Mmmmm...beer's Low Carb Trial

[MDC 5,875]

 

I know that it is not true. One, I have a daughter with Type 1 diabetes and as such have done research into how different macronutrients are processed within the body. Second, as an engineer I know that a "Calorie" is a unit of potential heat energy within foods; it is a theoretical ideal number which in no way implies that the body processes all calories the same.

 

And you... anecdotally aren't a fattie?

I didnt go to MIT but I am fairly sure that any doctor or nutritionist would tell you that a caloric deficit is the most surefire way to lose weight. I am

 

I am 511 and just under 175 lbs. I weigh less that you without a fad diet or ketosis breath.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

I didnt go to MIT but I am fairly sure that any doctor or nutritionist would tell you that a caloric deficit is the most surefire way to lose weight. I am

 

I am 511 and just under 175 lbs. I weigh less that you without a fad diet or ketosis breath.

I'm 5'10 and my lean body mass is 4 lbs more than you weigh total.

 

Keep your antiquated bmi.

[jerryskids 5,165]

I didnt go to MIT but I am fairly sure that any doctor or nutritionist would tell you that a caloric deficit is the most surefire way to lose weight. I am

 

I am 511 and just under 175 lbs. I weigh less that you without a fad diet or ketosis breath.

 

Caloric deficit is a way to lose weight, but that doesn't make all caloric deficits equal. Thanks for conceding that you've done no research on this topic. And a caloric deficit relying on high carbs (without most being fiber) is absolutely the least sustainable way to lose weight.

 

I'm fairly confident that penny, if being honest, will concede my point but he likes to move the goalposts to "healthy" and "longevity" which, as I've stated multiple times, are good objectives but are somewhat independent of the processing of macronutrients which you continue to remain blissfully ignorant about.

 

Also my height/weight ratio is about the same as yours. 3 pounds higher at the moment to concede that point, but I travel every week pretty much for work so I end up eating some version of crap multiple days per week.

[Reality 2,710]

MDC stops by, says something retarded, spikes his virtual football, and claims victory..

 

It's painful to watch..

[MDC 5,875]

 

Caloric deficit is a way to lose weight, but that doesn't make all caloric deficits equal. Thanks for conceding that you've done no research on this topic. And a caloric deficit relying on high carbs (without most being fiber) is absolutely the least sustainable way to lose weight.

 

I'm fairly confident that penny, if being honest, will concede my point but he likes to move the goalposts to "healthy" and "longevity" which, as I've stated multiple times, are good objectives but are somewhat independent of the processing of macronutrients which you continue to remain blissfully ignorant about.

 

Also my height/weight ratio is about the same as yours. 3 pounds higher at the moment to concede that point, but I travel every week pretty much for work so I end up eating some version of crap multiple days per week.

You sure crammed a lot of straw men into one post. I never said all caloric deficits are equal, or recommended high carbs, or advocated that Twinkie diet that keto wingnuts are always going on about.

 

Im sure there are several good reasons youre fatter than me.

[jerryskids 5,165]

You sure crammed a lot of straw men into one post. I never said all caloric deficits are equal, or recommended high carbs, or advocated that Twinkie diet that keto wingnuts are always going on about.

 

Im sure there are several good reasons youre fatter than me.

 

Funny you would accuse me of straw men, you haven't addressed a single point I've made. You've only made a grade school observation that A=B and continue to spew ignorance from there. I'll let others conclude who is more convincing, have a nice day.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,576]

MDC stops by, says something retarded, spikes his virtual football, and claims victory..

 

It's painful to watch..

It's either that or he just lies. It is what it is.

[MDC 5,875]

 

Funny you would accuse me of straw men, you haven't addressed a single point I've made. You've only made a grade school observation that A=B and continue to spew ignorance from there. I'll let others conclude who is more convincing, have a nice day.

Weve had this conversation a lot of times before.

[jerryskids 5,165]

Weve had this conversation a lot of times before.

 

Yep. Every time you look uninformed. CICO $#@!

[MDC 5,875]

 

Yep. Every time you look uninformed. CICO $#@!

The most reliable way to lose weight.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I no longer rigorously count calories but in the early going of weight loss it was really helpful to get a sense of how much I was over eating before. Now I just sort of keep a mental note but the habit of eating a healthy amount is ingrained.

Sounds reasonable.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

Just wondering, why haven't you asked him about ketogenic diets?

 

 

I quoted this because you said "satiety effect," which maybe was discussed but I don't recall the specifics. One of the huge benefits of a low-carb, high-fat diet is that carbs in general do not promote satiety, whereas fat does. Fiber may do it moreso than sugars, and I suspect your Blue Zone "65% carbs" is very high in fiber vs. glucose etc. They include nuts, eggs, and fiber. I already outlined how those diets are not that far off from low-carb (if you isolate fiber from non-fiber); heck even Atkins decades ago advocated a "maintenance" diet which included high-fiber foods.

 

Anyway, this is why I think your study about difficulty maintaining low-carb diets is bunk, because the very nature of the foods in it promotes satiety. High-glycemic carbs don't. To nzoner's post, never ever ever use "low-calorie" or "no-fat" anything. They have pounded that stuff with sugar. Eat the real thing, it is better for you.

 

It is also part of why I challenged MDC to an all-sugar diet. I know this is a chat bored and we don't need to be experts, but his lack of willingness to educate himself in any way on the way these macronutrients are processed is very frustrating. He just keeps saying "calories in calories out" like if he says it enough it will make it true. It just doesn't.

 

I think you understand the science but are drawing the line on a lifetime of animal fats and protein. I'm trying to find a middle ground here in multiple threads.

I have discussed some of the issues of VLC diets with my friend, but I just sent him an email asking what he tells his patients about ketogenic diets to clarify his stance.

 

I don't think anyone is promoting an "all-sugar" diet. In fact, I haven't seen anyone touting simple sugars for much of anything. And it's frustrating that every ketophile conflates healthy carbohydrates with processed junk, particularly when crap like bacon and lard appear on many VLC menus.

 

Fats and proteins promote satiety pretty well, so people on VLC diets tend to eat less calories. But minus a small number of calories invested in their metabolism/thermic effect of food, it still boils down to CICO. And plant-based, high fiber diets are less calorically dense, so you can eat a lot more to promote satiety the old fashioned way.

 

You are way off-base regarding the macronutrient content of diets in the blue zones. They are 65%+ carbohydrate, which is no-where near low carbohydrate: it's just they only eat healthy carbohydrates, along with a smattering of fat and protein.

 

And yeah, I do think a lifetime of animal protein isn't doing your body any favors. I also think VLC diets are prone to skimping on fiber, though it seems like Mmmmbeer is watching his pretty closely.

 

I think a middle ground is fine, but defining the middle is a problem. Neither veganism nor VLC diets are anywhere near it. I think the blue zone approach is reasonable for most people, but requires a major reduction in how much meat/animal protein one eats, which is too much in typical Western and VLC diets.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

I know that it is not true. One, I have a daughter with Type 1 diabetes and as such have done research into how different macronutrients are processed within the body. Second, as an engineer I know that a "Calorie" is a unit of potential heat energy within foods; it is a theoretical ideal number which in no way implies that the body processes all calories the same.

 

And you... anecdotally aren't a fattie?

I am no where near a fatty, with body fat % less than 11 my entire adult life. My visceral fat is low too. Lower BMI than you and MDC. And I eat plenty of carbohydrates.

[jerryskids 5,165]

I have discussed some of the issues of VLC diets with my friend, but I just sent him an email asking what he tells his patients about ketogenic diets to clarify his stance.

 

I don't think anyone is promoting an "all-sugar" diet. In fact, I haven't seen anyone touting simple sugars for much of anything. And it's frustrating that every ketophile conflates healthy carbohydrates with processed junk, particularly when crap like bacon and lard appear on many VLC menus.

 

Fats and proteins promote satiety pretty well, so people on VLC diets tend to eat less calories. But minus a small number of calories invested in their metabolism/thermic effect of food, it still boils down to CICO. And plant-based, high fiber diets are less calorically dense, so you can eat a lot more to promote satiety the old fashioned way.

 

You are way off-base regarding the macronutrient content of diets in the blue zones. They are 65%+ carbohydrate, which is no-where near low carbohydrate: it's just they only eat healthy carbohydrates, along with a smattering of fat and protein.

 

And yeah, I do think a lifetime of animal protein isn't doing your body any favors. I also think VLC diets are prone to skimping on fiber, though it seems like Mmmmbeer is watching his pretty closely.

 

I think a middle ground is fine, but defining the middle is a problem. Neither veganism nor VLC diets are anywhere near it. I think the blue zone approach is reasonable for most people, but requires a major reduction in how much meat/animal protein one eats, which is too much in typical Western and VLC diets.

 

I'm kinda thinking that whenever you see me post in a thread about this, you just spout a bunch of pablum that has nothing to do with what I said. If you want to have an adult conversation, please do us both a favor and punch yourself in the face, shake it off, re-read what I said, and post again. I would highlight the points I made in my OP but that is a waste of my time; go back and read them.

[jerryskids 5,165]

I am no where near a fatty, with body fat % less than 11 my entire adult life. My visceral fat is low too. Lower BMI than you and MDC. And I eat plenty of carbohydrates.

 

You eat plenty of fiber. MDC thinks a calorie is a calorie. I can't seem to educate either of you on why this is wrong.

 

ETA: Why "a calorie is a calorie" is wrong, not eating fiber.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I'm kinda thinking that whenever you see me post in a thread about this, you just spout a bunch of pablum that has nothing to do with what I said. If you want to have an adult conversation, please do us both a favor and punch yourself in the face, shake it off, re-read what I said, and post again. I would highlight the points I made in my OP but that is a waste of my time; go back and read them.

WTF are you talking about?

 

I addressed every one of your points.

[jerryskids 5,165]

WTF are you talking about?

 

I addressed every one of your points.

 

Really? Let's start with MDC's premise: is a Calorie a Calorie?

[penultimatestraw 473]

Really? Let's start with MDC's premise: is a Calorie a Calorie?

Not exactly, but the practical application is unclear.

 

Protein has a greater thermic effect than carbohydrate, which has a higher thermic effect than fat. So up to 15-20% more calories are utilized in the digestion/metabolism of protein relative to carbohydrate. Its even a greater difference between protein and fat. So all else being equal, after metabolism a diet consisting 100% of protein yields less kcal/g than 100% carbohydrate, which in turn yields less than 100% fat.

 

But if that were the only factor, ketogenic diets wouldnt be optimal either, as carbohydrates would be preferred over fat.

 

My point is all these diets are missing out on the bigger picture, promoting health, of which weight loss is only one component.

[MDC 5,875]

 

Really? Let's start with MDC's premise: is a Calorie a Calorie?

Thats not really my premise. My premise is that low carb is no better than a healthy balanced diet that includes carbs because calories are more important. I also think portion control is going to be a lot more sustainable over the long haul for most people than a no / low carb diet.

 

Hot take I know.

[jerryskids 5,165]

Thats not really my premise. My premise is that low carb is no better than a healthy balanced diet that includes carbs because calories are more important. I also think portion control is going to be a lot more sustainable over the long haul for most people than a no / low carb diet.

 

Hot take I know.

 

I've tried telling you that low calories combined with high carbs is as low as you can get for sustainability. You've offered nothing. I'm bored I guess, so I keep responding to your uninformed posts.

[penultimatestraw 473]

I've tried telling you that low calories combined with high carbs is as low as you can get for sustainability. You've offered nothing. I'm bored I guess, so I keep responding to your uninformed posts.

 

How do populations all over the world do it?

[jerryskids 5,165]

How do populations all over the world do it?

 

Your 5 populations in Blue Zones do it thru high fiber veggies and high protein/fat foods like nuts and eggs. Like we've discussed, not terribly different than the diet I espouse. MDC knows nothing about diet and I suggest you not try to die on that very short hill.

[MDC 5,875]

I had no idea that eating less + exercise was so controversial.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Your 5 populations in Blue Zones do it thru high fiber veggies and high protein/fat foods like nuts and eggs. Like we've discussed, not terribly different than the diet I espouse. MDC knows nothing about diet and I suggest you not try to die on that very short hill.

The TOTAL carbohydrate content of those diets is nothing like you are endorsing. You also are making a big assumption about the amount of eggs and nuts they eat. And you are totally ignoring the grain and legumes in their diets, both of which are enathma to the keto crowd.

[jerryskids 5,165]

The TOTAL carbohydrate content of those diets is nothing like you are endorsing. You also are making a big assumption about the amount of eggs and nuts they eat. And you are totally ignoring the grain and legumes in their diets, both of which are enathma to the keto crowd.

Your previous link called nuts the super food of all of the zones, and we've already discussed legumes.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Your previous link called nuts the super food of all of the zones, and we've already discussed legumes.

It also said they eat 75% carbohydrate, including grains, and not a lot of eggs or meat. Yet somehow you think their diet is similar to yours, and low carbohydrate

[Casual Observer 597]

All right, so are carbs good or bad? Asking for a friend.

[penultimatestraw 473]

Just wondering, why haven't you asked him about ketogenic diets?

He finally replied. Basically he agrees with just about everything Ive said, though added some info about ketogenic diets and cardiovascular risk/all cause mortality of which I wasnt aware:

Hey Arsenio, sorry, I just saw this email and with the volume of junk emails I receive in my inbox, I wonder how many more legit emails I miss.

 

Yes, any diet can result in weight loss when leading to consumption of lower calories than expended.

 

Definitely not a neutral risk for CV risk - these diets dramatically reduce systemic (including coronary) blood flow, resulting in increase CV dz, erectile dysfunction, etc. See video:

 

https://nutritionfacts.org/video/low-carb-diets-and-coronary-blood-flow/

 

Yes, other issues are lack of fiber - the most deficient "nutrient" in the standard American diet - and the risks associated with it - all sorts of GI issues, including cancer.

 

Yes, excess burden on the kidneys.

 

Excess production of IGF-1 - and cancer risks assoc with that. (https://nutritionfacts.org/?s=igf-1)

 

Increased inflammation and acidity and resultant increased urinary calcium loss.

 

nutritionfacts.org is an excellent evidence based resource of many of the commonly debated nutrition related questions.

[jerryskids 5,165]

He finally replied. Basically he agrees with just about everything Ive said, though added some info about ketogenic diets and cardiovascular risk/all cause mortality of which I wasnt aware:

 

Thanks for the info. I've already said multiple times that I subscribe to the "eat food. Mostly plants. A little less." philosophy.

 

That being said, it is unfortunate that he seems to lump processed carbs in with animal fats, as I strongly believe (and have seen studies although I don't have time now to find) that high processed carbs have a significantly worse impact on CV damage.

[MDC 5,875]

175 pounds of muscle this morning baby.

 

Pro carb.

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

Thanks for the info. I've already said multiple times that I subscribe to the "eat food. Mostly plants. A little less." philosophy.

 

That being said, it is unfortunate that he seems to lump processed carbs in with animal fats, as I strongly believe (and have seen studies although I don't have time now to find) that high processed carbs have a significantly worse impact on CV damage.

Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY, is advocating processed/refined carbohydrates as part of a balanced diet. So stop lumping them in with other carbohydrate-rich foods - fruits, veggies, legumes and grains. The latter two are especially demonized by the keto crowd, with no evidence either is unhealthy.

 

VLC diets advocate a bunch of protein and fat, much of it animal-derived. Although that is an effective recipe for short-term weight loss, it ain't healthy according to me, my friend and most other physicians. If you want to ignore the nutrition literature to attain your beach body, have at it, but do so realizing the potential for long term health consequences.

 

I know you aren't following a ketogenic diet, but seem dismissive of the risk of excess animal protein/fat intake while overstating the need to avoid carbohydrates. I'll continue to argue there is no need to limit healthy carbohydrates, as VLC diets aren't the answer to good nutrition.

[12th Man 884]

MDC stops by, says something retarded, spikes his virtual football, and claims victory..

 

It's painful to watch..

It's his troll act.

[12th Man 884]

175 pounds of muscle this morning baby.

 

Pro carb.

Post a pic. Prove it. But you won't. Keep trolling...

[jerryskids 5,165]

Nobody, I repeat, NOBODY, is advocating processed/refined carbohydrates as part of a balanced diet. So stop lumping them in with other carbohydrate-rich foods - fruits, veggies, legumes and grains. The latter two are especially demonized by the keto crowd, with no evidence either is unhealthy.

 

VLC diets advocate a bunch of protein and fat, much of it animal-derived. Although that is an effective recipe for short-term weight loss, it ain't healthy according to me, my friend and most other physicians. If you want to ignore the nutrition literature to attain your beach body, have at it, but do so realizing the potential for long term health consequences.

 

I know you aren't following a ketogenic diet, but seem dismissive of the risk of excess animal protein/fat intake while overstating the need to avoid carbohydrates. I'll continue to argue there is no need to limit healthy carbohydrates, as VLC diets aren't the answer to good nutrition.

 

I'm not really sure what I said that elicited this response so... thanks?

[penultimatestraw 473]

 

I'm not really sure what I said that elicited this response so... thanks?

It was your last sentence:

That being said, it is unfortunate that he seems to lump processed carbs in with animal fats, as I strongly believe (and have seen studies although I don't have time now to find) that high processed carbs have a significantly worse impact on CV damage.

Nobody is lumping processed carbohydrates with animal fats, nor has anyone commented on their relative contribution to CV risk. HTH.

[mmmmm...beer 691]

It doesn't matter now... I gained it all back.

[MDC 5,875]

Post a pic. Prove it. But you won't. Keep trolling...

A pic of my scale as I step on it?

[penultimatestraw 473]

It doesn't matter now... I gained it all back.

What happened? Seemed like you were doing pretty well. Does this end the trial?

 

Don't be discouraged; you didn't gain weight overnight, so you shouldn't expect to lose it rapidly.

[penultimatestraw 473]

A pic of my scale as I step on it?

Naked pic on scale with today's Fishtown Daily News.

[MDC 5,875]

It doesn't matter now... I gained it all back.

I told you low carb doesnt work.