will add the least weight. In the China Study/Project the (office worker) Chinese ate more calories and had lower BMIs than the Americans.

[Regular readers can stop reading here, just repetition below.]
As an example, I'm 173cm and ~64kg. I don't do a lot of exercise with bike riding being < 100km/week. I regularly eat 2800 Cal a day regulated by hunger. The macro ratio is ~C81:F9:P10, with a Cal density < 1 Cal/g. My BMI is 21.4 currently. If I did the same number of calories on a western diet I would expect to have a BMI easily over 27 (because that's what I used to be) and possibly over 30.

[Nobody]

Off to the doctors today for bloodwork and a good chat.

Has anyone heard of Leaky Gut?

So can I take it the bloodwork chat didn't go as planned? That happened to me too. First blood test a year after changing my diet, I was diagnosed with haemochromatosis.

Yes I've heard of leaky gut. My understanding is that leaky gut is caused by diet. The gut gets irritated and becomes more perforated than usual. What it lets through then triggers an immune response which causes inflammation and autoimmune diseases.

The problem begins with damage to the inside lining of the intestines forming a “leaky gut.” Now foreign proteins, such as cow-milk proteins, can pass into the blood stream.17 The body makes antibodies to these “invading milk proteins.” Unfortunately, the attack is not isolated to the cows-milk proteins. Proteins of similar structure are also attacked in the person’s joints, causing inflammation with swelling and crippling pain. Changing to a starch-based diet removes the animal proteins from the intestines immediately, and eventually heals the leaky gut. Inflammation begins to subside in four to seven days. Within four months over 70% of patients with inflammatory arthritis are dramatically improved or cured.

https://www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2009nl/may/healing.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Baalzamon]

Going to get blood taken on Monday. Good to hear that you have heard of Leaky Gut nobody. I expect quite a few people have it and are fully unaware.