How and why carbs and a high carb intake will keep you fat!!

Options
1…89111314…16

Replies

  • DianaPowerUp
    DianaPowerUp Posts: 518 Member
    Options
    Regardless of how many gms of carbs/day your body can handle, the man in the video has a valid point, and it's all about insulin production and insulin resistance. Some people are inherently more efficient with dealing with simple carbs, others (and probably more than realize it) are not.

    It was not until I reduced my carbs and increased my protein that I got dramatic results. Before that, I was the skinny fat person on a treadmill, wondering why I could spend so many hrs in the gym, and not look more fit/defined. Now, after revamping my diet, I spend much less time working out, and I look and feel better than ever. Oh, and my bloodwork has improved too, btw.
    His point is really only valid to those with insulin resistance, really. Which is a minority of the general population.

    Do you think your results came from reducing carbs or increasing protein? Or both? Realize that's what we call a confounding variable, yet you attribute your toning up to reducing carbs when it's possible the reduction of carbs had little to do with it, and rather the increase of protein accounted for all the change. Not saying that's the case, just some food for thought.

    Actually, I know exactly how it happened, b/c I didn't do everything simultaneously. I could never, ever get rid of those stubborn last 10 lbs of fat, until I reduced my carb intake. Once I did that, my body just started losing weight like crazy (which of course, will make you look more lean/tone if you continue your exercise). When I started increasing my protein intake, and decreasing my cardio and increasing my weights, is when I started getting even more definition.

    So, for me at least, it was the carbs that kept the pudge on, and adding the protein/weight training got me more buff once I lost that pudge.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    Yes I can, in fact I did.

    That statement and my insistence he provided empirical proof is based on a continuing debate between us. This is not science class, is in reference to the “studies” that have been posted that he laughs off, (the proof is correlational, anecdotal and observational) because they don’t meet his burden of proof.
    What? Is this in regards to low carb dieting? I don't laugh off the data, because the data shows low carb is not superior...I don't understand. When did I laugh off low carb data?

    The low carb data SUPPORTS MY POSITION. Why would I laugh that off?! It solidifies my argument. Again, for non pre/post-menopausal, elderly, obese women with cases of insulin resistance. For those populations, the low carb diets reign supreme. Which I have no problem conceding/
    My insistence on empirical studies for his proof is to show that if he applies the same standard of proof to his claims as he does to ours, he falls short too. He has gone as far as to insist that no animal studies be referenced as proof. There is no way any long term empirical controlled, studies can be done on humans, with regards to diet. All, long term studies are self reporting, replete with assumptions and interpretation.
    Want me to fetch you a 12 month study that compares the Atkins diet to the Zone diet, where the Atkins did NOT beat the Zone? But rather both diets in the long-term are comparable?

    What are you talking about, guy? What claims of mine are you referring to?

    Animal studies are relevant in regards to the biomechanics of nutrition. But if you say, "hey look, we fed this rat carbs and it gained fat." I'm going to say, "yeah no duh, rats have a highly active de novo lipogenesis pathway, which converts carbs to fat. Humans don't. It's comparing the lifting abilities of a gorilla and applying it to humans."
    It’s a convenient stance to claim someone’s statement wrong, and stand back and say, “the burden of proof is on you, oh, and by the way for me to accept your proof it has to meet this criteria.” Personally I don’t care who the burden of proof is on, from a scientific perspective.
    EXCEPT I HAVE RESEARCH ON MY SIDE. I have research that SHOWS the Atkins Diet did not beat the Zone diet in a 12 month study.

    WHAT. ARE. YOU. TALKING. ABOUT? You are unreal. You have zero concept of science, empiricism, or logic. Zero. You don't understand burden of proof in the smallest amount. You actually want me to DISPROVE YOUR CLAIMS, rather than you support them. My goodness.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    I'm going to take a wild guess and say that freerange and mynameisuntz didn't accomplish much at work today.. :laugh:
    Haha, full time studying for the GRE, not much studying accomplished today :[
    Actually, I know exactly how it happened, b/c I didn't do everything simultaneously. I could never, ever get rid of those stubborn last 10 lbs of fat, until I reduced my carb intake. Once I did that, my body just started losing weight like crazy (which of course, will make you look more lean/tone if you continue your exercise). When I started increasing my protein intake, and decreasing my cardio and increasing my weights, is when I started getting even more definition.

    So, for me at least, it was the carbs that kept the pudge on, and adding the protein/weight training got me more buff once I lost that pudge.
    Then hats off to you for experimenting, finding what works, and sticking with it.
  • beernutz
    beernutz Posts: 136
    Options
    [snip[
    EXCEPT I HAVE RESEARCH ON MY SIDE. I have research that SHOWS the Atkins Diet did not beat the Zone diet in a 12 month study.
    snip
    I am guessing you are NOT referring to this study: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/297/9/969.abstract
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    [snip[
    EXCEPT I HAVE RESEARCH ON MY SIDE. I have research that SHOWS the Atkins Diet did not beat the Zone diet in a 12 month study.
    snip
    I am guessing you are NOT referring to this study: http://jama.ama-assn.org/content/297/9/969.abstract
    Nope. The results of that are interesting, though in the minority of results. Such as: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15632335 - same design with different findings.
  • NYGoddess77
    NYGoddess77 Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    The OP made a statement of which I find truth too. Only because I see the results I got from my daily regimen and of course I research things daily. I wouldn't believe anything the FDA has to say about food and diet...give me a break.
    I follow a paleo lifestyle and notice that when I consume a higher fat, moderate protein and low carb ( only veggies ) diet, I lose fat without really having to do much of anything at all. I do however exercise once a day to P90X because I am sedentary and don't really leave my house much. I do little things around the house and take care of my boys. I see more muscle definition this time around then when I was following the P90X nutrition guide. I was always hungry when I consumed grain based carbs, no matter whole grain or processed crap. That's another problem about them. They are addictive. My cholesterol was 225 before I started this lifestyle. Even when I followed the P90X Nutrition guide. Once i've made the switch to this healthier lifestyle...It went to 170 in 3-4 months of cutting out the grains. I keep my carb intake to no more than 70grams on a bad day...but usually about 50g or less... my sugar is about 35g or less.
    My fat consumption is about 90+ grams a day ( animal fat, avocados, nuts, coconut cream, coconut oil, olive oil, olives) and protein is about 60 - 80 grams. But the last 2 days I've actually went as much as 115 grams of protein. Just one of those days lol.

    I am not knocking anyone's dietary lifestyle to each his own.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    Also see the study titled, "Ketogenic low-carbohydrate diets have no metabolic advantage over nonketogenic low-carbohydrate diets."

    Compares 30g carbs to 160g carbs.

    Or, "Comparison of weight-loss Diets with different compositions of fat, protein, and carbohydrates."
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    In the last couple of years, however, at least a dozen studies have been conducted in major medical and scientific research institutions throughout the world and published in top-notch medical and scientific journals that confirm what we and others have been saying for years—the low-carbohydrate diet is superior to the low-fat diet not only for weight-loss but for improvement of virtually all of the components of the metabolic syndrome as well.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    • At least a dozen studies have been conducted recently in major medical and scientific research institutions and published in top-notch journals that confirm the lowcarbohydrate diet is superior to the low-fat diet in multiple respects.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    Researchers from Harvard recently reported that subjects could eat 300 calories more per day on a low-carbohydrate diet than those following a low-fat diet and still lose the same amount of weight over a 12-week period.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    @freerange - all of these quotes from studies mean nothing without you citing the actual study. It's meaningless. For all we know this was research done on people with diabetes, or insulin resistance, or some metabolic disorder.

    Meaningless without the direct source. Post your sources.
  • NYGoddess77
    NYGoddess77 Posts: 146 Member
    Options
    I've read the report....but I still don't agree. The proof is in my total blood work-up. My health is far much better on this lifestyle than any I have ever tried and I no longer need meds. Not just fat loss, and muscle building etc... I mean cardiovascular, cholesterol, Blood Pressure,and Digestive issues. As i said to each his own.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    HAHA, YOU'RE QUOTING DR. EADES.

    Oh, this is rich. After his appearance in Fathead and his absolutely hilarious synopsis of carbohydrate metabolism and subsequent insulin response.

    Oh, my. Let me guess, you've got Dr. Lustig's opinion on HFCS ready and waiting to copy and paste next.
  • yeya29
    yeya29 Posts: 16
    Options
    When you eat, your body breaks down the food ate into glucose, which is what the body uses for energy, and it is stored in the body cells by insulin. If you don't eat, the pancreas will release glucagon to restore blood glucose levels by taking glucose from the body cells. You need to consume sugars (like fruit) in order to stay healthy, but you also need fat and protein. Also, I don't think there has been much research done on the subject of whether the body burns fat or muscle first, none that I heard of anyway. But I'm pretty sure that your body won't begin breaking down your heart before its stored energy - which is there for a purpose.

    The point is, you need all three of the nutrients. Don't cut one out for fear of gaining weight, at least not without consulting a professional first. Consume a healthy amount of calories, make sure you get all of your nutrients, and exercise. That should be enough.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    In 2008 Stampfer co-authored a study in the New England Journal of Medicine that followed 322 moderately obese individuals for two years as they adopted one of three diets: a low-fat, calorie-restricted diet based on American Heart Association guidelines; a Mediterranean, restricted-calorie diet rich in vegetables and low in red meat; and a low-carbohydrate, nonrestricted-calorie diet. Although the subjects on the low-carb diet ate the most saturated fat, they ended up with the healthiest ratio of HDL to LDL cholesterol and lost twice as much weight as their low-fat-eating counterparts.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    You just keep on copying and pasting websites that have yet to cite a single study and pretend it means anything.

    Good luck!
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    So now you're reduced to attacking the Dr, instead of hie work? Nice.
  • freerange
    freerange Posts: 1,722 Member
    Options
    Stampfer’s findings do not merely suggest that saturated fats are not so bad; they indicate that carbohydrates could be worse. A 1997 study he co-authored in the Journal of the American Medical Association evaluated 65,000 women and found that the quintile of women who ate the most easily digestible and readily absorbed carbohydrates—that is, those with the highest glycemic index—were 47 percent more likely to acquire type 2 diabetes than those in the quintile with the lowest average glycemic-index score.
  • mynameisuntz
    mynameisuntz Posts: 582 Member
    Options
    So now you're reduced to attacking the Dr, instead of hie work? Nice.
    Well you're not citing direct evidence; you're just citing opinions based on his interpretation of research studies which you are withholding.

    Furthermore, I DID attack his work. His explanation of carb metabolization in the human body in the movie Fathead was HILARIOUS. He said carbs get converted to and stored as fat almost immediately upon ingestion. No where in there did he mention the fact that carbs are stored as glycogen.

    My 4 year old brother would be able to tell you he was wrong.
  • thurberj
    thurberj Posts: 528 Member
    Options
    I reviewed my food diary for the last week with my trainer/nutritionist today. I was using the defaults from MFP. She said I have to increase my proteins significantly and decrease my carbs. I am doing interval training with her (combination of strength and cardio,) plus I play tennis 3 times per week and do Zumba at least 1 time per week. I am 56 and she says for me to lose and tone I need 45% protein, 25% carbs, and 30% fat. I have reset the percentages on MFP and hope to see even better results with her input. On days that I burn a lot of calories I can not eat them all back....I would explode. I even fit a coctail or glass of wine in from time to time.

Categories