Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
To Keto or Not To Keto?
Replies
-
You can disregard somatotyping since it was made up by a pyschologist and not a physiologist. And everyone burns carbs. If one is thinner, it's more likely they just don't eat a lot and/or do a lot of physical activity to burn more calories.I guess it just depends on your body type and how you normally eat, but for me personally, keto would make me gain a lot of weight. I am naturally a carb burner/ectomorph so a more balanced diet is best for me. anything remotely low carb makes me extremely bloated, lethargic, put on weight, always starving. even for those bodies benefit from keto, it seems not to be something that people can stick to long term. so unless you have specific health problems, I think a more balanced diet is a healthier and more sustainable option.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
9 -
Orionphoto wrote: »3. One other was to my daughter in law’s dismay is that Kale doesn’t have much nutritional value. Lol. (Again, no fact check done on this)
This would be an example of a time where it would be a good idea to do a fact check.
13 -
I think the best thing about keto or low carb is that there are a lot fewer options for snacking
. I am following a moderately low carb regime as I am insulin dependent, and the less extraneous insulin I need to take to combat the sugar highs from carbs, the better my glucose control.
I have shied away from going keto as I have been conditioned into thinking ketones=bad (obviously ketosis & ketoacidosis are very different things, but still...)
I believe I have found a regime that I can stick to and keep my BGL reasonably stable without going full keto but will keep me away from those unhealthy snacks (cupcake anyone?)2 -
Rainworth_Massive wrote: »I think the best thing about keto or low carb is that there are a lot fewer options for snacking . I am following a moderately low carb regime as I am insulin dependent, and the less extraneous insulin I need to take to combat the sugar highs from carbs, the better my glucose control.
I have shied away from going keto as I have been conditioned into thinking ketones=bad (obviously ketosis & ketoacidosis are very different things, but still...)
I believe I have found a regime that I can stick to and keep my BGL reasonably stable without going full keto but will keep me away from those unhealthy snacks (cupcake anyone?)
If anyone finds a way of eating useful because it tends to limit foods they may have trouble moderating AND they generally don't mind those limitations, I think that can be a positive thing for weight management.
But let's be real -- there are plenty of keto-friendly foods that obviously don't exist because of their nutrient-density (hello, fat bombs).
I don't really see a significant difference between having a cupcake sometimes and having a fat bomb sometimes unless it helps a particular individual control their calorie intake. For me, it's more sustainable to have the cupcake sometimes (if I want it) and continue to eat nutrient-dense higher carbohydrate foods frequently.6 -
I don't have trouble moderating certain foods, just trouble moderating my blood glucose with very carb dense foods. Type 1 diabetes sucks. Also, what the heck is a fat bomb? I have this mental image of someone eating a ball of lard... *Shudder*5
-
Rainworth_Massive wrote: »I don't have trouble moderating certain foods, just trouble moderating my blood glucose with very carb dense foods. Type 1 diabetes sucks. Also, what the heck is a fat bomb? I have this mental image of someone eating a ball of lard... *Shudder*
They're a snack that some people on keto make.
Here is an example: https://gimmedelicious.com/keto-cheesecake-fat-bombs/
0 -
janejellyroll wrote: »They're a snack that some people on keto make.
Here is an example: https://gimmedelicious.com/keto-cheesecake-fat-bombs/
Thanks
Don't think I'll try them though, have managed so far without! 2 -
How is it we eat the same things we feed our animals to fatten them up for market?
Grains such as wheat, oats, etc, and sugars, both "natural" and sugar alcohols. ("Ever see a fat animal in the wild" was a line from the video.)
that is a really silly argument.
You dont generally see fat animals in the wild because they do not have an abundance of food and they are active.
You do see fat pets.
Because animals are same as humans - if they eat too much and move too little, they gain weight.
18 -
paperpudding wrote: »How is it we eat the same things we feed our animals to fatten them up for market?
Grains such as wheat, oats, etc, and sugars, both "natural" and sugar alcohols. ("Ever see a fat animal in the wild" was a line from the video.)
that is a really silly argument.
You dont generally see fat animals in the wild because they do not have an abundance of food and they are active.
You do see fat pets.
Because animals are same as humans - if they eat too much and move too little, they gain weight.
Yep, my dog is on a grain-free diet due to stomach issues but if we don't regulate his food, he'll happily be a little butterball.5 -
Exactly. If you left a bunch of free food out in the wild that was calorie dense, and animals DIDN'T have to hunt or starve daily, I GUARANTEE those animals would all gain weight and get fat if it were just there for them daily.paperpudding wrote: »How is it we eat the same things we feed our animals to fatten them up for market?
Grains such as wheat, oats, etc, and sugars, both "natural" and sugar alcohols. ("Ever see a fat animal in the wild" was a line from the video.)
that is a really silly argument.
You dont generally see fat animals in the wild because they do not have an abundance of food and they are active.
You do see fat pets.
Because animals are same as humans - if they eat too much and move too little, they gain weight.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
3 -
If it's about keto, then there's likely no other new information with probably the exception of recipes. It's the craze right now (not that it has reappeared at least once every decade or so)Anyone read the book *The Fatburn Fix* by Catherine Shanahan?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 2 -
Exactly. If you left a bunch of free food out in the wild that was calorie dense, and animals DIDN'T have to hunt or starve daily, I GUARANTEE those animals would all gain weight and get fat if it were just there for them daily.paperpudding wrote: »How is it we eat the same things we feed our animals to fatten them up for market?
Grains such as wheat, oats, etc, and sugars, both "natural" and sugar alcohols. ("Ever see a fat animal in the wild" was a line from the video.)
that is a really silly argument.
You dont generally see fat animals in the wild because they do not have an abundance of food and they are active.
You do see fat pets.
Because animals are same as humans - if they eat too much and move too little, they gain weight.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
Yep, check the neighborhood dogs and cats.
1 -
I read Part I and so far am intrigued and a bit frightened. Below is a podcast with her (it gets better at the 24-min mark). Worth a full view:
If it's about keto, then there's likely no other new information with probably the exception of recipes. It's the craze right now (not that it has reappeared at least once every decade or so)Anyone read the book *The Fatburn Fix* by Catherine Shanahan?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugl1RsmU-HI
From the book's item description on Amazon:
" . . . but over decades of practice, renowned family physician Catherine Shanahan, M.D., observed that many of her patients could not burn their body fat between meals, . . . "
A couple red flags here. First, her practice is a family practice, she doesn't specialize in weight loss. In and of itself, that isn't a problem. Generalists certainly have added to the sum of human knowledge over the years. But I'd have some follow up questions about her experience and qualifications.
Second, what does it mean to "observe" that her patients cannot burn body fat between meals? What are the signs that someone is burning body fat between meals as opposed to someone who isn't? What kind of controls were these patients under? In other words, how did she verify that they SHOULD be burning fat between meals but were not? How did she compare these specific patients to her non-patients who were able to burn fat between meals?
"Dr. Shanahan shares five important rules to fix your fatburn:
1) Eat natural fats, not vegetable oils.
2) Eat slow-digesting carbs, not starchy carbs or sweets.
3) Seek salt.
4) Drink plenty of water.
5) Supplement with vitamins and minerals."
Anyone can write rules, the trick is showing that these rules make a difference. Given that her practice is a family practice, how did she go about establishing that following these rules make a meaningful difference as opposed to someone simply introducing a calorie deficit to lose weight?
I'd exercise caution here, especially since you're admitting the plan is already making you feel frightened (which may be a sign you've picked up on some additional red flags that weren't evidence in the item description).12 -
Honest opinion? I don't think she's that well versed in how body fat is actually lost. Lots of repetitive stuff I've heard over the years about low carb/keto. And for me, just about anyone that writes a book on diet and weight loss are doing it to take advantage of the sales since weight loss is such a huge industry. If I needed the money, I'd write a book.
I read Part I and so far am intrigued and a bit frightened. Below is a podcast with her (it gets better at the 24-min mark). Worth a full view:
If it's about keto, then there's likely no other new information with probably the exception of recipes. It's the craze right now (not that it has reappeared at least once every decade or so)Anyone read the book *The Fatburn Fix* by Catherine Shanahan?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutritionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugl1RsmU-HI
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
10 -
From the book's item description on Amazon:
"Dr. Shanahan shares five important rules to fix your fatburn:
1) Eat natural fats, not vegetable oils.
2) Eat slow-digesting carbs, not starchy carbs or sweets.
3) Seek salt.
4) Drink plenty of water.
5) Supplement with vitamins and minerals."
That bolded one doesn't even make sense. Carbs are starches (complex carbs), sugars (simple carbs) or fiber. The only way "slow-digesting carbs" even remotely makes sense is if "carbs" is taken as a synecdoche or metonymy. "Eat slow-digesting foods, not starchy carbs or sweets" might kinda make sense, but "slow-digesting carbs" is just WTF.
I guess it's easier to sell people stuff if one just slops words around in ways that don't educate them.
I'm just going to ignore my personal distaste for #5, which IMO ought to be "eat plenty of varied, colorful veggies/fruits and some whole grains to get your vitamins and minerals, but supplement if you find that impossible". Those darned veggies/fruits/grains are (mostly) slow-digesting foods, but just chock full of Da Evil Carbz.
10 -
From the book's item description on Amazon:
"Dr. Shanahan shares five important rules to fix your fatburn:
1) Eat natural fats, not vegetable oils.
2) Eat slow-digesting carbs, not starchy carbs or sweets.
3) Seek salt.
4) Drink plenty of water.
5) Supplement with vitamins and minerals."
That bolded one doesn't even make sense. Carbs are starches (complex carbs), sugars (simple carbs) or fiber. The only way "slow-digesting carbs" even remotely makes sense is if "carbs" is taken as a synecdoche or metonymy. "Eat slow-digesting foods, not starchy carbs or sweets" might kinda make sense, but "slow-digesting carbs" is just WTF.
I guess it's easier to sell people stuff if one just slops words around in ways that don't educate them.
I'm just going to ignore my personal distaste for #5, which IMO ought to be "eat plenty of varied, colorful veggies/fruits and some whole grains to get your vitamins and minerals, but supplement if you find that impossible". Those darned veggies/fruits/grains are (mostly) slow-digesting foods, but just chock full of Da Evil Carbz.
Nobody knows what a "carb" is anymore. It's become an utterly meaningless term, which is why you hear people say things like "I don't even eat carbs anymore, just meat and vegetables."
(Obviously SOME people know, but in general usage it's become meaningless as we see from this diet advice).8 -
" . . . but over decades of practice, renowned family physician Catherine Shanahan, M.D., observed that many of her patients could not burn their body fat between meals, . . . "
If the Doctor had hooked her patients up to a gas analyser to test their RER (and hence what blend of carbs and fat they are burning) then her patients would be divided into two very distinct categories:
1/ Alive and burning fat.
2/ Dead and not burning anything.
Sad that this hogwash is written by someone who has committed to the Hippocratic Oath and even sadder that the gullible will be duped.
10 -
Info on the author of “The Fatburn Fix”: Catherine Shanghai, M.D., is a board certified family physician and author of Deep Nutrition. She trained in biochemistry and genetics at Cornell University before attending Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. She practiced in Hawaii for ten years, where she studied ethnobotanist and her healthiest patients’ culinary habits. She served as director of the LA Lakers PRO Nutrition program for six years and now operates Healthy Choice Corporate Wellness and Metabolic Health from her office in Orlando, Florida.
Has anyone read the book that can offer input? She touches upon how and why some are able to burn fat optimally. I am wondering if anyone has applied similar methods over time and their results.
TIA0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Haven't read the book. Probably won't unless I get a free copy either. Not trying to be obtuse to her own experiences, but to me she sounds like she manipulates some to thinking that fat burning needs to be done a certain way in order for it to happen. When that's really not the case at all. I've stated it before that the Health, Fitness, and Wellness industry is a billion dollar business. And you stand out if you can create an issue that some associate with and you have the cure or answer for it. Great way to make money since many times you'll have people that will do well and testify to it. And really, in this business that's sometimes all you need regardless if the real reason people succeed it likely more due to a calorie deficit and consistency on a program.Info on the author of “The Fatburn Fix”: Catherine Shanghai, M.D., is a board certified family physician and author of Deep Nutrition. She trained in biochemistry and genetics at Cornell University before attending Robert Wood Johnson Medical School. She practiced in Hawaii for ten years, where she studied ethnobotanist and her healthiest patients’ culinary habits. She served as director of the LA Lakers PRO Nutrition program for six years and now operates Healthy Choice Corporate Wellness and Metabolic Health from her office in Orlando, Florida.
Has anyone read the book that can offer input? She touches upon how and why some are able to burn fat optimally. I am wondering if anyone has applied similar methods over time and their results.
TIA
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
7 -
janejellyroll wrote: »
I read Part I and so far am intrigued and a bit frightened. Below is a podcast with her (it gets better at the 24-min mark). Worth a full view:
If it's about keto, then there's likely no other new information with probably the exception of recipes. It's the craze right now (not that it has reappeared at least once every decade or so)Anyone read the book *The Fatburn Fix* by Catherine Shanahan?
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutritionhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugl1RsmU-HI
From the book's item description on Amazon:
" . . . but over decades of practice, renowned family physician Catherine Shanahan, M.D., observed that many of her patients could not burn their body fat between meals, . . . "
A couple red flags here. First, her practice is a family practice, she doesn't specialize in weight loss. In and of itself, that isn't a problem. Generalists certainly have added to the sum of human knowledge over the years. But I'd have some follow up questions about her experience and qualifications.
Second, what does it mean to "observe" that her patients cannot burn body fat between meals? What are the signs that someone is burning body fat between meals as opposed to someone who isn't? What kind of controls were these patients under? In other words, how did she verify that they SHOULD be burning fat between meals but were not? How did she compare these specific patients to her non-patients who were able to burn fat between meals?
"Dr. Shanahan shares five important rules to fix your fatburn:
1) Eat natural fats, not vegetable oils.
2) Eat slow-digesting carbs, not starchy carbs or sweets.
3) Seek salt.
4) Drink plenty of water.
5) Supplement with vitamins and minerals."
Anyone can write rules, the trick is showing that these rules make a difference. Given that her practice is a family practice, how did she go about establishing that following these rules make a meaningful difference as opposed to someone simply introducing a calorie deficit to lose weight?
I'd exercise caution here, especially since you're admitting the plan is already making you feel frightened (which may be a sign you've picked up on some additional red flags that weren't evidence in the item description).
What is frightening is how many people developing Type 2 diabetes. She illustrates a path that leads to disease. I read a lot of posts on MFP detailing the same symptoms and their methods of relief; relief that can cause damage to the metabolism.
What are you referring to here?
I don't think you have to accept this particular family practitioner's theories about why her patients are somehow UNABLE to burn fat (again, not sure what this means or how she determined it) to recognize that T2D is a real problem.2 -
This content has been removed.
-
I can, without hesitation, say that no one responding has read the book. If the responders had read the book, their responses would be completely different and not so generic. I agree @ninerbuff that everyone is out to make a buck and we should read with caution. But when people negatively respond about an author of a book and it’s content who haven’t done their research? Lack of information and refusal to investigate further because it suits an exhausted talking point is mind-numbing. Libraries are open for pick-up in my area; if anyone wants to discuss the content, I’m sure you can request a copy at your local library.
I asked, has anyone read the book...? I got a Qarb response. I welcome opposing arguments pertaining to the *subject matter* (that hasn’t been touched upon, yet).5 -
I can, without hesitation, say that no one responding has read the book. If the responders had read the book, their responses would be completely different and not so generic. I agree @ninerbuff that everyone is out to make a buck and we should read with caution. But when people negatively respond about an author of a book and it’s content who haven’t done their research? Lack of information and refusal to investigate further because it suits an exhausted talking point is mind-numbing. Libraries are open for pick-up in my area; if anyone wants to discuss the content, I’m sure you can request a copy at your local library.
I asked, has anyone read the book...? I got a Qarb response. I welcome opposing arguments pertaining to the *subject matter* (that hasn’t been touched upon, yet).
There are literally hundreds and hundreds of books based on the theory "It's going to be impossible for you to lose weight unless you follow MY specific rules." I'm not sure why you think we have to read this one in particular to ask some questions based specifically on the information that the publisher/author has chosen to provide about the book.
It's perfectly reasonable to read an abstract of a paper or a summary of a book and then say "I have some questions about it based on what I just read."
That's what's happening here. If your reading of the book has allowed you to determine that those questions are answered, you have a couple of options -- you can either say "that specific question is answered in the book, actually" or you can say "Here's the answer from the book." Either way, the conversation moves forward in a way that doesn't happen when you act like we're supposed to pretend the item description doesn't exist.
There are so many diet books it would be impossible for someone to read them all unless it was their full time job (and even then, they might not be able to keep up). It's not at all odd that people would note the things that this particular book has in common, based on the item description and the author's background, with some books that we have read that didn't seem to be based on evidence.
You don't have to have hesitation about stating that nobody responding here has read the book. Why? Well, we were upfront about it. Nobody has made a false claim about reading it. We're discussing it based on the information that the author herself (or her publisher) provided.11 -
I can, without hesitation, say that no one responding has read the book. If the responders had read the book, their responses would be completely different and not so generic. I agree @ninerbuff that everyone is out to make a buck and we should read with caution. But when people negatively respond about an author of a book and it’s content who haven’t done their research? Lack of information and refusal to investigate further because it suits an exhausted talking point is mind-numbing. Libraries are open for pick-up in my area; if anyone wants to discuss the content, I’m sure you can request a copy at your local library.
I asked, has anyone read the book...? I got a Qarb response. I welcome opposing arguments pertaining to the *subject matter* (that hasn’t been touched upon, yet).
When you've seen the same thing over and over again (insert macro of choice here) you tend to see the patterns. So I am going to go out on a limb and decide it is not necessary to read this book...9 -
Like some responded, there are THOUSANDS of books out there with authors and their own approaches in which they think would be best for a population. For me, because I've done this for over 35+ years, I really haven't seen anything significant enough to sway my opinion on uptaking another authors "new" revelation on weightloss, fat burning, etc.I can, without hesitation, say that no one responding has read the book. If the responders had read the book, their responses would be completely different and not so generic. I agree @ninerbuff that everyone is out to make a buck and we should read with caution. But when people negatively respond about an author of a book and it’s content who haven’t done their research? Lack of information and refusal to investigate further because it suits an exhausted talking point is mind-numbing. Libraries are open for pick-up in my area; if anyone wants to discuss the content, I’m sure you can request a copy at your local library.
I asked, has anyone read the book...? I got a Qarb response. I welcome opposing arguments pertaining to the *subject matter* (that hasn’t been touched upon, yet).
The human body hasn't significantly evolved in thousands of years. How we digested, and stored food and burned energy thousands of years ago, still is the same today.
And while this author might be very well versed in research, time on the job, etc. I'm personally not going to use my time to possibly read stuff that I already know.
What you may want to do is bring up a concern and what the author's stance is and then get feedback from here.
Don't know what a Qarb is (is that in her book?) So if you could explain, that may help get you an answer.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
5 -
Personally I don't rely on the media when it comes to subjects like this. Give me peer reviewed clinical studies to look at. What's funny is lots of authors will use studies, but a lot of them aren't peer reviewed but references. And many time in the references, it doesn't give solid conclusion or that the information is still in it's infancy and more studies need to be done.
Like some responded, there are THOUSANDS of books out there with authors and their own approaches in which they think would be best for a population. For me, because I've done this for over 35+ years, I really haven't seen anything significant enough to sway my opinion on uptaking another authors "new" revelation on weightloss, fat burning, etc.I can, without hesitation, say that no one responding has read the book. If the responders had read the book, their responses would be completely different and not so generic. I agree @ninerbuff that everyone is out to make a buck and we should read with caution. But when people negatively respond about an author of a book and it’s content who haven’t done their research? Lack of information and refusal to investigate further because it suits an exhausted talking point is mind-numbing. Libraries are open for pick-up in my area; if anyone wants to discuss the content, I’m sure you can request a copy at your local library.
I asked, has anyone read the book...? I got a Qarb response. I welcome opposing arguments pertaining to the *subject matter* (that hasn’t been touched upon, yet).
The human body hasn't significantly evolved in thousands of years. How we digested, and stored food and burned energy thousands of years ago, still is the same today.
And while this author might be very well versed in research, time on the job, etc. I'm personally not going to use my time to possibly read stuff that I already know.
What you may want to do is bring up a concern and what the author's stance is and then get feedback from here.
Don't know what a Qarb is (is that in her book?) So if you could explain, that may help get you an answer.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
We tend to choose the media that tells us what we want to hear or read. It’s reinforcement of our beliefs. This book may help give a better understanding of those beliefs, or not. My SO (a physician wanting to get some science-y take on the subject) added this to his library a couple months ago. I found it and started reading it to learn about fat-burning efficiency. More complex than I expected... Still reading so...
To your last question? Nope, not in the book.
Just from what I heard in the video, I'm not convinced enough to go out and read her book. Could what she says be accurate? I'll leave that up to the detractors and let them test her theories with peer review study.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
7 -
Here are some quotes from her book, many which I don't agree with because physiology 101 doesn't refer to it.
· Page 6, “We’re supposed to be able to use our body fat for energy between meals. That’s why we have body fat! We’re not supposed to need regular snacks—or even regular meals. We’re supposed to feel fine eating just one meal a day if we so choose, as long as we meet our nutritional needs in that one sitting.”
· Page 9, “In other words, the kind of fat you eat changes what kinds of fuel your body’s cells can use, which determines everything about your health.”
· Page 19, “When your metabolism is damaged, you lack energy. When you lack energy, you want to eat more often, and most of us seek out foods that make metabolic damage worse. It’s a trap—but you can escape if you can get more energy.”
· Page 20, “A healthy metabolism uses body fat to sustain your energy all day so that you don’t need to rely on food to keep your energy up. When your metabolism is healthy, you have plenty of energy all day long even if you don’t have time to eat.”
· Page 20, “Low energy also makes you gain weight. When your energy is down, you’re going to feel lazier than when your energy is up.”
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition 6 -
Enlighten us. I'm not opposed to looking a certain POV if the science actually backs it up. But so far, there's nothing that I've seen so far that would interest me into looking into her book or philosophy.Here are some quotes from her book, many which I don't agree with because physiology 101 doesn't refer to it.
· Page 6, “We’re supposed to be able to use our body fat for energy between meals. That’s why we have body fat! We’re not supposed to need regular snacks—or even regular meals. We’re supposed to feel fine eating just one meal a day if we so choose, as long as we meet our nutritional needs in that one sitting.”
· Page 9, “In other words, the kind of fat you eat changes what kinds of fuel your body’s cells can use, which determines everything about your health.”
· Page 19, “When your metabolism is damaged, you lack energy. When you lack energy, you want to eat more often, and most of us seek out foods that make metabolic damage worse. It’s a trap—but you can escape if you can get more energy.”
· Page 20, “A healthy metabolism uses body fat to sustain your energy all day so that you don’t need to rely on food to keep your energy up. When your metabolism is healthy, you have plenty of energy all day long even if you don’t have time to eat.”
· Page 20, “Low energy also makes you gain weight. When your energy is down, you’re going to feel lazier than when your energy is up.”
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I’m reading Part 2 now. More science-driven than the intro. She cites various scientific studies and shares political and societal changes to the norm.
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
5 -
Here are some quotes from her book, many which I don't agree with because physiology 101 doesn't refer to it.
· Page 6, “We’re supposed to be able to use our body fat for energy between meals. That’s why we have body fat! We’re not supposed to need regular snacks—or even regular meals. We’re supposed to feel fine eating just one meal a day if we so choose, as long as we meet our nutritional needs in that one sitting.”
· Page 9, “In other words, the kind of fat you eat changes what kinds of fuel your body’s cells can use, which determines everything about your health.”
· Page 19, “When your metabolism is damaged, you lack energy. When you lack energy, you want to eat more often, and most of us seek out foods that make metabolic damage worse. It’s a trap—but you can escape if you can get more energy.”
· Page 20, “A healthy metabolism uses body fat to sustain your energy all day so that you don’t need to rely on food to keep your energy up. When your metabolism is healthy, you have plenty of energy all day long even if you don’t have time to eat.”
· Page 20, “Low energy also makes you gain weight. When your energy is down, you’re going to feel lazier than when your energy is up.”
A.C.E. Certified Personal and Group Fitness Trainer
IDEA Fitness member
Kickboxing Certified Instructor
Been in fitness for 30 years and have studied kinesiology and nutrition
I’m reading Part 2 now. More science-driven than the intro. She cites various scientific studies and shares political and societal changes to the norm.
Something to consider, with all books, even with quoted studies, it doesn't mean that they are statijg what the actual study is saying.
I guess the larger question is what are your goals and what are you trying to achieve?2
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K 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