Low Carb, Paleo. Is this nonsense or science?
Replies
-
Screwed up editing and got duplicate posts.0
-
Edited screw up number 2.0
-
Um, I wasn't going to reply to your nonsense, but he said in his original post he said he didn't want a bunch of opinions. Go figure, that's exactly what he's getting.I thought it was quite clear he was interested in the scientific research (if any) that has been done and opinions on that. How that leads to being close minded, I admit I'm baffled.
That makes 2 of us. His question was clear as a bell from the opening post. It seems that some have some kind of perceptual handicap in that they have to answer with what they think instead of evidence based on research. That would explain a lot of the nonsense on these boards.
Lol! Are you and logic ever more than casual acquaintances?0 -
Never mind. Not worth it.0
-
The stuff grown today is pretty much toxic to all living creatures.
Do you really believe that last sentence? I can show you livestock and wildlife that not only survive but thrive eating modern cereal grains. Whole grain foodstuffs are very nutritious and certainly can be safely consumed by humans. I believe your information sources are selling a concept that is not supportable by science.
Yes, I do. Cows nor chickens are thriving eat grains they were never intended to eat. They are toxic to them and it is passed on to us through their meat, milk and the eggs.
Feeding livestock grains is not for their health. It is merely to fatten them up faster to send to the slaughter in the factory farming system.
[/quote]
I have a Phd in Animal Science, 31 yrs experience in the dairy industry, and have formulated hundreds of diets for dairy cattle. I can assure you that your comments are totally wrong. Cows can digest grain and perform very well consuming a properly balanced diet. Cereal grains are not toxic to the animal nor do they cause "toxic products" in milk as the result of consuming grains.0 -
The issue with those weight loss studies is that lower carb diets reduce water weight which will lower your total body weight. I don't think weight is a good indicator in these types of studies. I do agree though that protein is most thermogenic . You use more calories to digest protein. It does burn more calories, so very possible and likely you can take advantage of thermogenesis.
It depends on which style of paleo you're using. Are you using mostly protein? (increased thermogensis) or moderate protein higher fat (atkins style). The later would result in a lower thermogenic effect.
wha? no, that's not the issue. yeah, the short term loss is water weight on the keto diet but that doesn't really figure into anything. The keto diet changes the way your body burns energy from glucose to ketones (Fat) it's still about calorie deficit. the studies show that over all people on low carb diets lose weight and lose less muscle they also reduce hunger cravings.
some people do very well on keto diets and it's too restrictive for others. Sweden now recommends this kind of diet above all others. it also is shown to reduce cholesterol and insulin resistance.0 -
Alans great, but he certainly put his slant (bias) on this which is acceptable for this purpose.....everyone does it.This is 50 pages long from Alan Agaron
The Paleo Diet : Claims vs Evidence
http://www.nsca.com/uploadedFiles/NSCA/Inactive_Content/Program_Books/PTC_2013_Program_Book/Aragon.pdf
Paleo site interviewing Alan
http://paleomovement.com/alan-aragon-paleo-critic/
This is what I was looking for.
Thanks. Awesome!0 -
This is the best I can find on Sweden recommending a LCHF diet:
http://www.sbu.se/upload/Publikationer/Content1/1/Diets_among_obese_individuals.pdf
(it's in english)
They have the full review of literature published also...in Swedish. Generally only references to this study outside of the literature is a press release by Atkins.
Note that in this summary it states that giving nutrition advice for someone to lose weight over the short term (>6 months) the ADVICE to follow a LCHF diet is more effective. Over an extended period, there is no difference.0 -
At first it lowers water weight, however, they do start burning fat after the first week. I lost 30 lbs in 3 months on Atkins (stayed on the introductory phase and I did not count calories). I was 4'11 and 152 lbs, I dropped down to 118. People say you gain it back. Only if you start eating badly like you were before. However, you don't have to stay on this plan. I went onto normal eating and kept all of the weight off for 2 years (not counting carbs etc). Then I quit smoking in April and I have gained 10 lbs from over eating. So yes you gain it back if you start eating bad again, but otherwise, you can go off of a low carb diet to a normal diet and keep it off.
