Documentary Fed up
Replies
-
For a while there I bought into the whole low carb thing. Not quite as strict as Atkins but I had convinced myself that if I eat over 100g of carbs I'd gain weight. The only problem was I have a really sweet tooth. I'm not particularly fond of cheese, meat, cream and the like, so I was forcing myself to eat high protein, high fat foods and trying to talk myself into enjoying them. I was so crabby I would be mean to everyone.
The longest I managed to stay on track was around a month. During that time I dropped around a stone and a half (21lbs). Probably because all I was eating was iceberg lettuce and steamed chicken with a little olive oil.
So yes low carb did work but looking back it wasn't enjoyable and I don't think it could ever become a lifestyle change for me.
If all you ate was steamed chicken and iceberg lettuce and olive oil, you totally missed the point... Veggies and other grilled meats didnt even enter your thoughts?0 -
Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.0 -
double post0
-
mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
Interesting stuff there- "Like my Fat Head fast-food diet, nobody would mistake this for any kind of health-food diet. The guy is definitely consuming sugar. And yet he lost weight, lost body fat, raised his HDL, and lowered both his triglycerides and LDL. How can that be? Well, let’s look at the numbers.....
I copied the daily nutrition totals into Excel and calculated Professor Haub’s average daily intake of calories and macronutrients over the 10 weeks he’s been on the diet:
Calories: 1457
Fat (g): 61
Carbohydrate (g): 173
Protein (g): 54"
Sooo, the Twinkie guy drastically reduced his calories eating a 'junk' food diet, which included sugar, and lost weight and improved his blood panels. How about that
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Calories: 1457
Fat (g): 61
Carbohydrate (g): 173
Protein (g): 54"
Sooo, the Twinkie guy drastically reduced his calories eating a 'junk' food diet and lost weight and improved his blood panels. How about that
With an intake like that, he's going to end up skinny-fat.
No question on the weight loss side, though....a caloric deficit like that is guaranteed to drop pounds, no matter what is being eaten.0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »Calories: 1457
Fat (g): 61
Carbohydrate (g): 173
Protein (g): 54"
Sooo, the Twinkie guy drastically reduced his calories eating a 'junk' food diet and lost weight and improved his blood panels. How about that
With an intake like that, he's going to end up skinny-fat.
No question on the weight loss side, though....a caloric deficit like that is guaranteed to drop pounds, no matter what is being eaten.
Yes, he lost the weight AND improved his blood work. Same as I did, when I was losing weight following CICO and not cutting out any food groups/things I liked eating. I don't know about skinny fat, but I have a pretty solid bf% and can do 100 regular push-ups which I think indicates I'm not a super weakling I suppose I could be skinny fat, but if I am-what does that mean exactly?
I hope there's a follow up on the Twinkie guy at some point, would be interesting to see where he's at now0 -
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
We weren't looking at populations, we were talking about Haub being hungry. At least that's all I was talking about.
His diary isn't current, my mistake, last current entries go to March of last year. Those entries show he's eating things like ice cream bars and Lucky Charms. Same kinds of carbs.
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »...I suppose I could be skinny fat...
I thought we were talking about him. I don't have any idea what you're eating, and expressed no opinion regarding you.
0 -
Everyone's body is different. It is a chemical reaction. Not everyone processes sugar and carbs the same. I can have sugar on a diet and not have it make a difference. Carbs...I will blow it every time. I find I can't lose while juice fasting but I have marginal scale movement on smoothies and I don't really like them. I plan on watching both movies soon. They are the only two I haven't watched that are diet related.0
-
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?0 -
stevencloser wrote: »
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?
We've got a forum full of statistical outliers here, if that's the case, haven't we? I live in a house full of 'em!
0 -
Sarasmaintaining wrote: »...I suppose I could be skinny fat...
I thought we were talking about him. I don't have any idea what you're eating, and expressed no opinion regarding you.
Sorry, I did kind of lump myself in with him, my bad But, I do eat a pretty typical SAD diet-did this while I was in active weight loss and now that I'm in maintenance. I actually eat out more than probably a lot of people on SAD too. In spite of this, I've maintained the loss for a couple years now and have kept my glucose out of the pre-diabetic range, where it used to be. I did look into a lower carb woe a few weeks ago out of curiosity that it could be better for health, but after doing it a few days I discovered I didn't really enjoy it and really, there was no reason for me to try doing something different than I am now because my blood panels are great, blood pressure is great etc. I'm honestly not trying to brag, I just don't see how cutting out certain food groups would help me become better in some way.
At the end of the day, we all need to figure out what helps us accomplish our goals, whatever those are. If someone wants to reduce their carbs/sugar etc, because it helps them in some way-then I think that's great that they found something that helps them achieve their goals. Same as me not eating after 7pm because night time snacking, which caused me to go over my calorie goals, is something that I've had problems with in the past.
But, do I think everyone should not eat after 7pm because that's what works best for me? No-and that's why these sugar posts make me frustrated. Those who are 'anti' sugar' often (not always) push their way as the only Truth, and if someone eats sugar, then somehow they're in poor health. And that's just not true.
0 -
Everyone's body is different. It is a chemical reaction. Not everyone processes sugar and carbs the same. I can have sugar on a diet and not have it make a difference. Carbs...I will blow it every time. I find I can't lose while juice fasting but I have marginal scale movement on smoothies and I don't really like them. I plan on watching both movies soon. They are the only two I haven't watched that are diet related.
Sugars are carbs.0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »This thread will not end well.
This has been discussed before.
I just enjoyed some gelato. I'll still lose weight this week, because I'm under my calories. I've been doing this the whole time I've lost 37 pounds.
Excess calories cause weight gain.
If sugar is the cause of the excess calories, then sure, it's a problem. If cheese is the cause of excess calories, then that's the source of the problem. Whatever you eat to excess will be a problem, because at the end of the day, it's consuming too many calories that will lead your body to pack on the pounds.
I wasn't eating sugar when I gained a good bit of my weight. It's really popular right now to demonize sugar, but it oversimplifies a very complicated problem, and "documentaries" like Fed Up throw a veneer of junk science over the
issue and only confuse the whole issue.
^^ This^^
0 -
If you want to put it like that, I am saying, "people who ARE NOT over weight are statistical outliers" Due to the fact that 2/3rd of american are over weight. WHich is the majority of the population.stevencloser wrote: »
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?
Dude, that is not what "outlier" means. Two-thirds is barely one sigma, you need to at least get out to three sigma before using language like that.
0 -
If you want to put it like that, I am saying, "people who ARE NOT over weight are statistical outliers" Due to the fact that 2/3rd of american are over weight. WHich is the majority of the population.stevencloser wrote: »
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?
LOL. I thought "scientists" were supposed to have a fundamental grasp of basic statistics.
Do you even know what a statistical outlier is?
Hint: they do not fall within 1-σ of the mean.
0 -
FunkyTobias wrote: »
If you want to put it like that, I am saying, "people who ARE NOT over weight are statistical outliers" Due to the fact that 2/3rd of american are over weight. WHich is the majority of the population.stevencloser wrote: »
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?
LOL. I thought "scientists" were supposed to have a fundamental grasp of basic statistics.
Do you even know what a statistical outlier is?
Hint: they do not fall within 1-σ of the mean.
LOL... Um ok... i'll break it down.
Of course they "do not" fall within 1-σ of the mean. I think you had a reading issue. Let me clear it up for you. First, as i originally said, i was going with "outliers" to be consistent with the conversation. To clear up what the other guy said, I'll reword it for him to be correct.
"Are you saying, people who don't have sugar problems are the minority of the population?"
My reply is "yes"
Now lets look at a bell curve of BMI in america.
Overweight according to the BMI is from 25-29. So according to this curve, where do the majority of american's fall?
LOL
Words have meanings. He used the term "outliers" in the proper context.
Although the majority of the population is overweight, the normal weight population does not lie at the "ends of the bell curve" (your exact words). You misused the term and (as usual) tried to redefine it to make yourself look right.
Just stop.
ETA: Let's look at your original statement:When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
By definition, most people (~68%) fall within 1-σ of the mean. Your own source shows that this includes the vast majority of people in the normal weight range.
www4a.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=bmi+distribution
0 -
mamapeach910 wrote: »stevencloser wrote: »
Okay i just read the link, i misread what you wrote, i just thought it was the break down of the fat head guy. I have a dr.s appointment so i don't have time to look at it fully. I went to his current food diary, and i didn't see any recent entries. Maybe i looked in the wrong place, so I can't analyze his diet at the moment.mamapeach910 wrote: »mamapeach910 wrote: »Haub keeps an online food diary. He still eats treats and stuff. Interesting to look at. http://www.livestrong.com/thedailyplate/diary/who/haub/
I also found this http://www.fathead-movie.com/index.php/2010/11/16/the-twinkie-diet/ which gave a day's breakdown from while he was on the Twinkie diet.
I don't think you can say for certain that he'd have been hungry. Everyone responds differently to different macro ratios. I'd say that his macro balance doesn't look appreciably different now from when he was doing the experiment.
No i can't say for "certain" he was hungrier. Not very many things can be said with absolute certainty on here. But it's well known that those types of food cause a greater spike of insulin compared to a fat/protein source of a carb based source which isn't processed. Processed foods digest more quickly, we don't have to break them down as much. It's known that elevated insulin levels cause an over consumption of food. To stick to your calories in those situations it's a bit more difficult. Haubs ate more processed foods than the fat head guy.
" Additionally, central administration of insulin antibodies increases food intake and body weight."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14749506
Did you read the link? The Fat Head guy was talking about Haub.
And, sorry, I know how insulin works, doesn't matter. Whether someone is hungry on 45-55% carbs or not is an individual thing. Given that Haub still eats at roughly the same macro percentages, I'd say that he isn't.
I was trying to show you that.
His macro breakdown on the Twinkie diet as well as sample menu and total calorie intake were shown on the Fat Head post.
His current food log is the obvious link. He's obviously eating more calories now, but again, his macro ratio is about the same, if not a little higher on carbs.
But, I thought i made myself clear. When i mention carbs, i mostly referring to processed/refined. A few possibly scenerios.
1. The carbs he's eating aren't the same type.
2. If he's eating the same type of carbs, and he's doing okay, then this will most likely be due to genetics.
When looking at populations we need to look at where most people fall, not at the ends of the bell curve.
Are you now saying people who don't have a sugar problem are statistical outliers?
Like seriously?
We've got a forum full of statistical outliers here, if that's the case, haven't we? I live in a house full of 'em!
Nope it's not the case, if you're over weight you do have a insulin issue call it a "sugar" issue if you wish.
Taking a screenshot of this one.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions