mynameisuntz Member

Low carb is also great because you can eat at a caloric surplus and still lose weight so long as you eat under 50g carbs! ...huh.

No, what it means is you changed something else which resulted in weight loss. Maybe you dropped calories, increased exercise, dropped carb intake as a whole, etc. That or you can attribute your changes to fluctuations in water weight. Changing nothing EXCEPT for the time which you eat carbs will not do a thing for body…

Do you believe in gravity? Because your friend is arguing against a physical law of nature that is as well-known and as valid as the concept of gravity. It's known as the law of thermodynamics. If you are not changing your calories or macronutrients, and ONLY changing the time at which you eat carbs, you will see no…

Sounds like she doesn't know much about how the body metabolizes nutrients, then. Avoiding carbs at night, assuming you don't change your calories/macronutrients, will do NOTHING for your body composition. Period.

I don't know who that is, so I don't understand the significance of you comparing me to him (or her).

Just going to assume you're being sarcastic. But please continue; it's humorous watching someone believe that their misconceptions about anecdotal evidence defy a physical law of nature. Keep trying to defy gravity or prove that the earth is flat. Best of luck to you!

Not true. Caloric deficit is all that matters. The time you eat is irrelevant. Let me explain again: If you eat most of your calories earlier in the day, you burn more calories from fat later in the day. If you eat most of your calories later in the day, you burn more calories from fat earlier in the day. How is this…

Who?

Let's make 2 things clear: 1) If your maintenance is 2,000 calories in a 24 hour span, then you will burn that amount in a 24 hour span. 2) If you eat 1,500 calories in a 24 hour span, then you will be in a 500 calorie deficit. Now explain to me how meal timing or tapering meals negates the fact that, regardless of when…

And when we're comparing how much weight we can lift, let's ignore gravity? And I am telling you beyond reasonable doubt that you do not know a single human being who can eat more than their body burns and still lose weight. Similarly you don't know a single human being who can defy gravity and float. You are arguing…

Participants ate less than 2,000 calories in that study and lost weight. I don't understand how that proves you just have to watch carb intake, not calories, and you'll lose weight. Please clear this up for me.

I don't want a Youtube video. I want the ACTUAL study itself. Find me the direct source. I want to see a published study that says, "participants ate above caloric maintenance, but ate less than 50g per day, and still lost weight." You made that claim, that's what I want to see. P.S. according to the physical law of…

Nope, not true at all. BMR won't slow down, and the thermic effect of food (TEF - metabolic boost from eating food) is dose-dependent, meaning it doesn't matter what time you eat or how many meals you eat in a day.

Not defensive? I have no problem showing you who I am or answering any questions about myself. But how does that make my statements more credible? Do you think every guy with 10% body fat is up-to-date on their knowledge of nutrition and human physiology? If you want to know the validity of my advise, why don't you ask for…

Wow, what a miserable typo on my part. I followed it up a few posts later with the TRUE intent of my question: "Show me research that shows eating a caloric surplus, but keeping carbs below 50g, will NOT result in weight/fat gain." As that was in response to LaJauna saying: "You don't need to count calories if you keep…

That doesn't show participants eating a caloric surplus, yet low carb, and still losing fat.

What would you like to know about me? Want a picture? Want to know how much I can bench or how far I can bike in one sitting? Will that make my answers more credible? Do you discern credibility based on achievement? If I echo scientific research, then why does the medium matter? Why does the person merely relaying the…

Horribly misleading and factually incorrect synopsis of insulin. Insulin spikes WILL lead to insulin resistance, eh? Maybe in hypercaloric, sedentary lifestyles. Nothing new there... So you have zero sources for this claim. Furthermore: you have zero sources that explain the significance of this when applied to real life…

1) Are you implying grains/dairy/legumes are poisonous? Provide research to back up the claim, please. 2) How come people like the Okinawans and Sardinians can eat lots of non-paleo foods and still both be in the top 5 populations for longest living humans without disability? 3) If you believe strongly that…

Berkhan is one of the masterminds behind IF'ing becoming a more mainstream thing. Lots of empirical evidence posted on that cite supporting his claims. Great source of information.

Goodness no. Some studies have implicated that fasting may have the same neuroprotective effects that exercise has. No increased catabolism, and potentially INCREASED fat loss. Nothing dangerous about fasting unless you fast for extremely long periods of time (more than 24 hours) and then partake in rigorous activity.

Actually I don't remember anyone I really respond to. I said you were partially right, though! That's better than most people get...

They're not. Just two that I happened to reference. How would you like to step to the challenge of citing some relevant research? In vivo, clinical trials, humans, macro/micros consistent between paleo and non-paleo groups. No correlations, no biochemical research and pretending that's relevant to the everyday consumption…

Right and wrong. OP you can do this even if it is an everyday thing. The limits of our bodies anabolic/catabolic state are vastly underestimated and exaggerated, respectively. Our bodies don't think every 2-3 hours what it should be doing with itself regarding metabolism; it thinks in terms of 24 - 72 hours. You can eat…

What? ... Carbs are stored as glycogen within muscles and the liver. They are not stored in fat cells. They are stored in fat cells upon undergoing de novo lipogenesis, where they are converted to lipids THEN stored in fat cells. The fate of carbs when at maintenance or below is: 1) Being burned for energy. 2) Being stored…

He's wrong. It doesn't matter when you eat.

Bumping so LaJuana can find me those studies.

Primal blueprint isn't scientific. Show me research that shows eating a caloric surplus, but keeping carbs below 50g, will NOT result in weight/fat gain. Can't wait to see.

Are you trying to say that you can lose weight so long as you eat less than 50g carbs per day? Because that's how your statement can be interpreted. If so: please explain. If not, maybe clarify.

The closest time I did anything paleo-like is when I dabbled in low carb. It wasn't full paleo since I was still eating cheese, and veggies/fruit were sparse in that diet. How paleo makes individuals feel is not my concern. If someone says they feel better eating paleo, fantastic. More power to them. But don't tell me it's…