Anyone who is on a diet has already failed at a balanced diet, for whatever reason - I include myself in this. They are therefore likely to fail once they come off their diet, back to real life. I would postulate that those more likely to try an extreme diet are those who need to lose the most. THAT is why they put weight back on, not because of the diet itself. IMHO – I am not a nutritionist, just a bloke who likes beer and food and has struggled with my weight.
"Calories in vs calories" out is about as insightful as explaining how a car works by saying "petrol goes in the petrol hole and vrooms come out the back".
dantsw13 - Member
So, that article is by an adviser to Weigh****chers, a diet system that advocates low fat dieting, and is paid for by 50 food companies (guess what they make - cereal based carb, low fat) decides that low carb eating isn't the way ahead?
It is also from The Lancet, underwent peer review, and has been cited a lot (although i haven't checked if the citations are positive or negative). The point is, don't dismiss it just because of a link to Weight Watchers.
I'm not dismissing it, just that as Jamie says, there are studies on both sides with wildly differing views & conclusions.
Diagnosed type 2 diabetic in April last year now got all clear. Blood checked every 3 months. Please do not try any fad diets. Change what you eat and how you exercise permanently. Reduce your carbs up your good quality proteins and fats. Plenty of veg salad etc. Lose weight first then up your exercise. Very hard to do both properly. No wonder you bonked. Your body has to re learn how to utilise your fat reserves for energy instead of using the carbs you have just eaten. I am now leaner than I was when I got married at 26 and also a stone lighter, now pushing 47! I don't eat white rice, bread or pasta. First eight weeks was hell though. A good old health scare is a great incentive to get things sorted out and a great motivator. Upside is I climb for fun now downside is it takes me a while to get going on the bike. All my mates running on carbs are quick out of the blocks and I'm kind of hanging on for the first 5 miles or so. After that I seem to get going and I can keep going when they hit the wall and bonk.
Inbred - well done turning a negative into a positive. Do you take on food on longer rides, and if so, what non-carb option should do you go for?
I use grenade carbkilla high protein bars for longer rides. Obviously I can't risk anything with a high sugar content. Once your body learns to use your fat reserves for energy you won't bonk anymore but it takes time. The only sugar I have now is lactose in milk and fruit sugars when I add fruit to my porridge in the morning. Blueberries prunes banana etc. I'll eat an apple or pear with my lunch. Nuts are a great snack for riding. I'll take a small packet with me for shorter rides.
I would definitely watch some of the Sky Team Nutrition videos on YouTube. There is some great advice for anybody who is interested in nutrition for cycling. Surprising how little carbs are consumed and how much good quality protein and fat is eaten and also protein during a race to protect muscle development. It was a real eye opener for me.
Surprising how little carbs are consumed and how much good quality protein and fat is eaten and also protein during a race to protect muscle development. It was a real eye opener for me.
The one that gets me is mostly people complete inability to know what a portion of carbs is...
Gary Taubes is certainly a believer, reckons that stats and the papers add up.
Read proteinaholic by Garth Davis M.D. It goes through every fad diet and is all backed up by proper long term peer approved studies.
Atkins died relatively young of heart disease weighing around 270 pounds...
Atkins died relatively young of heart disease weighing around 270 pounds...
Er, he died aged 72 from a head injury from falling on ice, His heart disease was as a result of viral cardiomyopathy and his weight at death was as a result of fluid retention while in a coma.
His diet may be many things (and certainly not balanced) but it wasn't the cause of his death..!
Gary Taubes is certainly a believer, reckons that stats and the papers add up.
The problem with Taubes is that he has a lot to gain from his argument being right, as well as a hell of a lot lose if wrong.
He makes some good points, but there are things he says that don't apply to UK. For example, saying anything low fat is pumped full of sugar to improve taste. That might be the case in the States, but not here.
Keep a food diary to highlight any unhealthy snacking and try and cut that out/down, gradually reduce portion size at meals and up the veg and protein content of your meals. As others have said making a radical diet change for short term rapid weight loss isn't something that's sustainable for most people. If your goal is long term weight loss not trying to fit into a wedding dress in a month's time then avoid any famous/fad diets and focus on getting the basics right.
His autopsy was accidently released, you are correct about the head injury, but he did have severe heart disease and the fluid retention was minimal. Your version of events is the official Atkins line, reeled out to protect the Atkins brand.
[i]Atkins died relatively young of heart disease weighing around 270 pounds...[/i]
[[b]source:[/b] Daily Mail] 😆
DezB, I remembered incorrectly about actual cause of death, but the information came from Atkins autopsy, he really wasn't a well man.
Works for me.
Once I stopped eating heavy, starchy carbs, I found it hard to go back to them.
I eat a lot of meat, fish and eggs, along with a lot of veg.
I really believe you don't need the carbs, they are just filler, however they are a massive "healthy" industry. Just look at the number of breakfast cereals in the supermarket.
and the fluid retention was minimal.
according to wikipedia
[i]It also noted that he weighed 258 pounds (117 kilograms) at death, but Dr. Atkins weighed 195 pounds (88 kilograms) the day after he entered the hospital following his fall; he gained 63 pounds (29 kilograms) from fluid retention during the nine days he was in a coma before he died...[/i]
30% weight gain's not exactly minimal.
Everyone looking at Atkins etc should read the book Proteinaholic.
Every argument is countered, you only have to look at the longest living populations with the lowest rates of heart disease, cancers, diabetes etc and look at what they eat.
gobuchul- you mention the cereal companies, what about the meat,dairy and egg industries... bottom line is the more of these things you eat the worse your health.
Surprising how little carbs are consumed and how much good quality protein and fat is eaten and also protein during a race
They're consuming between 60 and 90g of carbs / hour during the race, as well as whatever else they have. About 6000 calories a day. Nothing "little" about it!
[url= https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Pollan ]Michael Pollan[/url] has it right I think.
Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants
you only have to look at the longest living populations with the lowest rates of heart disease, cancers, diabetes etc and look at what they eat.
as someone else pointed out up there, that the "Carbs in Carbs Out" thing is misleading, as is comparing groups of folk, their diets and concluding that longevity is solely down to that...there could be any numbers of factors including genetics, lifestyles, culture, weather etc etc.
nickc, I don't have time for debate, all I will say is that absolutely every variable is discussed, explained and backed up with the best scientific research available.
I have never been overweight, but have been primal for almost a year, which is very close to Atkins. Since reading the above book I am convinced enough to give up all animal products, this coming from a protein drink guzzling gym monkey.
The book is written by a bariatric surgeon in America who previously advised his patients to use a low carb diet, except they kept putting weight back on.
I have reduced my carb intake to a quarter of what it was and changed the type i.e slow release higher fibre carbs. I have no desire now to go back or feel short changed in anyway. Turnip or swede, sweet potato, celeriac etc instead of potato. Obviously no added sugar, this is a biggy. Low fat foods now are packed with bloody sugar because it's a cheap filler.
If you are overweight it is really very simple.......
If really was simple wouldn't we all be the perfect weight?
As a slight hijack I'm following a (lifestyle I guess, it's aim is to combat MS) diet which is basically plant based whole foods plus seafood/fish avoiding saturated/trans/hydrogenated oils/fats (obviously not entirely or I'd die). So no dairy or animal produce (although lean meat like turkey is probably ok). The idea is high polyunsaturated fat and low saturated fat. To someone who isn't a biologist at all but isn't afraid of reaching papers it all adds up, however as I say I lack the knowledge to understand this stuff fully...
My question is, is this diet actually healthy? (and my question which I'd guess not many can actually answer is, is it possible it could help with MS?)
And as a slight aside, I was ~71kg when I started the diet about and I'm now 66kg (lost the weight over ~2 months but has levelled off) and I certainly wasn't trying to lose weight (wasn't trying not to either, I've just been existing) so there's that.
Fresh ingredients, cook from scratch, exceed minimum exercise recommendations.
That's as complicated as anyone needs to make it.
Bagstard, looks an interesting read. I'll look it up. I will say that reading 'a' book (regardless of the credentials of the author) and evangelising it, isn't necessarily a great starting point though.
If really was simple wouldn't we all be the perfect weight?
Simple to understand does not mean easy to do.
My very basic thinking is we as a race survived for thousands of years eating plant based foods and meat. We didn't eat a lot of carbs or sugar and seemed to get on alright. This move to low fat carb based diets together with more sedentary lifestyles really didn't do me any favours. Eat properly and keep active is the crux of it.
Agree with TSY. Also get onto My Fitness Pal and record what you [b][u]actually[/b][/u] eat and how much you exercise. It can be a real eye opener.
My question is, is this diet actually healthy? (and my question which I'd guess not many can actually answer is, is it possible it could help with MS?)
My Mum has MS, and she switched to being vegetarian back in the late 70s as a result. Still eats dairy, but she feels that her diet has played a large part in helping live with the condition.
Anecdote is anecdotal, tho.
I think a lot of these studies with diet don't take into account hunger/satiety. There are studies out that that show eating high carbohyrdate foods increase hunger and you feel less satisfied.
carbohydrate doesn’t tend to feed back on appetite, but fat does
It could be very easy to eat over 10,000 calories in a day with carbs but very hard with fat.
[url= https://intensivedietarymanagement.com/how-do-we-gain-weight-calories-part-1/ ]Calories and how we gain weight[/url]
[quote=Jamie ]My question is, is this diet actually healthy? (and my question which I'd guess not many can actually answer is, is it possible it could help with MS?)
My Mum has MS, and she switched to being vegetarian back in the late 70s as a result. Still eats dairy, but she feels that her diet has played a large part in helping live with the condition.
Anecdote is anecdotal, tho.
Thanks Jamie, as you say anecdote but a lot of people report the same anecdote... Population studies seem to roughly back it too.
good way to fill your digestive system up with grey putty.
but hey, you'll be thin.
Nickc- I would agree with you, however I feel this is the end of my search, I have read many many books on nutrition and health, tried many different ways of eating. A year or so ago my opinions were very different, but I can't see them changing now. It isn't one mans theory, if you do read it I would be very interested in your opinion.
The few people I know who have read this book have now changed the way they eat.
I think a lot of these studies with diet don't take into account hunger/satiety.
This. Without meaning to diss the good-intentioned - unless you've actually treid a few of these plans out in the med/long term then its all too easy to assume.
On regimented low carb diets, hunger pangs literally dissapear. For me, this is why any 'everything in moderation' suggestion simply doesnt work for me.
I comfort eat, mainly in the evening, and I am predisposed to fast weight gain. I am convinced that all refined carbs are the work of the devil - and insulin control is the key.
Hence why Atkins has worked well in the past for me (and switching to iDave type plans) the hunger cravings vanish and eating becomes a fuel exchange rather than an event to cherish..
good way to fill your digestive system up with grey putty.
I counter that with my above statement - try it before you knock it. To be completely frank, the evidence of a carb rich diet is evidently horrific after I drop the kids off at the pool - yet zero-carb type diet reuslts in the most satisfying angel dumps.
The debate is always interesting, but in my current position - taking into account my general resolve, my genetic disposition, and my current 'very out of shape displaying worrying signs of health and not able to fit into any clothes', then a turbo weight loss on Atkins is a vastly better place for my body to be than where it currently is.
Thats how I see it anyways.
I'll massively step up the exercise once im able to fit back into my cycling gear(!).
eating becomes a fuel exchange rather than an event to cherish..
some of my most cherished events happened around meals...not wanting to dismiss your opinion (what works for you etc etc) that statement does seem pretty harsh/bland.
I think i'm going to give it another go.
Says it all, so like all diets you will loose weight. Then you will get board of it and it 'normal' again and put weight back on.
Just eat sensibly, everything in moderation, what fun is life if you cant eat pies/chocolate/chips etc
that statement does seem pretty harsh/bland.
I whole heartedly agree - my point being that I simply am unable to trust myself when given free reign - and unless I actually alter the way I view food, then I will put on weight.
Having your cravings vanish is not only an complete eye opener to a former carb addict, but it gives you the power to refrain from shoving in food.
In fact, I recall becoming acutely aware of the carb infiltration when I was running carb free. Every corner you turn, every show on TV, every shop you enter - they are virtually pushing refined carbs down your throat. It's akin to finding a pair of those sunglasses in 'They Live' - and suddenly seeing the food industry for what it really is. (apologies for random cult sci-fi reference).
What im trying to say is - Christmas dinner would always be a great time, I intend to eat at celebrations/get-togethers, but hopefully i'll be empowered to say 'no thanks - im full'.
Thats a revelation for a perennial plate clearer.
but hopefully i'll be empowered to say 'no thanks - im full'.
Thats a revelation for a perennial plate clearer.
ah, makes much more sense, thanks for the explanation. I agree there's a mindset that one has to be in to conquer any habits (lets steer clear of the word "addiction") that celebrates every day as a win rather than suffering through something that you know is good for you, but craving one's old life.
I think it works because by eating no carbs you get no insulin response and there are no excess Carbs to lay down as fat
almost - [SCIENCE]cells prefer to use fat as an energy source, when you eat glucose insulin is released which leads to an increase in malonyl CoA synthesis. malonyl CoA inhibits an enzyme called CPT-1 which is responsible for the transport of fatty acids across the mitochondrial membrane. Without fatty acid transport, fatty acid metabolism in the mitochondria is reduced and fat can build up. This goes on until all the glucose is used up which in turn causes insulin release to be slowed and malonyl CoA synthesis decreased. Fatty acid transport can then resume. If fat isn't used it gets stored (adipocytes) and you put on weight. The other upshot of eating lots of glucose is what you said, insulin stimulate glycogen synthesis in the liver but once your glycogen storage is filled, the sugars are processed into fatty acids which are exported out the liver as lipoproteins (LDL is bad).[/SCIENCE]
I used to do research into CPT1 and acetyl-CoA carboxylase, the enzyme that makes malonyl CoA.
You loose weight quickly by this method but like other people have said all you have to do is eat less sugar (no cakes, sweeties, sweet tea etc), use artificial sweeteners, reduce portion sizes and exercise. I've lost a stone recently in about 8 weeks using that method although I've not done enough exercise and still take huge portions lol.
use artificial sweeteners
Is there not any evidence to strongly counter this advice? ie, some/most sweeteners are indistinguishable by the chemical system in our bodies, and respond with an insulin spike regardless?
IIRC it has something to do with the sweet taste receptors but I could be wrong. Its not like what happens with actual sugar (glucose) intake however. There are studies that show no difference between water and water + sweetener on blood sugar/insulin levels. The other issue would be that if you have a sugary drink you don't feel hungry for a short time afterwards but with a diet drink you would.