Also I went from pre-diabetic to normal blood sugar levels, and lowered my cholesterol and blood pressure. It did great for me. I did a mix of lean meats and fatty meats. You don't' want to eliminate all fat because you need it when you restrict carbs. But you don't want to only eat bacon either.
- My personal experience. Not sure if this diet is the same as atkins, but it sounds similar.0 -
Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.0 -
Jerry, of all the stuff I've seen out there, that DrDiet site is one of the more interesting ones I found. I'm personally heading towards a LCHF diet. In all the stuff I read, It's the one that seems to make the most sense for me only because I'd like to swim long distances w/o feeding often and avoid bonking and GI distress. A number of marathon athletes, especially in the tri community, have become or are contemplating becoming what they call ketone-adapted. Becoming ketone-adapted seems to do the trick with the huge possible benefit of losing weight. I won't lie, I don't know much on the topic yet and it's going to be a self-experiment. I have a long way to go before understanding how it works; from what I read, it seems a highly personal experience. People seem to respond differently and have to work on balancing the nutrients/minerals to ensure that they are doing stuff correctly (magnesium, salt intake etc.) and that the experience of going through ketosis doesn t become extremely uncomfortable or a health challenge.
Dr Attia, a legit MD from the San Diego area, as well as an accomplished athlete --he's among others, a marathon swimmer, that's one of the ways I became aware of him -- Dr Attia went through a rigorous LCHF diet and did a ton of self-experimentation along the way. He no longer has a regular practice but does consult individuals for a lot of money. He writes and gathered lots of interesting info on his blog, which I admit, I have a hard time comprehending but I nevertheless try, sometimes asking translation from science/doc folks I know. Check it out: http://eatingacademy.com/start-here
He is also involved in orchestrating research on LCHF diet: http://nusi.org/the-science/why-nusi/#.UrtGbtiA3IU
There are 2 books he recommends reading (I have yet to read them!):
Why We Get Fat, Gary Taubes
Good Calories, Bad Calories, Gary Taubes
Gary Taubes is a partner in the NUSI initiative.
So, to answer your question, at this point, I really don't know. But I'm learning more every day. All I can say is the LCHF diet is the one, as a European, that I am most familiar with, except that the version I experienced growing up, is closer to a nutrient-rich-carb (veggies) and medium fat (select meat and oils) version. One thing is for sure: you'll have to read all that info opening your mind to other beliefs you may have now, including the theory that a successful diet is simply the exercise of eating less than the energy we expand (deficit). I know it's been a challenge with me. But what I'm reading so far is compelling.
Please share your thoughts as you discover stuff and as months go by. I surely will.
PS: I know nothing about Paleo so all I said above is mainly about LCHF
I just went to this website you posted: eatingacademy.com and I can't get off of it. I've been reading it for about an hour now! Thanks so much!! :flowerforyou:0 -
Um, I wasn't going to reply to your nonsense, but he said in his original post he said he didn't want a bunch of opinions. Go figure, that's exactly what he's getting.
Jerry,
Oh for goodness sake. I just don't know what to say to this.
Well, shoot, opinions are pretty darned important because they are often based on personal knowledge or other research on the same subject.here is what I will say….they lost weight because they used paleo, low carb, whatever to create a calorie deficit…
Paloe, IF, Low Carb, etc are not magical ways to lose weight..they are just a tool to create a calorie deficit to lose weight..
you can eat high carb/non paleo, and lose weight…
calories in vs calories out...
This isn't about losing weight.
It's not? The link you posted referenced losing weight..
Imho paleontology and low carb is bunk
No. It's about optimum health and proper nutrition.
i don't see how low carb or paleo promote optimum health and proper nutrition...
I mostly was asking about the research, not opinions. I don't mean to sound rude. I just wanted very specific information based upon the website and the research it sites.
Nope. Not true. Too many people here on MFP are anti low carb and anti Paleo. I was attempting to not get into that side of it by asking people to just stick to the research. Very few people did, but some did, and helped me gain some knowledge. The problem with people's opinions is that I don't know how true they are. If you say you ate Paleo for 6 months and dropped 12 lbs and 3% body fat. Ok. But, that's a sample of one. It's meaningless. There are too many other factors. In a controlled study, they would look at the diets of a group of people. There would be separate groups, one eating Paleo, one eating normal, and then maybe another eating low fat or something. Then you compare the groups and come up with your findings. As I'm hearing this, there is no conclusive research on this specific topic with controlled groups. But, they may have started some testing on pigs, as I understand it. So, I guess it's too early.
If as an individual, you find that eating a certain way provides benefits over eating other ways, then have at it. But, this thread was really not intended to be about people's bias or opinion, but rather I was specifically asking about the research I cited in my original post. Or, if there's other research that specifies the benefits of low carb or Paleo eating. Apparently, what I am hearing, is this does not exist right now.
Good. Then I made my point. I didn't post here for opinions. From your post count, it looks like you post a bit, but I've never seen you here. I'm here a lot. This isn't a low carb debate. I'm asking specific question of the research, not people's opinion on if low carb works. Is that difficult? I'm trying to stave off all the anti low carb patriots here. This isn't about what anyone thinks or feels. It's about what the research suggests. I'm asking to discuss the research. Not how a bowl of rice makes your belly swell.
You've missed my point. You are adamant you are that opinion on the research in the link that you provided is not part of a good discussion. Why so closed minded?.
I thought it was quite clear he was interested in the scientific research (if any) that has been done and opinions on that. How that leads to being close minded, I admit I'm baffled.
That makes 2 of us. His question was clear as a bell from the opening post. It seems that some have some kind of perceptual handicap in that they have to answer with what they think instead of evidence based on research. That would explain a lot of the nonsense on these boards.
LOL!0 -
Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.
Well, this thread continues to deliver the lolz.0 -
False, false, and false again. Studies don't show low carb diets lose more weight overall, they only show short term faster weight loss (water weight.) Also, low carb diets usually show MORE lean mass loss, due to a combination of water, glycogen, and muscle loss. Sweden absolutely does NOT "recommend this kind of diet above all others." The dietary recommendations for Sweden are 50% carbs, 20% protein, 30% fat. Sweden did acknowledge that a lowER carb diet is ok for weight loss, but even that recommendation was 40% carbs instead of 50%, nowhere near any definition of "low carb."The issue with those weight loss studies is that lower carb diets reduce water weight which will lower your total body weight. I don't think weight is a good indicator in these types of studies. I do agree though that protein is most thermogenic . You use more calories to digest protein. It does burn more calories, so very possible and likely you can take advantage of thermogenesis.
It depends on which style of paleo you're using. Are you using mostly protein? (increased thermogensis) or moderate protein higher fat (atkins style). The later would result in a lower thermogenic effect.
wha? no, that's not the issue. yeah, the short term loss is water weight on the keto diet but that doesn't really figure into anything. The keto diet changes the way your body burns energy from glucose to ketones (Fat) it's still about calorie deficit. the studies show that over all people on low carb diets lose weight and lose less muscle they also reduce hunger cravings.
some people do very well on keto diets and it's too restrictive for others. Sweden now recommends this kind of diet above all others. it also is shown to reduce cholesterol and insulin resistance.0 -
Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.
Well, this thread continues to deliver the lolz.
Yes, the 2 you showed and the Taubes/ Attia post are pretty funny. Does anyone believe in real research instead of what they read in articles and books that have a commercial agenda??0 -
What the what?Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.
Here's a secret for you, the human body burns fat for energy 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, even when you eat carbs. It IS a fat burning machine, always.0 -
Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.
Well, this thread continues to deliver the lolz.
Yes, the 2 you showed and the Taubes/ Attia post are pretty funny. Does anyone believe in real research instead of what they read in articles and books that have a commercial agenda??
They haven't been educated about the difference IMO. The problem is, when you try and educate them as to the difference, it almost immediately devolves into an 'all toys out of the pram' type response.0 -
Completely 100% agree with you. I had great benefits from it. I noted them above. But you are absolutely right about ketosis.
"Ketosis for weight loss If the body can switch from being a carb-burning machine to a fat-burning one, it loses weight.
We store our fat, sometimes in undesirable places, such as our hips, buttocks, tops of thighs and our tummy. Carbohydrates cannot be stored like fat can.
If our body is in carb-burning mode, we eat when carbohydrate levels drop in order to get our energy.
To reach ketosis, the body must be on a high fat/protein and low carbohydrate diet. According to some organizations and experts, such as Dr. Atkins, with proper monitoring (urine dip stick, for example), levels of ketosis can be kept within safe limits and the dieter can reach his/her ideal body weight without suffering unbearable hunger." ----Written by Christian Nordqvist
Copyright: Medical News Today
Not to be reproduced without the permission of Medical News Today.
Well, this thread continues to deliver the lolz.
Yes, the 2 you showed and the Taubes/ Attia post are pretty funny. Does anyone believe in real research instead of what they read in articles and books that have a commercial agenda??
They haven't been educated about the difference IMO. The problem is, when you try and educate them as to the difference, it almost immediately devolves into an 'all toys out of the pram' type response.
Yup! Reminds me of an old saying my mother used to use, "Don't confuse me with the facts. I've got my mind made up!" lol0 -
well I jumped back into this one and see that the derp is still strong in this thread…
I also see a lot of "opinions"…you all are now banned from this thread ..!! bahahahahaha0 -
:bigsmile:well I jumped back into this one and see that the derp is still strong in this thread…
I also see a lot of "opinions"…you all are now banned from this thread ..!! bahahahahaha0 -
The issue with those weight loss studies is that lower carb diets reduce water weight which will lower your total body weight. I don't think weight is a good indicator in these types of studies. I do agree though that protein is most thermogenic . You use more calories to digest protein. It does burn more calories, so very possible and likely you can take advantage of thermogenesis.
It depends on which style of paleo you're using. Are you using mostly protein? (increased thermogensis) or moderate protein higher fat (atkins style). The later would result in a lower thermogenic effect.
wha? no, that's not the issue. yeah, the short term loss is water weight on the keto diet but that doesn't really figure into anything. The keto diet changes the way your body burns energy from glucose to ketones (Fat) it's still about calorie deficit. the studies show that over all people on low carb diets lose weight and lose less muscle they also reduce hunger cravings.
some people do very well on keto diets and it's too restrictive for others. Sweden now recommends this kind of diet above all others. it also is shown to reduce cholesterol and insulin resistance.
iF sweden told you to jump off a bridge would you do that too?
Besides, I thought Sweden was neutral…what the hell are they doing giving diet opinions..????0 -
-
No Country wants to get in the way of the USA when obesity is on the line.:bigsmile:The issue with those weight loss studies is that lower carb diets reduce water weight which will lower your total body weight. I don't think weight is a good indicator in these types of studies. I do agree though that protein is most thermogenic . You use more calories to digest protein. It does burn more calories, so very possible and likely you can take advantage of thermogenesis.
It depends on which style of paleo you're using. Are you using mostly protein? (increased thermogensis) or moderate protein higher fat (atkins style). The later would result in a lower thermogenic effect.
wha? no, that's not the issue. yeah, the short term loss is water weight on the keto diet but that doesn't really figure into anything. The keto diet changes the way your body burns energy from glucose to ketones (Fat) it's still about calorie deficit. the studies show that over all people on low carb diets lose weight and lose less muscle they also reduce hunger cravings.
some people do very well on keto diets and it's too restrictive for others. Sweden now recommends this kind of diet above all others. it also is shown to reduce cholesterol and insulin resistance.
iF sweden told you to jump off a bridge would you do that too?
Besides, I thought Sweden was neutral…what the hell are they doing giving diet opinions..????0 -
As are the meats, fruits, vegetables, water, shelters, technology, and humans. Saying we shouldn't eat it because it's different now than it was then is a laughably false argument to make, as that would mean we shouldn't eat any food available, or drink any fluid available, as all of it is different now.
Paleolithic era man actually ate a majority of their calories from grains, legumes, fruits, and vegetables. Roughly 50% of their calories were carbs. They actually ate very similarly to today, which is one reason why we still eat that way today.Because even paleolithic people ate some grains and legumes. So completely removing a food group, just because our ancestors thousands of years ago ate less than we do, isn't really a compelling argument for total elimination in modern man.
Of course, eat what you want.
Some grains and legumes is not like today where they try and tell you to eat the majority of your food from those type of products.....
Plus, ancient people would have had to grind it up for themselves, soak it and do other preparation to make it edible, so much work went into the process of making it edible.............unlike today.
And I have had many Doctors tell me that these things we eat today are no where near what the ancient grains were. The stuff grown today is pretty much toxic to all living creatures.
This is largely false for paleolithic people that inhabited the higher latitudes.
Menus varied so much that it's impossible to pinpoint a specific 'paleo' diet. Paleoithic people in the topics and mid latitudes would have eaten more carbohydrate. Paleo isn't synonymous for 'low-carb'.
But that doesn't change the fact that they were not agricultural. Those are Neolithic peoples. Grains and pulses consumed by paleolithic peoples were still different than today.
Using that logic, we should all just starve to death or die of dehydration. Seems legit.
Yes, I agree those are laughable arguments. Good thing I wasn't making them nor addressing the apparent dislike you've got for paleo style diets.
I was just saying not all paleolithic peoples ate most of their calories from grains and legumes and fruits and vegetables.0 -
Jerry, someone just posted this on their wall. Thought I would share as it s likely to be the stuff you were asking to read/hear.
https://player.vimeo.com/video/612154490 -
Thank you QuietBloom and zerryz
There are some interesting studies going on with Ketogenic diets and it's affect on advanced tumors. Who knows our experience at Mayo may help someone in the future.
I am actually very intrigued by the fact that Mayo is conducting research on nutrition (LCHF in particular) in relations to the development or reduction of tumors. Hope your hub is doing better.0 -
I can only tell you my story my experience. And I will not argue about it It works for me.
Five years ago I was 133 pounds (5' 2") and I knew I had to make some changes.
1) I joined this site and started counting calories for a year....Fail
no weight loss, tired and hungry
2) Low Carb/Atkins for a year...struggled for a few months..did ok eventually...but a failed attempt..I just did not "get it"
3) Watched a documentary called FAT HEAD..you can find this group in FB as well....I dropped to 115lbs and have happily maintained this weight for three years
I am a proud "fat head" lchf
I do not even think about calories..I do not care. I eat a great variety of food, I feel great and I will continue with this forever because I can eat so much even while eating out. I don't feel guilty about food, I can eat confidently when I m hungry...no worries
LCHF is big in Sweden...Start here...http://www.dietdoctor.com/lchf
Gosh..I know you are looking for research and I apologize, I do not have the links to just point you in one handy direction; and I think watching the Fat Head movie is a good place to start.
Best of luck I wish you health and happiness with whatever you find works best for you. 0 -
0
-
in the BBC program Horizon did an episode about the Atkins diet and in there was a study where a pair of twins was sealed in totally (and the researchers measured everything about them) and they were both given identical calorie meals - one low carb as per Atkins and one 'normal'. The result was that there was no difference in the end, no miracle weight loss in one and not the other, etc etc.
Obviously it was a very small sample size and no I can't remember which Uni in the US did it, but the documentary is on youtube so anyone can watch it.0 -
All of the contradictory info online will make ur head want to explode. One study says people did eat grains long ago, another study says they didn't. One study says we should all be vegan and its the best way of eating another study wears we are omnivorous. Like the way a lot of this articles and studies are worded they ALL seem true.
Something that I have noticed recently is like Christie Brinkley is 60 and looks amazing, she eats mostly a vegan diet. I see all these vegans online that look freaking amazing. So who knows. They say cancer cant live in an alkaline rich environment.0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1hMXJ1Wl8o
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