ABC show "My Diet Is Better Than Your Diet"
Options
Replies
-
Oddly enough, I think Jeff made a good choice in his trainer. There's a lot of weirdness involved, but Jeff clearly needed to focus on his outlook just as much as his diet in order to succeed. And, based on the fact that he does lose weight, I bet there was some diet advice and exercise involved as well. They just focus on the freaky parts. Just like they focus on the weird aspects of the wild diet.0
-
Hoping to see a One year later update----it would be nice to read that everyone involved has continued to focus on health.0
-
I think people on the weight loss competition shows often ignore lean-body mass losses. There are a few that account for body fat percentages lost, but most don't consider the loss of muscle as a detriment. Keeping as much muscle as possible is important.
This is definitely true. That's why I was so glad to hear Able address it in the podcast. I mean really, Kurt won. Right? How could anyone think Jasmine somehow won when he lost so much more body fat. Even calculated from his own body weight. 22%?!?! I think she lost like 12 or something? Can't remember...
He won.
And glad to hear your SO was inspired.
hope she really loves the experience! 0 -
Went to the show's page and looked at the "Wild Diet" plan.
http://abc.go.com/shows/my-diet-is-better-than-yours/news/updates/abc-my-diet-is-better-than-yours-abel-james-wild-diet-plan
Look at what rule is first and foremost! Don't count calories. I told you all! Low carb plans almost universally are not calorie counting plans.
Excellent.0 -
baconslave wrote: »SiouxFallsMan wrote: »Just finished the last two episodes. The way Jeff ( I think that's his name from the yellow team) starts to get pissed and accuses Kurt and Able of cheating! Haha Kurt says he's just not hungry. That's the way I felt last night when it was dinner time. I love how they talked about IF too.
Jeff acts like my 4-year-old...
Agree. Even tho some of the trainers are nuts I'd take spending eight weeks with any of them over eight hours with him. I can not stand big babies.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I've not watched, since the first half of the first episode, but on the main boards folks are saying that the wild diet dieter says he's eating around 1,000 calories a day (I can't remember the exact range) and the trainer is not disagreeing? Why is that big man eating so little?
Cause where you're deep in ketosis you just aren't as hungry anymore. He's USING more than 1000 calories a day. They are just coming from his fat stores. That's why LCHF works.0 -
In the podcast he actually says that he realizes now that he was wrong with his calorie estimate because he was just guessing. And even in his guess he never even thought about the butter he added to coffee or vegetables or the fat in the bone broth. So his estimate was just made on the solid food he was eating.JessicaLCHF wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I've not watched, since the first half of the first episode, but on the main boards folks are saying that the wild diet dieter says he's eating around 1,000 calories a day (I can't remember the exact range) and the trainer is not disagreeing? Why is that big man eating so little?
Cause where you're deep in ketosis you just aren't as hungry anymore. He's USING more than 1000 calories a day. They are just coming from his fat stores. That's why LCHF works.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Dragonwolf wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I've not watched, since the first half of the first episode, but on the main boards folks are saying that the wild diet dieter says he's eating around 1,000 calories a day (I can't remember the exact range) and the trainer is not disagreeing? Why is that big man eating so little?
The plan involves not counting calories. So, it is very likely he is eating more than that. But, if you are very heavy, your hunger on low carb can be extremely low. He might be eating that little because his body isn't asking for food. It has plenty of energy, he is giving it the right nutrients, and it doesn't ask for excess.
My calories started low, unintentionally, (well 1600 ish) and rose as my fat stores went down. Same thing probably happened to him, except he had much more excess.
I get it, but again, If the plan doesn't count calories, why bring them up? I get LCHF but that wild diet seems wildly contradictory!
If I had to guess, I'd say a prompt got edited out or something.
And how does one comment by a contestant make an entire diet "wildly contradictory"?
It seems odd to call it a "primarily plant based diet" (on the website and otherwise), then focus mostly on animals.
It seems odd to say it doesn't count calories, then talk about calorie counts (and have them be very low).
It just seems contradictory to me.
The website references grass fed, high quality meats. The contestant talks about hot dogs. I dunno. I guess I'm just not made for reality tv. but I already knew that. ha. Carry on!
I think that was around the time that he was starting IF. I had assumed his calories were low because of fasting.
I think it is sort of funny to call it plant based diet too. I assumed he did that because it is more acceptable (trendy) to the public to eat lots of plants over meats... A bit of the old anti-fat or anti-meat bias. People feel better about themselves and their diet when they include lots of "healthy fruits and veggies" in their diet. Just my guess.0 -
Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Dragonwolf wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I've not watched, since the first half of the first episode, but on the main boards folks are saying that the wild diet dieter says he's eating around 1,000 calories a day (I can't remember the exact range) and the trainer is not disagreeing? Why is that big man eating so little?
The plan involves not counting calories. So, it is very likely he is eating more than that. But, if you are very heavy, your hunger on low carb can be extremely low. He might be eating that little because his body isn't asking for food. It has plenty of energy, he is giving it the right nutrients, and it doesn't ask for excess.
My calories started low, unintentionally, (well 1600 ish) and rose as my fat stores went down. Same thing probably happened to him, except he had much more excess.
I get it, but again, If the plan doesn't count calories, why bring them up? I get LCHF but that wild diet seems wildly contradictory!
If I had to guess, I'd say a prompt got edited out or something.
And how does one comment by a contestant make an entire diet "wildly contradictory"?
It seems odd to call it a "primarily plant based diet" (on the website and otherwise), then focus mostly on animals.
It seems odd to say it doesn't count calories, then talk about calorie counts (and have them be very low).
It just seems contradictory to me.
The website references grass fed, high quality meats. The contestant talks about hot dogs. I dunno. I guess I'm just not made for reality tv. but I already knew that. ha. Carry on!
I think that was around the time that he was starting IF. I had assumed his calories were low because of fasting.
I think it is sort of funny to call it plant based diet too. I assumed he did that because it is more acceptable (trendy) to the public to eat lots of plants over meats... A bit of the old anti-fat or anti-meat bias. People feel better about themselves and their diet when they include lots of "healthy fruits and veggies" in their diet. Just my guess.
In the podcast they said he was eating more veg than meat overall. But the show wanted to focus on the part that was the "most extreme". Able actually is very pro green veggies in large abundance. He is actually very pro green smoothies as a part of every day diet. But, he isn't so keen on fruit.0 -
Able is on the recent episode Living La Vida Low Carb podcast talking about the show and Kurt. What he is saying is that he advised Kurt to cut his carbs way down because Kurt wants to lose weight faster but he cannot work out much due to his injuries. It kind of echoes the advice from Mark Sisson's new book, where he talks about getting fat adapted, and then staying there if you have excess body fat. It kind of makes sense, if once the excess body fat is dropped we can assume that metabolism will be able to process carbs correctly, which I'm not so sure about.0
-
What is really interesting is who won if you account for body fat lost and not just weight.
Kurt put on an estimated 16.5 pounds of muscle, so he really lost 103.5 pounds of fat. That is 87 pounds that show on the scale plus the 16.5 pounds that don't show because they have been replaced by muscle.
Jasmine lost an estimated 9 pounds of muscle, so she really lost 44 pounds of fat. That is 53 pounds from the scale minus the 9 pounds that were muscle and not fat.
Work the percentages and Kurt beats Jasmine, but more importantly he put on lean body mass.
Edit: we have to assume that the body fat percentages are not completely accurate, because that means Kurt managed an average daily deficit of 3700 calories -- or something insane like that. I guess it's possible when you're as big as he is, but even if he was eating as low as he said on the show (which was unlikely) it would be a pretty huge TDEE for someone only walking and doing 7 minutes of high intensity exercise a day.0 -
Able is on the recent episode Living La Vida Low Carb podcast talking about the show and Kurt. What he is saying is that he advised Kurt to cut his carbs way down because Kurt wants to lose weight faster but he cannot work out much due to his injuries. It kind of echoes the advice from Mark Sisson's new book, where he talks about getting fat adapted, and then staying there if you have excess body fat. It kind of makes sense, if once the excess body fat is dropped we can assume that metabolism will be able to process carbs correctly, which I'm not so sure about.
Agree
I'm not so sure about that either. At least not for anyone with any degree of metabolic sensitivity to carbs, for sure. I think for a little while they might be tolerated and only if it's not right back to processed carbs.0 -
What is really interesting is who won if you account for body fat lost and not just weight.
Kurt put on an estimated 16.5 pounds of muscle, so he really lost 103.5 pounds of fat. That is 87 pounds that show on the scale plus the 16.5 pounds that don't show because they have been replaced by muscle.
Jasmine lost an estimated 9 pounds of muscle, so she really lost 44 pounds of fat. That is 53 pounds from the scale minus the 9 pounds that were muscle and not fat.
Work the percentages and Kurt beats Jasmine, but more importantly he put on lean body mass.
Edit: we have to assume that the body fat percentages are not completely accurate, because that means Kurt managed an average daily deficit of 3700 calories -- or something insane like that. I guess it's possible when you're as big as he is, but even if he was eating as low as he said on the show (which was unlikely) it would be a pretty huge TDEE for someone only walking and doing 7 minutes of high intensity exercise a day.
Oh but... CICO! It's impossible! lol
I just had to say it...
Yeah, Kurt totally won! And I wish these shows discussed things like muscle loss and gain for that matter.
But of course we know it's impossible to gain muscle while also loosing fat right?
Oh I guess that 16 lbs of muscle is what they call "newbie gains". But... Wait... Isn't that an aweful lot to be "newbie gains"? And don't you have to actually lift heavy stuff to get those gains? Oh geez! Now my wittle ketone driven brain can't compute! Lol
0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Able is on the recent episode Living La Vida Low Carb podcast talking about the show and Kurt. What he is saying is that he advised Kurt to cut his carbs way down because Kurt wants to lose weight faster but he cannot work out much due to his injuries. It kind of echoes the advice from Mark Sisson's new book, where he talks about getting fat adapted, and then staying there if you have excess body fat. It kind of makes sense, if once the excess body fat is dropped we can assume that metabolism will be able to process carbs correctly, which I'm not so sure about.
Agree
I'm not so sure about that either. At least not for anyone with any degree of metabolic sensitivity to carbs, for sure. I think for a little while they might be tolerated and only if it's not right back to processed carbs.
A doctor here in the UK is just starting a larger scale study of a smaller one he already finished that showed a good percentage of participants regaining at least some insulin sensitivity after losing the fat around their liver and pancreas. He's on a mission to show that diabetes can be "cured". That definitely wasn't the result for everyone, but there is clearly hope for some based on his work this far. But I'm sure most people understand that they can't go back to eating the same way that got them into this mess to begin with.0 -
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Dragonwolf wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »Sabine_Stroehm wrote: »I've not watched, since the first half of the first episode, but on the main boards folks are saying that the wild diet dieter says he's eating around 1,000 calories a day (I can't remember the exact range) and the trainer is not disagreeing? Why is that big man eating so little?
The plan involves not counting calories. So, it is very likely he is eating more than that. But, if you are very heavy, your hunger on low carb can be extremely low. He might be eating that little because his body isn't asking for food. It has plenty of energy, he is giving it the right nutrients, and it doesn't ask for excess.
My calories started low, unintentionally, (well 1600 ish) and rose as my fat stores went down. Same thing probably happened to him, except he had much more excess.
I get it, but again, If the plan doesn't count calories, why bring them up? I get LCHF but that wild diet seems wildly contradictory!
If I had to guess, I'd say a prompt got edited out or something.
And how does one comment by a contestant make an entire diet "wildly contradictory"?
It seems odd to call it a "primarily plant based diet" (on the website and otherwise), then focus mostly on animals.
It seems odd to say it doesn't count calories, then talk about calorie counts (and have them be very low).
It just seems contradictory to me.
The website references grass fed, high quality meats. The contestant talks about hot dogs. I dunno. I guess I'm just not made for reality tv. but I already knew that. ha. Carry on!
I think that was around the time that he was starting IF. I had assumed his calories were low because of fasting.
I think it is sort of funny to call it plant based diet too. I assumed he did that because it is more acceptable (trendy) to the public to eat lots of plants over meats... A bit of the old anti-fat or anti-meat bias. People feel better about themselves and their diet when they include lots of "healthy fruits and veggies" in their diet. Just my guess.
In the podcast they said he was eating more veg than meat overall. But the show wanted to focus on the part that was the "most extreme". Able actually is very pro green veggies in large abundance. He is actually very pro green smoothies as a part of every day diet. But, he isn't so keen on fruit.
you're right he is pro veggies, in his book he has veggies accounting for half of the space on a plate of food.Able is on the recent episode Living La Vida Low Carb podcast talking about the show and Kurt. What he is saying is that he advised Kurt to cut his carbs way down because Kurt wants to lose weight faster but he cannot work out much due to his injuries. It kind of echoes the advice from Mark Sisson's new book, where he talks about getting fat adapted, and then staying there if you have excess body fat. It kind of makes sense, if once the excess body fat is dropped we can assume that metabolism will be able to process carbs correctly, which I'm not so sure about.
I was actually thinking about that after watching a video Erin (erinseattle) shared. If increased body fat % causes insulin resistance and consequently fat storage, then doesn't losing body fat alleviates insulin resistance and thus the body uses carbs properly and efficiently?0 -
PaleoInScotland wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Able is on the recent episode Living La Vida Low Carb podcast talking about the show and Kurt. What he is saying is that he advised Kurt to cut his carbs way down because Kurt wants to lose weight faster but he cannot work out much due to his injuries. It kind of echoes the advice from Mark Sisson's new book, where he talks about getting fat adapted, and then staying there if you have excess body fat. It kind of makes sense, if once the excess body fat is dropped we can assume that metabolism will be able to process carbs correctly, which I'm not so sure about.
Agree
I'm not so sure about that either. At least not for anyone with any degree of metabolic sensitivity to carbs, for sure. I think for a little while they might be tolerated and only if it's not right back to processed carbs.
A doctor here in the UK is just starting a larger scale study of a smaller one he already finished that showed a good percentage of participants regaining at least some insulin sensitivity after losing the fat around their liver and pancreas. He's on a mission to show that diabetes can be "cured". That definitely wasn't the result for everyone, but there is clearly hope for some based on his work this far. But I'm sure most people understand that they can't go back to eating the same way that got them into this mess to begin with.
Oh I definitely agree that insulin sensitivity can be regained just as you said. I actually think that happens quite quickly and why lchf is so immediately successful for people with these problems. I bet full sensitivity is regained. But, i believe that processed carbs are the cause of it so that's why I think it will just happen again if someone goes back to eating that way. It just makes sense. I bet the sensitivity stays pretty well, maybe even indefinitely with just moderate carbs all coming from non starchy veggies and other very low sugar real foods. I don't think even whole grains would serve a recovered person very well either.
I honestly think the "cure" is quite possible for many people. That state of maintaining the cure is just how people should be eating anyway.0 -
@Sunny_Bunny_ I guess it depends what your definition of 'recovered' is? I think a lot of people would think that it would mean to be able to go back to SAD, or at least to 300g of carbs in their diet, and still stay thin. I don't think that would be the case.0
-
I think you're exactly correct.@Sunny_Bunny_ I guess it depends what your definition of 'recovered' is? I think a lot of people would think that it would mean to be able to go back to SAD, or at least to 300g of carbs in their diet, and still stay thin. I don't think that would be the case.
0 -
@Sunny_Bunny_ I guess it depends what your definition of 'recovered' is? I think a lot of people would think that it would mean to be able to go back to SAD, or at least to 300g of carbs in their diet, and still stay thin. I don't think that would be the case.
That kind of thinking always strikes me as odd. It's kind of like saying that because your lung cancer is "cured," you can go back to smoking three packs a day and not again suffer the consequences.
The people that can live off of Twinkies without getting metabolic issues are like the people who smoked two packs a day until they died in a car accident at 90. Yeah, such people exist, but it doesn't mean everyone's able to do it.0 -
PaleoInScotland wrote: »A doctor here in the UK is just starting a larger scale study of a smaller one he already finished that showed a good percentage of participants regaining at least some insulin sensitivity after losing the fat around their liver and pancreas. He's on a mission to show that diabetes can be "cured". That definitely wasn't the result for everyone, but there is clearly hope for some based on his work this far. But I'm sure most people understand that they can't go back to eating the same way that got them into this mess to begin with.
@PaleoInScotland my diabetes is now "cured", in that, without knowing my medical history, lab tests no longer identify me as diabetic. And that includes having a "normal" reaction to glucose overload.
This, to my endo, means that I should increase the amount of "whole grains" and "healthy fruit" I eat. She doesn't know I haven't had cereals, in any form, in more than a year and even though I eat fruit most days, that's a bunch of berries or a small wild apple when I can get them.
Even though I'm "cured" I think I'd be crazy to go back to eating what caused me to become ill. And, whatever her tests say, I know I may no longer register as diabetic but I'm far from my optimal health (other doctors, different tests). So I'll continue to do what has been working and ignore her advice.
But all this was just to ask the name of that doctor or links to more information, if you have them. Thank you!
::flowerforyou::0
