Gary Taubes
Options
Replies
-
I am sure I am replying too late to this but.. my opinion..
I did a ketosis diet for I don't know, 7 months? I lost a lot of weight. Probably 50lbs
I went back to a "normal" diet of eating clean and around 130-150 carbs a day. I lost 40 more lbs.
When I was in ketosis.. I was so full all the time I was taking in less calories than my BMR. Usually.. 900-1000 cals a day. Gary Taubes talks about "not calorie counting" because if you eat until satiety like you're supposed to.. you WILL be under your calorie "goals" for the day. It is essentially calories in - calories out.
My problem with a ketosis diet was that I had NO energy to work out. People say it will pass, well.. for 7 months it didn't. I was losing a lot of fat, but also a ton of muscle. I would rather work out - limit my white starches - and feel healthy.
That being said, if you want a low carb/ketosis diet it's very possible and will work. Also, being a vegetarian should be fine. Check out reddit.com/r/vegetarianketo0 -
Being a guy who's always struggled with weight loss I read Taubes book with great interest. It was certainly appealing to be told it's not my fault although I honestly have had no problems admitting that I ate myself into this a long time ago. I haven't tried to assign blame for my weight elsewhere since I was a kid. Saying that, few have been able to tell me why I seemed to gain weight so easily as a teenager when my friends were often scoffing more food than I was. Either way, it doesn't absolve me of blame.
I think his dismantling of the lipid hypothesis is interesting although I agree with others that his insulin theory is old as the hills and sadly a low carb diet doesn't result in effortless weight loss (like he claims). I actually prefer a low carb approach for it's apparent greater satiety, but it's not a magic bullet, at least not for me. I've done it hard core for months, tracking intake and exercise and I've tried other approaches, what works is restricting calorie intake. Sorry, I believe calorie theory is here to stay, at least for me.
I also think Taubes writing was sometimes contradictory. He does actually say that calorie intake is important but that it's a tautology to say that someone is fat because they eat too much. It's obviously true and confers no useful information. He is validating calorie theory right there in that statement! But then in other parts of the book he seems to suggest calories don't matter, only carbs do. I was never able to reconcile those aspects of his book.
As for eating meat. It's a change, change is hard, but it can be done. When I transitioned from a high carb, low fat diet to a low carb, primal diet I couldn't imagine what I'd eat for breakfast since it normally consisted of cereal and toast, yet now I couldn't imagine eating that box of livestock feed every morning. Introduce some meat slowly, maybe some chicken at first in a stir fry with loads of veggies, work yourself up to it. I bet your mouth will be watering for a steak in no time at all.0 -
Re. the tired old 'you can't rewrite the laws of thermodynamics' quip: the first law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems.
We are not closed systems.
It is clear from this thread that some of us, for whatever reason, cannot lose - or in my case even steadily maintain a pretty high - weight using the standard macronutrient ratios. Even though we don't eat junk and exercise constantly. And possess iron willpower.
Why the dogma? If the received wisdom doesn't work, there's nothing at all wrong with trying to find a way that does.
Actually, the laws of thermodynamics apply to closed, isolated, and open systems. Here's the first law of thermodynamics for open systems:the increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added to the system by matter flowing in and by heating, minus the amount lost by matter flowing out and in the form of work done by the system
In other words, calories in vs calories burned.
Oh, and those metabolic disorders that seem to screw up the first law? Those are covered by the second law, entropy.0 -
Re. the tired old 'you can't rewrite the laws of thermodynamics' quip: the first law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems.
We are not closed systems.
It is clear from this thread that some of us, for whatever reason, cannot lose - or in my case even steadily maintain a pretty high - weight using the standard macronutrient ratios. Even though we don't eat junk and exercise constantly. And possess iron willpower.
Why the dogma? If the received wisdom doesn't work, there's nothing at all wrong with trying to find a way that does.
Actually, the laws of thermodynamics apply to closed, isolated, and open systems. Here's the first law of thermodynamics for open systems:the increase in the internal energy of a system is equal to the amount of energy added to the system by matter flowing in and by heating, minus the amount lost by matter flowing out and in the form of work done by the system
In other words, calories in vs calories burned.
Oh, and those metabolic disorders that seem to screw up the first law? Those are covered by the second law, entropy.
I agree with your points although to give Taubes credit he does also make the point that the laws of thermodynamics aren't very helpful to someone overweight in that it doesn't tell them why they eat the amount they do. Most skinny people I know (especially younger ones) don't make a conscious decision to eat in moderation they just eat naturally and don't gain weight. Yet others do the same and gain weight continuously, they are obviously eating more (or moving less), but why don't they eat the same amount as the skinny person or move as much as them?0 -
Free will.
Your body adapts itself to the way you treat it. Overeat, and your body will adapt itself and adjust hunger and satiety signals to match the overeating pattern. Under eat, and the body will adapt the other way. You have to remember, from an evolutionary standpoint, human beings evolved with a feast or famine metabolism. When food was plentiful, humans gorged and gained fat. That way, when the food ran out, they could survive on fat stores. Early humans generally ate once every 2-3 days most of the time, sometimes eating every day, sometimes going weeks without food. The body evolved and adapted to this practice.
Now, of course, modern humans have 24/7 access to food. The human body hasn't adapted to that. It still responds to feast and fast. So when a person starts overeating, the body adapts its responses to store fat, as it's preparing for the eventual fast that it expects to come next. Unfortunately, the fast usually doesn't come, other than crash dieting. This is why people yoyo diet. The body is just doing what it has evolved to do. The body itself doesn't think, it just does. Our brain does the thinking. Unfortunately, a lot of people tend to turn their brain off when it comes to eating.
It's the same thing with activity levels. The more active you make yourself, the more your body adapts itself to being active. The more sedentary you are, the more the body adapts itself to being sedentary. The body will generally adapt itself to any condition that it's told to adapt to by the mind. The mind controls the body. A lot of people ignore that fact, and then try to blame it on their body, like Taubes. He blames overeating on the body being obese, rather than the body becoming obese because the person allowed themselves to over eat. It's a classic logical fallacy of the circular argument.0 -
As someone with PCOS and therefore should thrive on low carbs Taubes is a load of crap. There's no science behind what he states.
People with PCOS seem to thrive on low GI not necessarily low carb. I've lost 77lbs in ten months by not eating processed grains (and controlling my calories) I had white bread two weeks ago and was up all night in agony.0 -
It is calories in...calories out.
For me more protein in....less carbs in....means better, faster weight loss.
And I feel fuller with minimal sugary, carby, dessert cravings. I can do this for life.
To the OP...sorry you don't like meat. I respect your opinion. It is weird to eat meat when I really stop to think about it. But I love it. All of it. Others were good to suggest fish. Or shellfish. My favorite is mussels. Or fried oysters. Fry them in coconut oil. You smell the coconut oil cooking but can't taste it. Yummo!
I am going to look into the Taubes book. I will take all information and sort out for myself what I find credible or useful.
Good luck with your increased protein intake. One more thing, have you tried Garden of Life protein powder.? All seeds and so good in a shake with Greek Yogurt!0 -
Thanks everyone for all the great tips! celebrity328... that was so hopeful.0
-
What I am seeking are the reasoned opinions of folks who have expertise in this area.
Thanks.
That's a fair statement.
I would start here and be sure to view the links attached within the articles as some will direct you to peer reviewed research:
http://weightology.net/?p=251
http://weightology.net/?p=265
Thanks. Much appreciated.0 -
I don't believe that calorie intake is a cause for weight gain, but it is an effect of some condition that promotes weight gain. Obese people have chronic hunger over the long term that people who are always at a healthy weight don't have. There must be something causing this other than mental problems. That is why I respect Taubes' message, even if its not quite right.0
-
I don't believe that calorie intake is a cause for weight gain, but it is an effect of some condition that promotes weight gain. Obese people have chronic hunger over the long term that people who are always at a healthy weight don't have. There must be something causing this other than mental problems. That is why I respect Taubes' message, even if its not quite right.
Oh Grinch...
I know what you're trying to say but you worded it terribly, a surplus of calories is indeed why you gain weight0 -
There may be an element of showmanship in Taubes but in my view it is outweighed by the fact that, for me, the majority of what he says rings true.
On a scientific, evolutionary and intuitive level.
And that is way more than I have got by traditional means from any other so called 'nutrition expert'.
Hell, just go back the Banting diet in the early 1900s and see what the wisdom was back then ... Did they count calories back then? Of course not.
The sad fact is we have seriously gone backwards nutritionally but they momentum is swinging back the other way, one person at a time.
Well said.
I have read The Letter of Corpulence that William Banting wrote in the late 1800's. No calorie counting at all. That right there tells me that we shouldn't have to be counting calories and that the QUALITY of what we eat majorly overrides what we eat and not the QUANTITY.0 -
I don't believe that calorie intake is a cause for weight gain, but it is an effect of some condition that promotes weight gain. Obese people have chronic hunger over the long term that people who are always at a healthy weight don't have. There must be something causing this other than mental problems. That is why I respect Taubes' message, even if its not quite right.
Oh Grinch...
I know what you're trying to say but you worded it terribly, a surplus of calories is indeed why you gain weight
It doesn't matter to me that calories are necessary for weight gain, because I don't believe the average person has any control long term over their calorie intake as long as they eat the same types of food that got them fat in the first place. So I think Taubes is right that our food supply causes us to eat at a calorie surplus, and I think some carb foods are a large part of that, but it may or may not be because of the glucose/fructose or because of other micro-nutrients found in these foods.
I think Taubes went wrong by putting all his eggs in the insulin basket unfortunately, when its clearly more complicated than that.0 -
The whole "insulin spiking" argument that people like Taubes make does not make sense. Protein "spikes" insulin also, not just carbohydrates while fat does not acutally "spike" insulin.
Too much protein will spike insulin. Protein does not spike insulin if not eaten in excess. Hence the reason that when starting out with Paleo / Primal and Atkins you will be eating higher fat, moderate protein and low carb to heal the body and the pancreas.
This is the reason that those of us with PCOS, thyroid, diabetes / insulin resistance do well with a low carb plan and as long activity level is maintained or increased the amount of carbs that are able to be introduced into the body is allowed to a certain point.0 -
The whole "insulin spiking" argument that people like Taubes make does not make sense. Protein "spikes" insulin also, not just carbohydrates while fat does not acutally "spike" insulin.
Too much protein will spike insulin. Protein does not spike insulin if not eaten in excess. Hence the reason that when starting out with Paleo / Primal and Atkins you will be eating higher fat, moderate protein and low carb to heal the body and the pancreas.
Lol, would you consider 2-3 eggs an excessive amount of protein?0 -
Has anyone else heard of Zoe Harcombe and her diet, she says much the same thing as Gary, it's all to do with insulin being released when you consume carbs, and that causes fat when eaten with carbs to be stored, check out The Harcombe Diet.0
-
The whole "insulin spiking" argument that people like Taubes make does not make sense. Protein "spikes" insulin also, not just carbohydrates while fat does not acutally "spike" insulin.
Too much protein will spike insulin. Protein does not spike insulin if not eaten in excess. Hence the reason that when starting out with Paleo / Primal and Atkins you will be eating higher fat, moderate protein and low carb to heal the body and the pancreas.
This is the reason that those of us with PCOS, thyroid, diabetes / insulin resistance do well with a low carb plan and as long activity level is maintained or increased the amount of carbs that are able to be introduced into the body is allowed to a certain point.
The researchers who support the insulin hypothesis generally don't even make the claim that insulin spikes are bad. They say that chronically elevated insulin levels are bad. Plus we are recommended to eat over 3 times more carbs than protein, so the total insulin effect from carbs will be much higher. I imagine someone who is insulin resistant will secrete more insulin after eating carbs than after eating protein as well to clear the glucose in the blood.0 -
Has anyone else heard of Zoe Harcombe and her diet, she says much the same thing as Gary, it's all to do with insulin being released when you consume carbs, and that causes fat when eaten with carbs to be stored, check out The Harcombe Diet.
Harcombe spews BS, although I thought her writeup on the lipid hypothesis was better than Taubes'0 -
-
Lol
"Last fall, researchers at the University of California, Davis, published three studies—two of humans, one of rhesus monkeys—confirming the deleterious effect of these sugars on metabolism and insulin levels. The message of all three studies was that sugars are unhealthy—not because people or monkeys consumed too much of them, but because, well, they do things to our bodies that the other nutrients we eat simply don’t do."
How does he come to that conclusion? Did he even read those studies? So 25% of caloric intake in sugar for sedentary individuals doesn't constitute too much?0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 392.1K Introduce Yourself
- 43.6K Getting Started
- 259.9K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.7K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.4K Fitness and Exercise
- 403 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.8K Motivation and Support
- 7.9K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.4K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.4K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions