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.
Keto diet = good or bad
Replies
-
Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
I believe you said something about ignoring people.10 -
snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.13 -
diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....4 -
diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Well... what we perceive as blue is, in fact, black.
4 -
diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s8 -
ladyreva78 wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Well... what we perceive as blue is, in fact, black.
Not since I quit drinking6 -
janejellyroll wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s
I might buy this...everyone knows it's azure we see, unless we had eggs for breakfast.1 -
janejellyroll wrote: »diannethegeek wrote: »snickerscharlie wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »magnusthenerd wrote: »Sunny_Bunny_ wrote: »There seems to be a lot you thinking the study was designed to do anything other than test the efficacy of a low carb diet.
Someone mentioned that people quit the study... people quit every study. For whatever reason. Literally someone could just decide that donuts are more important to them than not being diabetic. People literally do that every single day.
Knit picking irrelevant things you think matter doesn’t change the fact that 60% of the people reversed their diabetes. The reason that’s significant is because reputable resources like the ADA would have you believe it’s a progressive disease with no hope of reversal. Weight loss alone doesn’t show a 60% reversal rate. If weight was the factor that idea suggests, lean people wouldn’t become diabetic.
All your bias is showing.
As far as what is or isn't nitpicking about the study, I think you fundamentally disqualified yourself from making those assessments with your rejection of science as having valid methods over subjective experience based epistemology.
And yes, in obese and overweight individuals early in T2D, successfully losing and maintaining a 10% reduction in weight is about a guarantee to reversal. Good exercise programs can reduce markers in 4 weeks. Compliance is a huge factor.
Now can weight loss treat all T2D? No, it has both a lifestyle and genetic component. That I'm saying it can be treated that way isn't saying that is the whole etiology of the condition.
And yes, my bias does show. Understanding science will cause massive bias about studies based on their methodology. Bias isn't the same as being incorrect. If that is your standard, the Virta study has the issue of the doctors doing it all have financial relationships with Virta. But I frankly tried to avoid even bothering with that because I think it is the lowest tier of criticism of scientific research.
You say a lot of things. Most of which are incredibly one sided where you completely ignore anything anyone else says.
Meh
One sided in what sense. I haven't seen him take a position for or against keto, which is the topic. He is proscience. Why does that disturb you? You seem to be looking for an argument.
Seriously?!?! I gave someone a link to an article that happened to be on the Virta site and then had people jumping all over Virta as money hungry snake oil salesmen. I never made any claims of any kind. I only shared info I thought someone, not even those responding, might be interested in. And I’m the one looking for a fight? What a joke!
I’ve clearly said all along that It’s good for people to have options so they can find what’s right for them.
That’s argumentative?!?
Interesting
This is the debate section. Things get debated here.
I honestly believe that if someone posted to the debate section that the sky is blue, MFP would go 28 pages debating whether it's actually blue or if it's just perceived as blue.
That perception could be the result of a lack of omega 3 fatty acids, or insulin resistance, or...you know....
Come on, it's clearly "keto brain" clouding the ability to correctly process visual data! /s
Pretty sure it's said that keto improves all functioning. (As does any other special diet of preference.)3 -
This forum could be renamed to the mocking forum rather than debate. Remove any confusion...11 -
Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)3 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)
They grouped blue and green together under a single color name, if I recall correctly. And I believe several other cultures did the same thing. But it's been a long time since my degree so I may have it wrong.
So there's a solid historical precedent to be made that the sky is actually green. We only call it blue as a modern invention.5 -
Yep, this. Heck, I just admitted that I've done the potato hack on a different thread, we could have all sorts of fun with that one3 -
This content has been removed.
-
-
This discussion’s spiralled somewhat! I don’t mind because it was beginning to feel a little accusatory.
To get back to keto, I’d be interested to know how people explained what how and why they’re eating in that way. In social situations it can be hard to explain why you’ve brought your own food (I can’t really eat school or restaurant food as I’m a vegetarian).0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)
They grouped blue and green together under a single color name, if I recall correctly. And I believe several other cultures did the same thing. But it's been a long time since my degree so I may have it wrong.
So there's a solid historical precedent to be made that the sky is actually green. We only call it blue as a modern invention.
Sadly, I'm not convinced that using one word for a spectrum of colour that English-speaking people in our own time-frame divide into two smaller spectra with their own word means that Archimedes thought trees and the sky were the same shade of colour!
0 -
svlofthouse wrote: »This discussion’s spiralled somewhat! I don’t mind because it was beginning to feel a little accusatory.
To get back to keto, I’d be interested to know how people explained what how and why they’re eating in that way. In social situations it can be hard to explain why you’ve brought your own food (I can’t really eat school or restaurant food as I’m a vegetarian).
Social situations are easy... if you are going to a restaurant you eat meat with a side of meat, if you are going to someone's home, eat beforehand and don't eat there (or do like you would in the restaurant - eat the meat and skip the rest).0 -
svlofthouse wrote: »This discussion’s spiralled somewhat! I don’t mind because it was beginning to feel a little accusatory.
To get back to keto, I’d be interested to know how people explained what how and why they’re eating in that way. In social situations it can be hard to explain why you’ve brought your own food (I can’t really eat school or restaurant food as I’m a vegetarian).
Where do you live that vegetarian options aren't available? In the US, there's usually at least one option for vegetarians except maybe in some really rural areas (and even then, you can usually get an omelette or a grilled cheese or something).1 -
diannethegeek wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)
They grouped blue and green together under a single color name, if I recall correctly. And I believe several other cultures did the same thing. But it's been a long time since my degree so I may have it wrong.
So there's a solid historical precedent to be made that the sky is actually green. We only call it blue as a modern invention.
Yep, this. Heck, I just admitted that I've done the potato hack on a different thread, we could have all sorts of fun with that one
And I don't even know what the heck the potato hack is!!
Like I said, there's a wealth of information to be gotten here 😁0 -
diannethegeek wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)
They grouped blue and green together under a single color name, if I recall correctly. And I believe several other cultures did the same thing. But it's been a long time since my degree so I may have it wrong.
So there's a solid historical precedent to be made that the sky is actually green. We only call it blue as a modern invention.
Yep, this. Heck, I just admitted that I've done the potato hack on a different thread, we could have all sorts of fun with that one
And I don't even know what the heck the potato hack is!!
Like I said, there's a wealth of information to be gotten here 😁
Oh it's a dumpter fire waiting to happen
I actually proofread a book about the hack for a guy, (Tim Steele), I met on another forum, a few years back. He ended up publishing it and is now working on his second book. He's an advocate of short potato hacks, but the Potato Hack King is the Spud Fit Man, the man is a legend lol
https://www.today.com/health/spud-fit-man-loses-weight-eating-only-potatoes-year-t1061441 -
diannethegeek wrote: »HeliumIsNoble wrote: »Ooh, I espy an opportunity for a tangent. Did you know that according to clickbait articles, the ancient Greeks didn't see blue?
(I think it was a great deal more complex than that, in reality.)
They grouped blue and green together under a single color name, if I recall correctly. And I believe several other cultures did the same thing. But it's been a long time since my degree so I may have it wrong.
So there's a solid historical precedent to be made that the sky is actually green. We only call it blue as a modern invention.
Yep, this. Heck, I just admitted that I've done the potato hack on a different thread, we could have all sorts of fun with that one
And I don't even know what the heck the potato hack is!!
Like I said, there's a wealth of information to be gotten here 😁
Oh it's a dumpter fire waiting to happen
I actually proofread a book about the hack for a guy I met on another forum, a few years back. He ended up publishing it and is now working on his second book. He's (Tim Steele) an advocate of short potato hacks, but the Potato Hack King is the Spud Fit Man, the man is a legend lol
https://www.today.com/health/spud-fit-man-loses-weight-eating-only-potatoes-year-t106144
Oh Ok! I vaguely remember reading something about that, or something similar. I can't imagine lol. Thanks!0 -
Penn (of Penn and Teller) started his weight loss with the potato diet - he ate only potatoes for a month and then slowly added other foods back in.
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/health/diet-nutrition/news/a39697/penn-jillette-weight-loss-potato-diet/1 -
Penn (of Penn and Teller) started his weight loss with the potato diet - he ate only potatoes for a month and then slowly added other foods back in.
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/health/diet-nutrition/news/a39697/penn-jillette-weight-loss-potato-diet/
I couldn't do the mental gymnastics required to talk myself into that. I like potatoes and all, but....no..0 -
I probably could eat only potatoes for a month, but I'm not convinced I'm capable of eating so few as to lose weight.1
-
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »I probably could eat only potatoes for a month, but I'm not convinced I'm capable of eating so few as to lose weight.
You'd be surprised-once you remove all the fun extras (butter, cheese, bacon etc) and alls you have is plain, naked potatoes you don't really feel like eating a lot of them2 -
HeliumIsNoble wrote: »I probably could eat only potatoes for a month, but I'm not convinced I'm capable of eating so few as to lose weight.
You'd be surprised-once you remove all the fun extras (butter, cheese, bacon etc) and alls you have is plain, naked potatoes you don't really feel like eating a lot of them
Not for me. Assuming I can put a bit of salt on it, I can eat quite a lot of potatoes if I don't limit myself.2 -
Penn (of Penn and Teller) started his weight loss with the potato diet - he ate only potatoes for a month and then slowly added other foods back in.
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/health/diet-nutrition/news/a39697/penn-jillette-weight-loss-potato-diet/
I couldn't do the mental gymnastics required to talk myself into that. I like potatoes and all, but....no..HeliumIsNoble wrote: »I probably could eat only potatoes for a month, but I'm not convinced I'm capable of eating so few as to lose weight.
If we want to live on Mars someday, we'd better learn how...4 -
I had it explained here, and then saw my first potato thread in the open forums.
sigh...1 -
Penn (of Penn and Teller) started his weight loss with the potato diet - he ate only potatoes for a month and then slowly added other foods back in.
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/health/diet-nutrition/news/a39697/penn-jillette-weight-loss-potato-diet/
I couldn't do the mental gymnastics required to talk myself into that. I like potatoes and all, but....no..HeliumIsNoble wrote: »I probably could eat only potatoes for a month, but I'm not convinced I'm capable of eating so few as to lose weight.
If we want to live on Mars someday, we'd better learn how...
Yes, but he also had ketchup....2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 427 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K 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
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions