Plant Based Diet Thread

[CKinnard]

Hmmm PBWF and you eat pita bread but treat nuts with caution? I eat almonds and walnuts like there is no tomorrow and eat any grain based foods with caution. I treat all (processed) grains with caution. Personally I think calories in/calories out is to simplistic. Calories in = calories out + calories to storage. With this you can then see that reducing calories in does not necessarily equate to weight loss.

How old are you and what's your history with weight gain/loss, and what's you energy expenditure typically?

[CKinnard]

Regarding the 4 numbers (legumes/grains, potato, vege, fruit), the only thing I have left out of a PBWF diet is nuts and seeds.
One could also argue at a stretch I am not accounting for avocado.

Other things that come to mind are sugars, breads & processed grains (~60% of US diet), coconut, oil, salt and juices. WFPB means different things to different people.

Sugars: on a PBWF's diet?
breads and processed grains: whole grains are included in the 4 numbers.
salt: doesn't have Calories
coconut and oil: If one is struggling with weight, or even if they are not, would these feature significantly in a PBWF diet?

Honestly, one is either serious about losing weight or not, and same for PBWF diet!
If one needs to lose weight, the first things to eliminate or cut dramatically are the energy dense, and replace with whole foods (legumes, grains, vege, fruit).

kidney tests are very insensitive, so you can lose as much as 90% of renal function before standard tests are abnormal. This is partially due to the large reserve capacity of the kidneys.

[big booty]

Hmmm PBWF and you eat pita bread but treat nuts with caution? I eat almonds and walnuts like there is no tomorrow and eat any grain based foods with caution. I treat all (processed) grains with caution. Personally I think calories in/calories out is to simplistic. Calories in = calories out + calories to storage. With this you can then see that reducing calories in does not necessarily equate to weight loss.

How old are you and what's your history with weight gain/loss, and what's you energy expenditure typically?

55. Was always thin with my pre married weight being about 74-76kg, 178cm tall. Usual thing, you get married, have kids, have less me-time so over the ensuing 25 years I put on about 1 kg per year. Peaked at 92kg in early 2015 and decided enough was enough. Got back on the bike after a 30 year absence. I now weigh 71-72kg which was my self imposed goal weight. Been there since March this year. I would love to ride more but family life means I get to squeeze in one ride per week. About 50kms. I try and walk about 2-3km each lunch time at work. Would love to do more but that's not possible. Energy expenditure? No idea. Im guessing 2000-2200 cal per day?

Can I convince you to incorporate fasting as a regular regimen rather than a once off detox? Do a simple experiment. Get some bloods done so you know your baseline. Don't change anything diet wise other than incorporating a once a week 36 hour fast (not juice, just water. Well, lets say a couple of cups of coffee are allowed). Give it a minimum of 6 months and retest your bloods. See what happens.

[CKinnard]

BB, so it seems your weight loss coincided with taking up cycling.
Or have you changed your food intake dramatically also?

The prolonged fast wasn't about weight loss. It is actually a very severe thing to put the body through. Lean tissue is broken down significantly. Connective tissue, muscle, etc. The liver and kidneys are stressed in trying to clear toxins released from fat, and higher levels of protein being broken down.

The benefits vs the adverse effects have not been fully elucidated. However, chronic blood pressure and diabetes type 2 are reversed, most autoimmune diseases go into a quiescent state and many other conditions clear up.

Therefore, the reasons for doing a prolonged fast differ from doing intermittent or alternate day fasting.
I've said many times here and elsewhere that prolonged fasting is not about weight loss, but it appears a hard thing for some to understand. It says a lot about many people's consciousness and cognitive flexibility.

[big booty]

There was weight loss associated with my taking up cycling. I probably dropped from 92 to about 84 and stopped. I started cycling in Feb 2015. I didn't start intermittent fasting until Oct. I then continued to lose weight until March 2016. I was doing two days per week. I now do every Monday. I can fully appreciate that fasting has other benefits apart from weight loss. That is why I continue to make it part of my regimen. It is only in recent months that I would say my liver is functioning well and is able to store or extract energy substrate well. Fully appreciate that fasting, to begin with, places organs under stress. I used to get a lower back numb pain during my fasts which I put down to my liver/kidney working real hard clearing toxins.

I wouldn't say my diet has dramatically changed but I have tweaked it. I eat more veggies now, mostly raw. I am not a big fan of juicing any foods. Not good in my opinion. I eat some fruit, mostly berries, some citrus as well. I eat processed grains VERY sparingly. That means limited bread, pasta, rice etc. I eat some meat. Mostly tuna and chicken, maybe some red meat every once in a while. Ive upped my nut intake but the only ones I eat are almonds and walnuts. Ive upped my cheese and yogurt intake. That was my little experiment from the beginning of the year. My bloods went in the right direction so Im happy. Ive never been a big drinker but I do enjoy the odd beer or wine once in a while.

You say you lost a lot of lean tissue while fasting? Is this your gut feel or was this actually measured? Im surprised. I don't think Ive lost a lot but then you did an extended fast whereas mine has always been intermittent. To me it doesn't make a lot of sense that your body would prefer to metabolise lean tissue instead of stored fat while fasting?

[Nobody]

Sugars: on a PBWF's diet?
breads and processed grains: whole grains are included in the 4 numbers.
salt: doesn't have Calories
coconut and oil: If one is struggling with weight, or even if they are not, would these feature significantly in a PBWF diet?

McDougall comes to mind with bread and a bit of sugar and salt. Bread may be one of the the least of peoples' problems. But if one is looking to lose weight, then...
Salt doesn't have calories. But it has not only been shown to be unhealthy, but it stimulates appetite.
Barnard says to minimize oil, but he doesn't press people to get rid of it from what I've seen.
Plenty still do juices and smoothies.

Honestly, one is either serious about losing weight or not, and same for PBWF diet!

My point is that although many claim to be serious, they may not be. With or without knowing it. Which is what McDougall often says about people who don't lose the weight on his diet. I think McDougall uses the word "lying".

kidney tests are very insensitive, so you can lose as much as 90% of renal function before standard tests are abnormal. This is partially due to the large reserve capacity of the kidneys.

Interesting, thanks.

[CKinnard]

McDougall comes to mind with bread and a bit of sugar and salt. Bread may be one of the the least of peoples' problems. But if one is looking to lose weight, then...
Salt doesn't have calories. But it has not only been shown to be unhealthy, but it stimulates appetite.
Barnard says to minimize oil, but he doesn't press people to get rid of it from what I've seen.
Plenty still do juices and smoothies.

Honestly, one is either serious about losing weight or not, and same for PBWF diet!

My point is that although many claim to be serious, they may not be. With or without knowing it. Which is what McDougall often says about people who don't lose the weight on his diet. I think McDougall uses the word "lying".

kidney tests are very insensitive, so you can lose as much as 90% of renal function before standard tests are abnormal. This is partially due to the large reserve capacity of the kidneys.

Interesting, thanks.

If McDougall et al included Calorie in/out in their intensive education programs, they'd then know whether students were lying. The outcome wouldn't be muddied by dysregulated satiety physiology....that would be the scientifically robust thing to do.
But one has to believe that dysregulated satiety physiology exists, beyond that elucidated in The Pleasure Trap.
And the literature certainly says it is more complicated. i.e.
- GPR43 receptor's influence on fat cell insulin sensitivity. (guess what happens to fat cells when they are selectively made less insulin sensitive)
- brown adipose tissue enzymes called PM20D1 can selectively cause the burning of carbohydrate for no apparent purpose other than to generate heat. but not everyone has equivalent amounts of BAT nor can they be stimulated to the same degree.

The science is fast throwing up ample evidence that satiety is much more complicated and variable than to advise people to eat this or that particular diet until sated. But unless one reads that science, they are unlikely to teach it, and more likely to say people are liars.

[CKinnard]

You say you lost a lot of lean tissue while fasting? Is this your gut feel or was this actually measured? Im surprised. I don't think Ive lost a lot but then you did an extended fast whereas mine has always been intermittent. To me it doesn't make a lot of sense that your body would prefer to metabolise lean tissue instead of stored fat while fasting?

The science says if one loses weight greater than 1% of bodyweight per week, then lean tissue loss can be over 20% and as much as 30% of total tissue weight lost. True North say one loses around 40g lean tissue a day for the first week of a water fast, then around 20g/day.
I am basing my lean tissue loss on the observation I could do 30 or more pushups before I started the fast, and only 10 when I finished.
The body is never fully surviving on fat reserves. Red blood cells and neurons need a steady supply of glucose, from gluconeogenesis of primarily protein substrates. Hence, when you are fasting, it may be wise to rest your brain to preserve your muscles.

As for intermittent fasting, do you do a ~34 hour fast - skip 3 main meals, therefore not eating from say Sunday evening dinner through to Tuesday breakfast.
OR
do you do a 24 hour fast in which you skip two main meals such as Monday breakfast and lunch?

[Nobody]

If McDougall et al included Calorie in/out in their intensive education programs, they'd then know whether students were lying. The outcome wouldn't be muddied by dysregulated satiety physiology....that would be the scientifically robust thing to do.
But one has to believe that dysregulated satiety physiology exists, beyond that elucidated in The Pleasure Trap...

Yes, agree. There are always going to be people with physiological and/or psychological issues that have more than the usual problems with weight loss.

As you've explained in the past, a lot of the methods I've presented here like caloric density, or body weight following the total fat intake are only guides at best. There are always going to be people who can prove them all wrong, including myself with average calorie density. Since I've managed to gain a bit of weight while keeping the calorie density under the level where it shouldn't happen. I should lose it again in spring since I can change diet easily.

But on the other hand there are also a lot of people out there that are just soft when it comes to diet (as they've been trained to be their whole lives). As an example, they say they can't be without their specific favorite food(s) of choice. I would argue there are far more soft people out there than people with real physiological issues. It may sound harsh, but most people I've spoken to cling to "moderation in all things" and other pieces of false information to justify why they should keep on doing what they like, rather than what's good for them. Their choice, their loss. For the most part, I'm over trying to convince people of the benefits in person. Even the ones where it seems like the message is getting through still end up staying with the status-quo.

Speaking of McDougall, below is a MS RCT he was involved in which has only recently been published. He admitted that they didn't get the results they were looking for. All I got from it was that it's too late to adopt a low-fat plant-based diet once you have MS and (once again) that the diet style doesn't guarantee weight loss. There seems to be more factors involved if you want to have a BMI <= 23. Fortunately, for whatever reason, I appear to have them. I think food tracking is a big one.

The diet:

The study diet was based on starchy plant foods (beans, breads, corn, pastas, potatoes, sweet potatoes, and rice with the addition of fruits and non-starchy vegetables). Approximately 10% of calories were derived from fat, 14% from protein and 76% from carbohydrate (Anonymous, 2014).

Low-fat, plant-based diet in multiple sclerosis: A randomized controlled trial

[big booty]

You say you lost a lot of lean tissue while fasting? Is this your gut feel or was this actually measured? Im surprised. I don't think Ive lost a lot but then you did an extended fast whereas mine has always been intermittent. To me it doesn't make a lot of sense that your body would prefer to metabolise lean tissue instead of stored fat while fasting?

The science says if one loses weight greater than 1% of bodyweight per week, then lean tissue loss can be over 20% and as much as 30% of total tissue weight lost. True North say one loses around 40g lean tissue a day for the first week of a water fast, then around 20g/day.
I am basing my lean tissue loss on the observation I could do 30 or more pushups before I started the fast, and only 10 when I finished.
The body is never fully surviving on fat reserves. Red blood cells and neurons need a steady supply of glucose, from gluconeogenesis of primarily protein substrates. Hence, when you are fasting, it may be wise to rest your brain to preserve your muscles.

As for intermittent fasting, do you do a ~34 hour fast - skip 3 main meals, therefore not eating from say Sunday evening dinner through to Tuesday breakfast.
OR
do you do a 24 hour fast in which you skip two main meals such as Monday breakfast and lunch?

Well that makes sense with the lack of lean tissue loss. I lost about 0.5kg per week over the course of one year, so well below 0.5% per week. I never noticed a loss in cycling performance. If anything the offset was working in my favour. That is the weight loss was outstripping (any muscle loss) as I generally improved my cycling performance. Of course I suppose I was becoming fitter over the course of the year as well. So if there was any downside I don't know what it was.

Correct me if Im wrong but the brain is able to use ketone bodies as energy quite readily in the absence of glucose. Evolutionary wise it would have made no sense whatsoever to have an developed an energy storage system that the brain was not able to utilise. I do a 36 hour fast. Dinner on Sunday night and then the next meal is Tuesday morning. Im fasting as I type right now. As Ive mention before it took me about 6-7 months before I noticed a distinctive difference while doing my fasts. Whether this was psychological, physiological or both Im not sure.

[CKinnard]

Well that makes sense with the lack of lean tissue loss. I lost about 0.5kg per week over the course of one year, so well below 0.5% per week. I never noticed a loss in cycling performance. If anything the offset was working in my favour. That is the weight loss was outstripping (any muscle loss) as I generally improved my cycling performance. Of course I suppose I was becoming fitter over the course of the year as well. So if there was any downside I don't know what it was.

Correct me if Im wrong but the brain is able to use ketone bodies as energy quite readily in the absence of glucose. Evolutionary wise it would have made no sense whatsoever to have an developed an energy storage system that the brain was not able to utilise. I do a 36 hour fast. Dinner on Sunday night and then the next meal is Tuesday morning. Im fasting as I type right now. As Ive mention before it took me about 6-7 months before I noticed a distinctive difference while doing my fasts. Whether this was psychological, physiological or both Im not sure.

Well of course, athletic improvement is highly dependent on your baseline, age, and general health.
The brain can only use up to 70% ketone bodies, the rest has to be glucose.

I am also fasting one day a week (today), until I get waist circumference to where I want it.
Though I am drinking dilute green tea. Against my better judgement, I thought I'd put an hour in on the bicycle after work late this arvo.
I haven't stirred my appetite at all, and hope that lasts til tomorrow morning.

Regarding the change in your blood tests after a period of intermittent fasting, if you were building your activity level, losing bodyfat, and adjusting your diet, it would be difficult to know what caused the test changes.

[big booty]

Tea is OK unless you want to be a Buddhist monk about fasting. I have two coffees with a splash of milk on my fast days. Agreed about the variables. I did some bloods early 2015. Started fasting in Oct. Did some bloods again in Dec. Granted I was still losing weight until March but my major dietary change was from Jan 2016 and I consciously decided to up my fat intake. Cheese, yogurt and avocados. Then had bloods taken in June. The HDL went up and that hadn't moved. In fact even going back 15 years that had always been low. The trigs went down and that had hadn't moved prior to the last results. Not scientifically rigorous but good enough for me.

[CKinnard]

eat more beans!

[big booty]

Wont that upset your carb protein ratio CK?

Correlation does not prove cause and effect. One could argue that literacy is responsible for longevity. Want to live longer? Then make sure your literacy is poor. Having said that I don't mind the odd Mexican meal but prefer Indian.

[CKinnard]

Have you ever heard me mention a carb protein ratio before?

There's no appropriate level of carbs (presuming you mean grains). It's purely dependent on your activity levels, weight, and whether you are trying to lose or maintain weight.

When dieting, it is appropriate to get a slightly higher level of protein, which is pretty much impossible to do on PBWF without upping your legumes significantly. i.e.

say I weigh 80kg, and burn roughly 2500 Cals a day, and want to lose 3-5kg at 1kg a week.
So I am going to average 1500 Calories a day.
Tell me how many cups of legumes and carbs I need to get an appropriate intake of protein, and the protein amount per kg bodyweight.
While you are at it, give me the amounts of other foods I need for a balanced diet.

[big booty]

No idea how many cups of beans you would need? Running a 7000 cal deficit per week would be about right for a 1kg loss per week though, on the assumption you were still burning 2500 p/w. I don't count calories so Im not very scientific about my food intake. With regards to balanced diet would need to know what your definition was. With regards to protein intake there are occasions when I crave protein, I listen to that cue. Same for fat and carbs so Im guessing that my P/C/F ratio is all over the place day to day. Maybe I confused you with nobody as I recall a post that had a P/C/F ratio that was being aimed for, If that wasn't you I apologise. Now if I could only reduce my literacy Id live longer according to the Hispanic paradox.

[Nobody]

...say I weigh 80kg, and burn roughly 2500 Cals a day, and want to lose 3-5kg at 1kg a week.
So I am going to average 1500 Calories a day.
Tell me how many cups of legumes and carbs I need to get an appropriate intake of protein, and the protein amount per kg bodyweight.
While you are at it, give me the amounts of other foods I need for a balanced diet.

Easy with a spreadsheet.
Assuming you eat 95g (0.6 cup) of dry oats for breakfast with blueberries & linseed. Later a sweet potato & broccoli meal. Then about 2.5 cups of beans per day. Protein g/kg of BW = 0.83. Everything listed below (oats are listed as 275g, but that's with water soaked in). Total Cal including fibre is listed in the middle at the bottom, along with the average calorie density.



Edit: Redone as previous was for 65kg body weight. Now for 80kg.

[big booty]

Wow that's well organised. Sorry for my ignorance but what does NF stand for? Is one column simple sugars and the other column total carbohydrates (including sugars)?

Ive been eating mostly almonds and walnuts for my protein and fats. Might have to include brazil nuts based on your spread sheet. Do you have walnuts in that spread sheet out of interest?

Not a big fan of any dried fruits. Im sure its not a problem for you no body as Im sure youre very regimented, but I think dried fruits and processed grains play havoc with most people's satiety signals. On another "diet" forum Ive yet to read a post that said "I binged on broccoli". Processed grains and sugary foods, yep easy to binge on those. Out of interest what do the dates give you that you don't get from other foods?

[CKinnard]

No idea how many cups of beans you would need? Running a 7000 cal deficit per week would be about right for a 1kg loss per week though, on the assumption you were still burning 2500 p/w. I don't count calories so Im not very scientific about my food intake. With regards to balanced diet would need to know what your definition was. With regards to protein intake there are occasions when I crave protein, I listen to that cue. Same for fat and carbs so Im guessing that my P/C/F ratio is all over the place day to day. Maybe I confused you with nobody as I recall a post that had a P/C/F ratio that was being aimed for, If that wasn't you I apologise. Now if I could only reduce my literacy Id live longer according to the Hispanic paradox.

Well I was being slightly rhetorical above. I don't seem to have much luck helping others to realize that if you want to give credible information regarding nutrition, you will do it better by knowing where the Calories come from, and controlling how many are consumed.....this is especially so for the chronically overweight.

I note you have a psychological block to counting Calories because you perceive it as too mentally taxing.
I've spent 15 years dumbing it down to get around that...because most people have the same mental block as you, and prefer to put up with regular cravings for this food or that, without understanding what drives the cravings...and choose fasting 1-2 days a week in preference to portion control by Calorie guestimation.

But then, when people into their 30s/40s/50s/60s and cannot compensate for not knowing their Calorie intake, with exercise (due to time or health constraints), they start to get heavier! and have no idea how to counter it....because they chose to remain ignorant about the Calories they stuff in their mouths...every day of their lives....but not Mondays for you!

Re balanced diet, the Australian Dietary Guidelines or Michael Gregor's daily dozen would be a good start.
That means at least getting in 5 cups of vege and 2 cups of fruit every day.....and let's say 0.8g protein /kg bwt/day.

I've messed with dozens of permutations in regards to getting protein levels optimized when dieting or maintaining weight on a PBWF diet.
Why have I done this? because no one else has, and it causes a lot of confusion and missing the mark when people want to get serious about losing weight and understanding the role of exercise in doing so. I've never seen a book or website or presentation where optimizing protein and Calorie intake is controlled.

WHen you do it, you realize how rubbery and inadequate are the dietary guidelines being thrown around by PBWF gurus and the national guidelines, even Michael Gregor, True North, John McDougall, Neal Barnard, Dean Ornish, etc, etc. BUT!!! while they get a third of people successfully controlling weight, then they think they are doing the best they can, given human nature!

My view is this line of thinking shares a lot in common with Durian Rider and Freelee saying everyone should be able to eat 3000 Calories on their diet, because it works for 1/3 of people who try it. If you are not one of the 1/3, then you must be lying or have damaged metabolism, and just need to stick it out for several years. Not very helpful, is it!

[big booty]

Good luck getting people to count calories on a regular basis. I don't have a particular mental block, just cant be bothered counting. And up to about 18 months ago I had paid the price of that laziness. I know this regular fasting Ive incorporated has helped me in lots of ways and thinking of it as "a cheats way" of eating whatever I like for 6 days and then fasting for 1 to compensate is selling the concept way short. I am now satiated very easily. Portion control comes easily without the need for counting calories or the need of a spread sheet. I find that I seek better food options naturally without forcing the issue. Im tending to do these things freely rather than because I need to. Might be off with the fairies on this one but I think this way of eating taps into how most of us have been generically engineered over thousands of years. I don't think we are engineered to have 3 meals per day and with most of those being carb dense foods like grains, rice etc.

[Nobody]

Correlation does not prove cause and effect. One could argue that literacy is responsible for longevity. Want to live longer? Then make sure your literacy is poor.

Confirmation bias. This is why I'm less likely to try to encourage people to change their diet for their own health. Because people believe whatever they want, regardless of the evidence presented. Everyone suffers from it to some degree.

My view is this line of thinking shares a lot in common with Durian Rider and Freelee saying everyone should be able to eat 3000 Calories on their diet, because it works for 1/3 of people who try it. If you are not one of the 1/3, then you must be lying or have damaged metabolism, and just need to stick it out for several years. Not very helpful, is it!

Point taken. I've probably been on that boat for some time. Oh well, I'll move on from there to encourage calorie tracking as well. By the way I got the answer wrong before. Edited now with 2.5 cups of beans, or 400g, which is quite a lot IMO.

Wow that's well organised. Sorry for my ignorance but what does NF stand for? Is one column simple sugars and the other column total carbohydrates (including sugars)?

Thanks. NF = no fibre. It's on the top left corner of the spreadsheet. It's the way AU authorities do it, where in the US they include the fibre. I've done both on the spreadsheet.

Ive been eating mostly almonds and walnuts for my protein and fats. Might have to include brazil nuts based on your spread sheet. Do you have walnuts in that spread sheet out of interest?

My spreadsheet is very specifically tuned to what I can eat. Walnuts are preferable to almonds, but I get an eczema reaction from them. Brazil nuts are good for selenium, which you usually don't need if you're eating an omnivore diet. Brazil nuts are high in selenium and you can overdose.

Not a big fan of any dried fruits. I'm sure its not a problem for you no body as I'm sure you're very regimented, but I think dried fruits and processed grains play havoc with most people's satiety signals.

They are both high in calorie density. Dates put weight on for some people, but I didn't notice a change. However they do give me acne and I do better on other less processed fruit, so resist buying them. They are just on the spreadsheet from when I did, or in case I do again. Some things on there I don't eat regularly. The ones with numbers under the column "Usual" usually get more use. And yes being a tech makes me a bit of a numbers nerd and I often use the spreadsheet when I'm at home.

On another "diet" forum I've yet to read a post that said "I binged on broccoli". Processed grains and sugary foods, yep easy to binge on those. Out of interest what do the dates give you that you don't get from other foods?

Nothing. They are just nice to eat. But so is unprocessed fruit, so I usually choose the unprocessed.

[kb]

Out of interest what do the dates give you that you don't get from other foods?

Nothing. They are just nice to eat. But so is unprocessed fruit, so I usually choose the unprocessed.

They work pretty well in a jersey pocket on long days in the saddle.

[Nobody]

They work pretty well in a jersey pocket on long days in the saddle.

True. Dried fruit has it's useful place. I just had the blinkers on and was thinking nutrition only.

[CKinnard]

Easy with a spreadsheet.

yes but when on a Calorie deficit, it's wise to step up protein to spare lean tissue...such facts are the devil in the detail, so often discarded. and once you start dealing with sedentary elderly people, it is virtually impossible to get them onto a Calorie deficit and attain lean tissue sparing protein intake, let alone 0.8g/kg.....even if you put them on 100% legumes!

This is where there's a case to be made for protein supplements. However that has to be weighed against the strain on the kidneys of additional protein. If you can find me a book or blog that gets explores the ratios and math on this, I am all ears. Of the dozens of dietitians I know, they say it is all too hard. Some bodybuilders get into it a bit, but they don't give a stuff about little old ladies, or small Asians!

At some stage Nobody, you might explore aggregating your food groups. Just as an accountant doesn't mess with individual cash book entries, but sees all via an income statement and balance sheet, also with ingredient aggregation in nutrition analysis.

[big booty]

Interesting you should say that CK. After I break my fast Im naturally drawn to protein or when Ive done a really hard ride close to my PB Im once again drawn to protein rather than carbs or fat.