FitnessBore - 2018 edition

[brawndolicious]

What? Tell the Japan Diabetes Society about this, they'd certainly be interested in trumpeting the fact that they have cured diabetes!

I have no idea what you are talking about.  If older generations of Japanese were healthy, thin, lived long, and didn't have diabetes or any of the other "diseases of affluence" than you can't say that they would benefit from cutting back on the ratio of carbs in their diets.

Japan as a country shows how it is possible for normal people to avoid diabetes and hyperinsulimia while being on a carbcentric diet.  This isn't some new information, it's just a big example you can see everywhere you turn.

You obviously have a different definition than me about "perfectly healthy". Look around you, at anyone aged 50-60 and above who is eating a standard American diet. Can you honestly describe these people as "perfectly healthy"? I find it shocking how much we accept disease and poor health as a fact of life these days. We can live a relatively long life thanks to invasive medical procedures and pills for everything, but be basically useless for any physical task for much of our lives. Our cavemen ancestors would be appalled at what we've let ourselves become.

I didn't post anything about Americans being healthy.  What are you talking about?  If you believe that the youth in Japan are getting less healthy than their parents, then look at the differences in how much fast food they eat and how big the portion sizes are today.  Because it's obvious that for generations, the ratio of carbs to fat was not an issue.

[Cormacaroni]

Where are you getting the idea that the Japanese people avoided diabetes on their traditional diet?? Just because the incidence of it has risen due to the Western diet doesn't mean that they were free of it before that! There is no reason for ANYBODY to get adult onset diabetes - it is an entirely preventable condition, as is obesity. You can avoid it on a variety on diets, sure, but as I keep fucking hammering home and you keep fucking IGNORING, I'm talking about OPTIMAL nutrition here, and you keep trying to twist it into some kind of "well if it isn't demonstrably lethal after a single bite, why should we avoid it" scenario. Traditional diets happened entirely by accident. The Japanese people ate whatever they could from their environment - they didn't scorn animal protein because they thought the fat was bad, they just didn't have enough of it to go around. A diet that is built from the ground up, that draws on all the best available nutrition sources we have available now, will inevitably be better. We need to figure out what that is, not stop looking to the past and saying "that was good enough for them, it's good enough for me".

You and everyone you know can follow the traditional Japanese diet if you want. If you can even find all the good things about - fish, seaweed-based products etc. Enjoy being 5 feet tall and emaciated!

[pollo]

There's always the living to 100 thing too.

As for the post or pre, I don't really care, but I'm going to try and adhere to the Drinky method of "have carbs only when I work out" cept if it's vegetables then i can have that shit whenever.

I don't like how this non-carb diet does slow down my runs though, and generally makes me tired after any form of exercise. It's so much easier just downing plates and plates of pasta/rice and then going for a 3-4 mile run or playing 3-4 hours of football 

But I am seeing results, and I'm energetic. Also much better than starving myself+cardio  yo-yo method I've been on the past..say 9 years. The weight loss is slow, but I'm doing it right this time.

[Cormacaroni]

For long efforts, sure, it seems many people do well with some extra carbs. The issue is when you get into eating a ton of them, and then you don't exercise. Plus, I have other problems with long, slow exercise in general. If it makes you that tired, it may be a sign that it's not that good for you in the first place!

If you're doing it to play football, it's unavoidable of course, so fuel as appropriate. Add in 50g or so of extra carbs on the days you do long efforts, and see how it goes. As long as they're from quality sources.

[brawndolicious]

Where are you getting the idea that the Japanese people avoided diabetes on their traditional diet?? Just because the incidence of it has risen due to the Western diet doesn't mean that they were free of it before that!

But they had lower rates of diabetes and higher carb:fat ratio.  Being a modern country, it's not hard to believe that some of their people end up obese or diabetic simply because their job and lifestyle involves lots of sitting around and not enough exercise.  That's a lifestyle problem.  On any diet, you'll get fat if you have a sedentary lifestyle.

There is no reason for ANYBODY to get adult onset diabetes - it is an entirely preventable condition, as is obesity. You can avoid it on a variety on diets, sure, but as I keep fucking hammering home and you keep fucking IGNORING, I'm talking about OPTIMAL nutrition here, and you keep trying to twist it into some kind of "well if it isn't demonstrably lethal after a single bite, why should we avoid it" scenario.

What is this "single bite" anecdote you're talking about?  I'm just saying that when the slimmest industrialized nation has a higher carb:fat ratio, you should look at something other than fat vs carbs or maybe not even at their diet when looking for why they still have some obese/diabetic people.  Look at their lifestyle, do they do daily exercise?  How much cardio?  Just basically try and look at it in a different way.

You and everyone you know can follow the traditional Japanese diet if you want. If you can even find all the good things about - fish, seaweed-based products etc. Enjoy being 5 feet tall and emaciated!

Either you're skimming my posts too fast or you forgot that I already agreed with you about sodium being too high in their diet.  The only reason I brought up Japan is to bring up their low obesity statistics and its connection to a major part of their diet (DA CARBS).

[Cormacaroni]

I see you've agreed with the sodium thing. Why bring it up again? I said way back that there are a host of environmental factors to consider that may or may not account for Japanese longevity. Caloric restriction is another major issue - no matter what you eat, if you eat less of it, you live longer. You don't necessarily have a great quality of life or health though.

I'm not interested in your relatively lower rates of diabetes. You're comparing them to an even shittier diet that is HIGHER IN CARBS (as well as higher in fat)! The modern Japanese diet has MORE carbs, MORE fat, MORE calories, MORE processed food. It's worse in every way, to the extent that we can't meaningfully separate out all the reasons why it's worse. They're all mashed together. The ratio isn't important when there is too much of everything, which is the case in almost all industrialized nations now.

It doesn't prove or disprove anything about the ratios because you lack a proper control group. There are very few properly done studies that look at sensible genuinely low carb diets in comparison with others. I can cite you some that do, that point to all kinds of beneficial things happening, but almost all of them are flawed in some way. (most are too small, too short-term, have weird definitions of the diets, don't account for exercise or have weird definitions of exercise...)

[Cormacaroni]

There's always the living to 100 thing too.

As for the post or pre, I don't really care, but I'm going to try and adhere to the Drinky method of "have carbs only when I work out" cept if it's vegetables then i can have that shit whenever.

I don't like how this non-carb diet does slow down my runs though, and generally makes me tired after any form of exercise. It's so much easier just downing plates and plates of pasta/rice and then going for a 3-4 mile run or playing 3-4 hours of football 

But I am seeing results, and I'm energetic. Also much better than starving myself+cardio  yo-yo method I've been on the past..say 9 years. The weight loss is slow, but I'm doing it right this time.

The other option of course is to keep the carbs fairly low and add in more fat (olive oil, butter, cream etc, not deep-fried foods!).

Ultimately, you're facing a dilemma - you can't expect to never be tired and always be up for exercise if you're trying to lose a bunch of weight. That sweet spot is hard to hit and constantly moving.

[Mupepe]

I missed my first day in my routine in 6 weeks.  I got home last night and I just felt achey and like I was getting sick.  I was really pissed at myself but I know I would have been worthless working out, but I feel great today.

[brawndolicious]

I'm not interested in your relatively lower rates of diabetes. You're comparing them to an even shittier diet that is HIGHER IN CARBS (as well as higher in fat)! The modern Japanese diet has MORE carbs, MORE fat, MORE calories, MORE processed food. It's worse in every way, to the extent that we can't meaningfully separate out all the reasons why it's worse. They're all mashed together. The ratio isn't important when there is too much of everything, which is the case in almost all industrialized nations now.

It's not just diabetes that is important today though.  Also consider the link between eating red meat and heart disease.  You can't just eliminate all the diseases connected to diets our ancestors didn't have and just end up with 80% of your calories from protein.  My point is that of all the fat or carb heavy diets in the industrialized world today, Japan seems to have a relatively decent sweet spot with their low heart disease, diabetes, obesity rates and long lifespans.  They still have diet-related health problems it seems (like being short apparently) but it shows you shouldn't be worried about taking such a radical diet approach.

So WRT not losing weight because you had a few drinks on a weekend, that's just ridiculous..

It doesn't prove or disprove anything about the ratios because you lack a proper control group. There are very few properly done studies that look at sensible genuinely low carb diets in comparison with others. I can cite you some that do, that point to all kinds of beneficial things happening, but almost all of them are flawed in some way. (most are too small, too short-term, have weird definitions of the diets, don't account for exercise or have weird definitions of exercise...)

I've looked for studies like those and couldn't find one with really relevant results.  I think one had only 20 people initially and 6 of them dropped out and yet it's "carbs are bad for you" results got widespread media attention.  It says something about the diet though if 30% dropped out after what I believe was only a month.

The other problem with the paleo diet is the agricultural expense.  It's not sustainable on a global level unless we decimate the human population.

[Cormacaroni]

Re - the Paleo Diet. I agree that it's not sustainable but that's not anything I can solve. I'm lucky enough to be able to afford anything I want to eat so I'm going to eat what I consider to be the best food. Of course, it's quite possible to look at it from the viewpoint of our population being unsustainable, rather than our diet being unsustainable. Like I've said many times, I'm interested in optimal nutrition for me, not how to feed the world. That's a misuse of the word 'decimate' of course; we'd need to reduce it by much more than 10%.

Diabetes and the J diet: I've been agreeing with the general idea that the traditional J diet seems to get better results than most but there are a gazillion things going on which make it tough to single out what is causing those results. The traditional J diet includes things like deep-fried pork cutlets in eggs, on a bed of rice. In other words, a nightmare from the standpoint of almost any diet. but it is perhaps being counteracted by the relatively huge amount of incredibly nutritious sea vegetables (konbu, seaweed etc). Like I said earlier, sheer caloric restriction may have had an awful lot to do with the lifespans - there is a lot of info to suggest that just eating less food, no matter of what kind, can have a very significant impact on lifespans. And Japanese cooking is renowned for the tininess of its portions, which probably stems from a historical lack of arable land for farming. There have also been significant periods of famine in modern history, thanks to the wars.

Are we going to have to start fighting about heart disease now? Something which was practically unknown until modern times? Maybe you're going to suggest that humans only started eating meat since McDonalds opened its doors?

If there's a link between red meat and heart disease, which has not been demonstrated outside of observational studies that I'm aware of, I'm of the opinion that it's due to the poor quality of most meats right now, not because of anything intrinsically wrong with animal protein. Industrially-farmed meats are a toxic mess with very little nutritional value, so it makes plenty of sense to avoid them. Again, though, I can afford to seek out organic, grass-fed beef, organic eggs etc. Given my excellent bloodwork since i've made these changes I'm perfectly happy to continue the experiment, since no-one in academia is doing it for me. I've never suggested anything along the lines of an 80% protein diet though, that's truly absurd. Adequate protein for recovery, preferably organic, grass-fed meat, organic eggs, wild game, good fats, and carbs from non-starchy, nutritious vegetables.

If you want a study to chew over, try the New England Journal of Medicine. 322 participants, 2 yrs, 95% adherence.

I find it frustrating, as the goal is focused on weight loss, not overall health. Still, the indicators for long-time health improved best on low-carb. The other diets involve calorie restriction whereas those on low-carb were unrestricted in that regard. Nevertheless, those on low-carb lost more weight. I wish they'd do one on HEALTHY people (i.e. not obese, because anyone who starts obese and gets thin is going to see improved health markers across the board no matter how they get there, IMHO).

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681

[Mupepe]

well last night I was bench pressing 165 and I got on my last rep of my last set, number 50 and I had to bail.  so I got to roll that fucker back down my chest.  That was fun. 

[Cormacaroni]

What on earth are you doing sets that long for? That's enough for cardio.

[Mupepe]

I'm just staying with my buddy while he ramps up. 

Just making sure you realize, it's 5 sets of 10.  Not of actually 50.  Sorry.  He's only 165 5x5 and moving up quick so I'm just trying to get every 5 sets of 10.

[brawndolicious]

author=Cormacaroni link=topic=32900.msg1180799#msg1180799 date=1280374812]
Diabetes and the J diet: I've been agreeing with the general idea that the traditional J diet seems to get better results than most but there are a gazillion things going on which make it tough to single out what is causing those results. The traditional J diet includes things like deep-fried pork cutlets in eggs, on a bed of rice. In other words, a nightmare from the standpoint of almost any diet. but it is perhaps being counteracted by the relatively huge amount of incredibly nutritious sea vegetables (konbu, seaweed etc). Like I said earlier, sheer caloric restriction may have had an awful lot to do with the lifespans - there is a lot of info to suggest that just eating less food, no matter of what kind, can have a very significant impact on lifespans. And Japanese cooking is renowned for the tininess of its portions, which probably stems from a historical lack of arable land for farming. There have also been significant periods of famine in modern history, thanks to the wars.

Yeah...it's got stuff in it that I would never eat but I'm talking about the daily diet.  But also, I was trying to point out that carbcentric diets don't lead to huge carb cravings/yo-yoing blood sugar as some suspect.  You also have to consider the caloric load point about early humans' diets.  Is the composition of their diet important so much as just the number of calories?  The way you focused in on a few drinks you had in a weekend as the reason you weren't losing weight anymore is what brought this up.

Are we going to have to start fighting about heart disease now? Something which was practically unknown until modern times? Maybe you're going to suggest that humans only started eating meat since McDonalds opened its doors?

If there's a link between red meat and heart disease, which has not been demonstrated outside of observational studies that I'm aware of, I'm of the opinion that it's due to the poor quality of most meats right now, not because of anything intrinsically wrong with animal protein. Industrially-farmed meats are a toxic mess with very little nutritional value, so it makes plenty of sense to avoid them. Again, though, I can afford to seek out organic, grass-fed beef, organic eggs etc. Given my excellent bloodwork since i've made these changes I'm perfectly happy to continue the experiment, since no-one in academia is doing it for me. I've never suggested anything along the lines of an 80% protein diet though, that's truly absurd. Adequate protein for recovery, preferably organic, grass-fed meat, organic eggs, wild game, good fats, and carbs from non-starchy, nutritious vegetables.

Access to cheap meat that you can eat every day is pretty recent, like heart disease.  The reason I said red meat is because of it's high saturated fat content.  Compared to unsaturated fat, saturated fat is worse for your heart.

uh, doesn't grass-fed cattle have less fat proportionally?  I don't know of any benefit of organic eggs.

If you want a study to chew over, try the New England Journal of Medicine. 322 participants, 2 yrs, 95% adherence.

I find it frustrating, as the goal is focused on weight loss, not overall health. Still, the indicators for long-time health improved best on low-carb. The other diets involve calorie restriction whereas those on low-carb were unrestricted in that regard. Nevertheless, those on low-carb lost more weight. I wish they'd do one on HEALTHY people (i.e. not obese, because anyone who starts obese and gets thin is going to see improved health markers across the board no matter how they get there, IMHO).

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa0708681

Any weight loss diet can be successful as long as you eat less calories.  It's irrelevant when overweight people say that they lost weight on any particular diet if caloric load isn't controlled.  Especially with a diet as restrictive as a paleo diet.  An ideal study wouldn't be on healthy young people either.  It would focus on people at the top of the bell curve.  The goal isn't to just measure body composition, but to see the long-term effects on heart disease, diabetes, etc.

[Cormacaroni]

You were trying to CLAIM that carbcentric diets don't lead to that, based on some observations of a diet you've never eaten. Despite all the evidence to the contrary of what we know about how insulin, leptin etc work. Based on observational, anecdotal evidence. You take it as read but I'm saying, they have ALL those problems, just not to the same degree as in the modern western diet.

What I said about drinks works exactly the same on any diet (or no diet at all) - if you take in a bunch of extra calories (300 or so in a drink), in a form as easily digested as alcohol, you have very little chance of staying in a calorie deficit for that day. It doesn't blow the whole diet. You continue to demonstrate a remarkable ability to take one thing and run madly in the wrong direction. Try it yourself and see! Eat a calorie restricted diet for a while til you see noticeable progress, then go on a weekend bender (4 or 5 drinks a day should be enough) and tell me if you don't see an immediate difference in your waistline. You are probably the only male who has ever drunk alcohol that ever needs this explained to them.

What you're saying about the study really just makes me wish you would stop posting here, 'cause you're not reading or offering meaningful data. And every time I pull you up on something, you just ignore it. It's hard to even see how your responses to the quoted sections follow on from what I'm saying...you just seem to be picking up on keywords and saying something random. I mean, do you think, from what I've posted here, that I've somehow never heard of the concept of a link between red meat and heart disease? Or that you can lose weight on any diet if it's calorie restricted?

Anyway, in an attempt to clarify:

THE FOLKS ON THE PALEO DIET WERE ALLOWED TO EAT ALL THE CALORIES THEY WANTED. THE FOLKS ON THE OTHER DIET WERE RESTRICTED. That's why the results here are rather remarkable, and strongly indicate that if the folks on paleo were ALSO calorie-restricted, their results would have blown the others out of the water. Just one of several ways the study is poorly-designed and frustrating.
I want to see something done on young, healthy people because I think there is a strong preventative quality to eating right that I'd like to see investigated over the long term. Not just a short study with the conclusion that people who eat more carrots have an increased indication for some form of cancer. I want to see a long-term study that investigates which diets prevent disease. Sadly all we have is observational crap like the China Study that effectively tells us nothing, and leads to people like you burbling cliches about the Japanese diet as if they mean something.

[brawndolicious]

You were trying to CLAIM that carbcentric diets don't lead to that, based on some observations of a diet you've never eaten. Despite all the evidence to the contrary of what we know about how insulin, leptin etc work. Based on observational, anecdotal evidence. You take it as read but I'm saying, they have ALL those problems, just not to the same degree as in the modern western diet.

My point was clear, that it does not automatically lead to diabetes.  My point wasn't that excessive carbs don't lead to diabetes but that not all carbcentric diets are equal.  I don't know what part you got confused by.

What I said about drinks works exactly the same on any diet (or no diet at all) - if you take in a bunch of extra calories (300 or so in a drink), in a form as easily digested as alcohol, you have very little chance of staying in a calorie deficit for that day. It doesn't blow the whole diet. You continue to demonstrate a remarkable ability to take one thing and run madly in the wrong direction. Try it yourself and see! Eat a calorie restricted diet for a while til you see noticeable progress, then go on a weekend bender (4 or 5 drinks a day should be enough) and tell me if you don't see an immediate difference in your waistline. You are probably the only male who has ever drunk alcohol that ever needs this explained to them.

300 calories is maybe a half hour of cardio.  Is it really that hard to modify your exercise schedule?

What you're saying about the study really just makes me wish you would stop posting here, 'cause you're not reading or offering meaningful data. And every time I pull you up on something, you just ignore it. It's hard to even see how your responses to the quoted sections follow on from what I'm saying...you just seem to be picking up on keywords and saying something random. I mean, do you think, from what I've posted here, that I've somehow never heard of the concept of a link between red meat and heart disease? Or that you can lose weight on any diet if it's calorie restricted?

You're the one bringing up anecdotes of fat people you see on the street and self-experimentation you did because academics didn't test it for you and you're telling me I don't establish enough hard data?  I'm also pointing out some obvious links so you can connect several dots more easily (heart disease is new->common red meat is new->paleo diet wouldn't rule out a major cause of a new disease).

THE FOLKS ON THE PALEO DIET WERE ALLOWED TO EAT ALL THE CALORIES THEY WANTED. THE FOLKS ON THE OTHER DIET WERE RESTRICTED. That's why the results here are rather remarkable, and strongly indicate that if the folks on paleo were ALSO calorie-restricted, their results would have blown the others out of the water. Just one of several ways the study is poorly-designed and frustrating.

That doesn't mean that they actually ate more calories.  A paleo diet is a lot more restrictive than a low-fat diet so it makes sense that with less options on what to eat, they won't eat as much.  Hence, less calories.

I want to see something done on young, healthy people because I think there is a strong preventative quality to eating right that I'd like to see investigated over the long term. Not just a short study with the conclusion that people who eat more carrots have an increased indication for some form of cancer. I want to see a long-term study that investigates which diets prevent disease. Sadly all we have is observational crap like the China Study that effectively tells us nothing, and leads to people like you burbling cliches about the Japanese diet as if they mean something.

What cliche?  My only point is that no extreme diet is really ever ideal and that the average Japanese diet is not extreme (at least wrt carbs and fat ratios).

[Cormacaroni]

oh god

giving up now

He's telling me to do more cardio so I can drink.

The diet with no restrictions on how much you can eat is the one that logically results in less calories. OK. We're not dealing with a rational mind here, or one that's prepared to think for more than 30 seconds about what he's saying.

There hasn't been one single useful piece of advice from this guy, and nothing I am saying is resulting in anything more than sending him off on bizarre tangents and making him leap to wild conclusions. I appreciate that nobody should just take my recommendations at face value, but this is getting silly. We're not helping anyone with this, and it's not even a fun discussion.

I'm done. I was done about 20 pages ago actually, but this seals it. Everyone just avoid 'extreme' diets (like eating some meat and vegetables!) and you'll be ok! Don't lift anything too heavy, now!

[Cormacaroni]

Further to the above:

If anybody wants my advice on nutrition, feel free to PM me or start a new thread. I'm not going to do it here anymore, because it leads to this seemingly endless cycle of misinterpretation, attempted clarification, further misinterpretation, and on 'til shotgun suicide. Or just go read 'Good Calories Bad Calories' by Gary Taubes, 'The Primal Blueprint' by Mark Sisson, 'The Paleo Diet' by Loren Cordain, Protein Power by Dr Michael Eades, www.robbwolf.com, www.paleo.nu etc, all good sources of info.

[Van Cruncheon]

am nintenho is internet dysfunctional. most of us just drift through his posts, looking for the really insane-o bits we can quote and append various emoticons to

[cool breeze]

I'll ask a legitimate question that I've had for a while:  Is it good to be having a lot of fruit, or should you limit it due to the natural sugar and whatnot?

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

Further to the above:

If anybody wants my advice on nutrition, feel free to PM me or start a new thread. I'm not going to do it here anymore, because it leads to this seemingly endless cycle of misinterpretation, attempted clarification, further misinterpretation, and on 'til shotgun suicide. Or just go read 'Good Calories Bad Calories' by Gary Taubes, 'The Primal Blueprint' by Mark Sisson, 'The Paleo Diet' by Loren Cordain, Protein Power by Dr Michael Eades, www.robbwolf.com, www.paleo.nu etc, all good sources of info.

Oh come on now.  Just because am nintenho is a distinguished mentally-challenged fellow doesn't mean you should stop talking about nutrition.

I have him on ignore anyway because he either is a bot or tries his best to resemble one.

[Cormacaroni]

Further to the above:

If anybody wants my advice on nutrition, feel free to PM me or start a new thread. I'm not going to do it here anymore, because it leads to this seemingly endless cycle of misinterpretation, attempted clarification, further misinterpretation, and on 'til shotgun suicide. Or just go read 'Good Calories Bad Calories' by Gary Taubes, 'The Primal Blueprint' by Mark Sisson, 'The Paleo Diet' by Loren Cordain, Protein Power by Dr Michael Eades, www.robbwolf.com, www.paleo.nu etc, all good sources of info.

Oh come on now.  Just because am nintenho is a distinguished mentally-challenged fellow doesn't mean you should stop talking about nutrition.

I have him on ignore anyway because he either is a bot or tries his best to resemble one.

The last couple of pages must be really fucking weird for you then

I dunno, he's asking some legitimate questions that I feel are worth discussing. It's just that we never get anywhere because he's married to conventional wisdom and I'm very much on a mission to destroy it. It was the same about fitness too.

Anyway, Linkzg asked about fruit. The fast answer is: there is good fruit, and there is bad fruit.

You have to be aware of glycemic load here. The fructose is hard on the liver in large doses, and of course the sheer calories increase the more you eat. So there is stuff you should really try to limit, like pineapples or especially juices. Still, not many people really pig out on fruit so usually most people don't need to worry too much about it unless they're trying to stay seriously low-carb and/or lose a ton of weight really fast. Berries are the most recommended form to take it in - blueberries, strawberries, raspberries. And preferably the wild kind, which are much tarter/less sweet than the cultivated varieties. (This is a general problem with fruit - apples for example keep getting sweeter and sweeter because of selective breeding for supermarket-friendly varieties. It's next to impossible to find a genuinely tart apple like a russet or a Granny Smith here in Japan). And definitely be very wary of dried stuff with lots of sugar. I love raisins, but you have to realize you can eat a whole bunch worth of grapes in a single handful when they're dried. If they coat them in sugar, like they usually do with mangoes -which are already incredibly sweet - it's just a crazy amount of calories, sugar and fructose. You may as well just have a Snickers or some chocolate ice cream at that point.

[Mupepe]

I destroyed 155 shoulder press last night

[brawndolicious]

The diet with no restrictions on how much you can eat is the one that logically results in less calories. OK. We're not dealing with a rational mind here, or one that's prepared to think for more than 30 seconds about what he's saying.

Actually I couldn't find anything in there confirming the average calorie intake of the atkins group, and I have heard of people on low-carb diets taking in less calories just because of how much of their normal diet gets excluded but obviously without the data you can't say either way.  The study also needs to say how many dropped out of each test group.

As far as weight loss, the atkins group only had lost about 5% more pounds than the mediterranean group, which could be explained by water loss.

[Boogie]

Cormac: how about bananas?

Also, remember kiddies, at the start of fitnessbore nintenho was advising that the best way to get rid of that spare tire around your waist was to do crunches.

[Mupepe]

i have a friend whose suggestion to my workout routine was 300 crunches a day to lose some fat.  when i tried explaining a tight stomach and sick pack was mostly diet I got a response that sounds like it was ripped right out of an infomercial. 

[Cormacaroni]

Cormac: how about bananas?

Also, remember kiddies, at the start of fitnessbore nintenho was advising that the best way to get rid of that spare tire around your waist was to do crunches.

Yeah, there has been so much inanity I can't deal anymore. He's on ignore now. Why not, it's not like he actually anything here beyond knee-jerk skepticism.

Bananas are among the most calorie-dense, high GI fruits, Boogie. Yes, the potassium is great but all that sweet taste doesn't come free, sadly. Eat in moderation (which is difficult when you buy them in bunches, I know...eat one and give the rest away to co-workers etc, they're cheap!)

The full list of high GI, low antioxidant "enjoy in moderation but don't go crazy on" fruits looks something like this: melons, mangoes, papayas, pineapples, nectarines, dates, bananas, oranges, tangerines, plums, grapes, pomegranates, dried fruits. I haven't had it confirmed in print by anyone yet but I'm pretty sure those Golden kiwi fruits I love are in there too (the ones which are sweet rather than tart). Your tongue is all the guide you need in most cases. Once you cut sugar from your diet, your sensitivity to sweetness will probably heighten dramatically, much like smokers regaining their sense of taste once they quit.

Variety is paramount, really. Don't buy lots of fruit and veg at once and eat it for a week; go to the shop daily or every other day and buy a little at a time, and never buy the same thing on consecutive days if you can help it. Different fruits have different strengths and weaknesses from a nutritional standpoint, so the shotgun approach pays off pretty well. You can go crazy thinking "oh crap, i haven't had a tomato in a week, I need more lycopene!". Just get plenty of variety in your fruit and veg and you'll be way ahead of the curve. Luckily, this also makes for the most interesting meals, especially if you're handy in the kitchen.

[Boogie]

Man, this eating right shit is too complicated and hard.  I'd starve myself trying to follow all these rules.  Doesn't help that I can't stand salad.

[Cormacaroni]

Man, this eating right shit is too complicated and hard.  I'd starve myself trying to follow all these rules.  Doesn't help that I can't stand salad.

It sure can seem that way, when you try to think about all the different kinds of food out there and all the putative consequences. I went cold turkey, but I did a motherfucking SHITTON of reading and experimenting before that, including a whole year of the Atkins diet. Plus I know how to cook. Take it a bit at a time. The easiest first step is breakfast, I find. Bacon or sausage and eggs instead of toast and OJ or cereal is a great first step. Or do it at dinner, if that gives you more time for shopping and cooking. Most people eat the same 10 or basic meals over and over, so if you can work up a repertoire of 10 or so meals you like to eat, you'll find it pretty easy to go paleo full-time.

My meals tend to follow this template:

eggs for breakfast, often with one or two of the following: sausage, cheese, salmon or tomato
salad (usually chicken or seafood) if i'm buying something to eat at the office / homemade soup or stew for lunch if i'm organized enough to cook
meat and veg for dinner (just had a Genghis Cohen wagyu sirloin steak with buttered broccoli and an avocado, DAMN yummy)

snacks - yoghurt, cream, fruit, some nuts, cold meats

I don't always eat 3 meals either, sometimes it's 2, sometimes its 5 (i.e. mostly snacks, if I'm working from home or something)

If you know anything about cooking, you can be cooking up tasty variations on the above 'til the day you die. Just a matter of mixing and matching good quality ingredients. The great thing is you don't have to worry much about the quantities involved - no measuring or fretting about what you're taking in. It's pretty hard to overeat this way.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I'm going to start experimenting with cooking more and more to make up for variety.  I love eggs but having it twice a day is getting to drag on for me a bit.

This weekend I'm going to experiment and make chicken with curry for dinners next week.  Lots of protein, some fats, and minimal carbohydrates.  Probably going to get some shit from a packet of stuff but if it works, I'll make my own and experiment.  Plus I'm on call so I can't really do anything other than experiment with food, especially spicy foods.

Foods I eat now: Beef tenderloin, Omega-3 eggs, full fat greek yogurt, grape tomatoes, the occasional handful of fruit that comes from my parents' garden (cherries, raspberries, strawberries)

[duckman2000]

Eating reasonably sensible is good enough for me right now, I don't have the time nor focus to live in trembling fear of diabetes or body fat. I've had more "cheat meals" this past couple of months than I can recall, but I'm in better shape than ever simply because I actually push myself physically every day instead of bulking away on the couch or in front of the computer. That, and I've made breakfast my main meal and cut out that stupid evening snack, and gone to bed when I've felt tired. I don't think I want another office-style job now.

[Van Cruncheon]

yeah, every time i bring an evening snack back into my meal schedule, my weight loss stagnates. i stopped it entirely last month despite some intial early hunger pangs, and the last 10 pounds are goin' away.

[Boogie]

Weight-wise, I'm hovering right around 188-190, due probably to drinking and the occasional late-night whole pizza craving. 

Which isn't bad.  It's down 6 or 7 lbs from my worst point six months ago.  Nagging knee injury is preventing me from training as fully as I'd like, so my routine is mostly a starting-strength-esque strength workout + "light" cardio.  Whereas I'd rather be doing hard MMA-style training 4 days a week and lifting around that.

[Cormacaroni]

I'm going to start experimenting with cooking more and more to make up for variety.  I love eggs but having it twice a day is getting to drag on for me a bit.

This weekend I'm going to experiment and make chicken with curry for dinners next week.  Lots of protein, some fats, and minimal carbohydrates.  Probably going to get some shit from a packet of stuff but if it works, I'll make my own and experiment.  Plus I'm on call so I can't really do anything other than experiment with food, especially spicy foods.

Foods I eat now: Beef tenderloin, Omega-3 eggs, full fat greek yogurt, grape tomatoes, the occasional handful of fruit that comes from my parents' garden (cherries, raspberries, strawberries)

I make curry a fair amount, mostly the Japanese stuff because it's so simple. Thai curry is great too - coconut milk is a wonderful fat source. You can just drink it of course, or make smoothies.

On beef - No idea what you pay for tenderloin, but you'll probably find that you're spending more on food with this style of eating, so you'll want to mostly stay away from expensive cuts like sirloin, especially if you're going organic/grass-fed. Stewing the tougher, cheaper cuts is a great way to go. I'd rather have a stew of grass-fed beef than a cheap factory-farm steak at this point...apart from any nutritional concerns (and there are many), it tastes better. It's so easy to make something that tastes great too - mince some garlic and onions, sautee, toss in the beef (preferably marinated but ok even if you don't), add some tomatoes and some beef stock, then just put the whole pot in the oven on a low-ish heat for 3 or 4 hours. Any other veggies you add at that point are err, gravy. Most Sunday evenings, I do something like this - enough for a weeks worth of lunches or dinners. Usually I'll do a pot of some kind of soup as well. Having food in the fridge is pretty key to resisting temptation, especially expensive food. I find it pretty easy to say no to a bagel when I know I have grass-fed wagyu sirloin waiting at home that will go off if I don't eat it.

I notice you're eating very few veggies - I'd definitely like to see some broccoli, spinach etc in there. If you just don't like them, putting them in curry or something that will overwhelm their taste is a good way to get used to them. Personally I love them. Try them in your eggs maybe - I really got sick of eggs during my year on Atkins so now I add stuff every time. Cheese, sausage, salmon, broccoli, whatever. Try a Spanish omelette with good chorizo - now that's a meal!

[Boogie]

I really got sick of eggs during my year on Atkins

sick of eggs?!

BLASPHEMY!!

[Cormacaroni]

yeah, every time i bring an evening snack back into my meal schedule, my weight loss stagnates. i stopped it entirely last month despite some intial early hunger pangs, and the last 10 pounds are goin' away.

Have you ever tried intermittent fasting (IF)?

There is no such thing as the "last 10lbs" I think - when you actually lose it you look in the mirror and go "fuck...i could EASILY lose 10lbs more"

[Van Cruncheon]

yeah, that's my prob. i hit 185 and now i am MAN IN HIGH SCHOOL I WAS 165 GEEZ I COULD LOSE MORE

what is "if"? i find not eating easier than managing a five-meal, protein-heavy schedule, and i'm not sure i wanna weaken the ol' discipline, as it were

[Cormacaroni]

Intermittent fasting is the developing art of tricking your body into losing weight with randomized intervals of feast/famine. The simplest form is just eating a ton of food one night, then not eating again at all until the next night. There are a huge number of ways of implementing the basic protocol though.

Since it's fundamentally a process of active DISorganization of the diet, it's pretty low stress to implement. In fact, it happens naturally a lot of the time anyway, only in reverse; modern life often leads us to skip breakfast and lunch, say, and then we pig out at dinner to make up the shortfall. It just turns out that this is not necessarily a bad thing, and that we may be too married to "3 squares a day".

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/how-to-intermittent-fasting/

I'm not totally sold on it myself, because it seems that you have to be pretty dialed in otherwise to really get the benefit of it. If you're struggling with a bunch of other issues (high stress, poor quality sleep, sketchy diet, booze, caffeine, cigarettes, crappy exercise regimen), this might just add to your woes. But if you're headed in the right directions generally, it seems to kickstart stagnant weight loss for a lot of people.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I'm going to start experimenting with cooking more and more to make up for variety.  I love eggs but having it twice a day is getting to drag on for me a bit.

This weekend I'm going to experiment and make chicken with curry for dinners next week.  Lots of protein, some fats, and minimal carbohydrates.  Probably going to get some shit from a packet of stuff but if it works, I'll make my own and experiment.  Plus I'm on call so I can't really do anything other than experiment with food, especially spicy foods.

Foods I eat now: Beef tenderloin, Omega-3 eggs, full fat greek yogurt, grape tomatoes, the occasional handful of fruit that comes from my parents' garden (cherries, raspberries, strawberries)

I make curry a fair amount, mostly the Japanese stuff because it's so simple. Thai curry is great too - coconut milk is a wonderful fat source. You can just drink it of course, or make smoothies.

On beef - No idea what you pay for tenderloin, but you'll probably find that you're spending more on food with this style of eating, so you'll want to mostly stay away from expensive cuts like sirloin, especially if you're going organic/grass-fed. Stewing the tougher, cheaper cuts is a great way to go. I'd rather have a stew of grass-fed beef than a cheap factory-farm steak at this point...apart from any nutritional concerns (and there are many), it tastes better. It's so easy to make something that tastes great too - mince some garlic and onions, sautee, toss in the beef (preferably marinated but ok even if you don't), add some tomatoes and some beef stock, then just put the whole pot in the oven on a low-ish heat for 3 or 4 hours. Any other veggies you add at that point are err, gravy. Most Sunday evenings, I do something like this - enough for a weeks worth of lunches or dinners. Usually I'll do a pot of some kind of soup as well. Having food in the fridge is pretty key to resisting temptation, especially expensive food. I find it pretty easy to say no to a bagel when I know I have grass-fed wagyu sirloin waiting at home that will go off if I don't eat it.

I notice you're eating very few veggies - I'd definitely like to see some broccoli, spinach etc in there. If you just don't like them, putting them in curry or something that will overwhelm their taste is a good way to get used to them. Personally I love them. Try them in your eggs maybe - I really got sick of eggs during my year on Atkins so now I add stuff every time. Cheese, sausage, salmon, broccoli, whatever. Try a Spanish omelette with good chorizo - now that's a meal!

Thanks for the response!

I have access to cheap beef, regardless of the cut so why not get the best is what I'm thinking.  If I had to pay regular prices for that kind of thing, I'd probably just opt for chicken breasts instead.

I agree about the vegetables thing.  For a long time, I used to cut up tomato, mushrooms, green peppers, and pickled jalapeno peppers into the eggs.  I stopped mostly because of my somewhat erratic work schedule.  I may just restart that old practice and cut up some vegetables.

Part of the thing is that I do quite a bit of traveling for my job during the day so my lunches are typically easy to prepare affairs (usually 4 oz of steak and a cup of yogurt).  I've been meaning to add a lot of variety because like what you said, some areas of the diet are neglected.

I appreciate your suggestions and will probably begin implementing them.  I haven't done a lot of research on this but I will make the time.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

What about doing PSMF vs. IF?

[Cormacaroni]

What about doing PSMF vs. IF?

The former is a full-time, presumably long-term deal for people who really need to lose weight tomorrow, and the day after, and for many months after that. It doesn't look like any kind of fun at all, and there is no freakin' way you'd be able to keep lifting like you do on it. Your recovery and energy would be horrible. Whereas IF is just a way of gaming your regular food intake a bit to improve hormonal response. Most people seem to do it about once a week with success; much more than that and your body just adapts to it, defeating the point. The broad principle is a somewhat in line with the Crossfit mantra of "constantly varied" exercise.

Also, with IF, you're not necessarily taking in any less calories, just adjusting WHEN you take them in. Kill buffalo, eat a ton of buffalo. Fail to kill buffalo, go hungry for a while and live off your hump.

[Olivia Wilde Homo]

I think PSMF is only meant to work for a couple of weeks at a time according to Lyle McDonald.  I could never do it; if I can't get carbohydrates, I at least need fats.  It just seems like an alternative if you want to shed some of the remaining fat in a hard and fast manner.

[Cormacaroni]

A lot of Lyle McDonald's stuff is just too hardcore for me at this point, but it's still useful to read because he really knows his shit, and has had a ton of success with his methods. If I had a photoshoot for Men's Health coming up in a month, I'd probably do something like what he suggests

But yeah, it would be horrible. Guaranteed huge calorie deficit, guaranteed ketosis. There is no reason to think that it wouldn't work, and work crazy fast - it would just suck all the life from me. Plus, it would make working out miserable, I bet. It's for the very committed, in other words.

Also, I'm always a bit worried about a subsequent rebound. I'm sure he has a program in place for getting off it again afterwards but that just extends the period over which you have to be incredibly careful about every mouthful.

Still, good tool to have in the toolbox - you never know what you'll be ready for down the road.

[pollo]

Man, this eating right shit is too complicated and hard.  I'd starve myself trying to follow all these rules.  Doesn't help that I can't stand salad.

I used to hate salad too, but with no other acceptable form of carbohydrate i'm allowed to consume i  crave it all the time.

If I have my Ceasars in a day, i'm good. Without it, I crave carbs like a mo-fo.

[Cormacaroni]

that's a bit weird, pollo.

Either you're just not eating enough calories (resulting in excessive hunger), or you're eating more carbs than you think (causing you to continue to crave carbs). If the former, and you're going well into a calorie deficit in order to lose weight fast, ok. But you must realize that what you are craving is not carbs, but FOOD. As a general rule, if you are below 200lbs and craving food of some sort all the time, rethink your diet. It's better to lose weight slowly and consistently than lose a shitload and then rebound.

[pollo]

Nah, i just crave it because I don't get enough fiber in my diet.

When I get 0 gms of fiber in my diet my shits get real bloody -- so I always have almonds and dark chocolate around to counteract it.

I try to get at least 10 gms. But it's hard because so many foods have so little fiber in them.

[Cormacaroni]

I can't see how almonds and dark chocolate are going to help with that, mate. Eat some broccoli if you need fiber!

[pollo]

3 gms of fiber in 1 serving of almods
3 gms of fiber in 1 serving of dark chocolate

[Cormacaroni]

3 grams out of what, a 28 gram serving?

By that logic, I guess you can justify eating pizza if it has salami as a topping and you are short of protein. Almonds and dark chocolate are both fine in moderation, but they are not smart choices if you need fiber when you consider how much fat and potentially sugar you are also taking in. You run the risk of going way over your calorie budget in the interest of getting a few grams of fiber. You have no such risk with broccoli.

I guess if you just can't stand to eat the vegetables which anybody who has ever eaten will tell you fix your dumps PDQ, go for it.

I say: Eat the goddamn vegetables, your ass will thank me for it!

[BlackMage]

maaan.. old age is upon me. I've always been in ok shape most of my life, but lately i've been growing quite the belly. I think i need to incorporate more cardio in my daily routine.

[Cormacaroni]

Sort out your diet first, assuming you haven't already.

Burning more calories so that you can eat more calories is counter-productive and just wears you out, and leaves you hungry. Most people haven't the willpower to actually consistently eat less when doing a lot of cardio. Maybe you're different, but the odds are that you're not.

[BlackMage]

Sort out your diet first, assuming you haven't already.

Burning more calories so that you can eat more calories is counter-productive and just wears you out, and leaves you hungry. Most people haven't the willpower to actually consistently eat less when doing a lot of cardio. Maybe you're different, but the odds are that you're not.

*eats his fries* So far I've dont a lot of talkiing.. but mmmm ^__________^

[Cormacaroni]

well, have fun on the treadmill. or getting fatter.

[Mupepe]

2nd day of paleo done.  fuuuuuu  kicking carbs is a bitch.  especially my tortillas and beans

[BlackMage]

i use to drink 1-2 beers a day now I quit cold turkey.. ill miss my newcastles  :'(

[Cormacaroni]

2nd day of paleo done.  fuuuuuu  kicking carbs is a bitch.  especially my tortillas and beans

Congrats! Just eat more in the short term if you're really struggling. Then at least you don't have to deal with hunger pangs, on top of the phantom cravings.

I went to a Mexican place with friends the other night and ordered beef fajitas with "no tortillas". Everyone lolled as the waitress ran off to check if they had no tortillas. I just spooned all the toppings on top of the beef, it was awesome. 

[Cormacaroni]

In case Rob Thomas needs a little motivation. I have no idea how anyone could find it hard to eat stuff like this every day

Grass-fed steak with garlic + white wine reduction, stir-fried broccoli and zucchini, avocado with salt and lemon juice.

[Van Cruncheon]

my protein shake failed to satisfy :'(

[Mupepe]

In case Rob Thomas needs a little motivation. I have no idea how anyone could find it hard to eat stuff like this every day

Grass-fed steak with garlic + white wine reduction, stir-fried broccoli and zucchini, avocado with salt and lemon juice.

(Image removed from quote.)

Goddamn.

[Cormacaroni]

i use to drink 1-2 beers a day now I quit cold turkey..

I'm at 4 weeks 2 days, I've had 1 diet beer and 2 glasses of wine in that time.

<thud>

.... and that is the sound of Cormacaroni's jaw slamming onto his living room floor. 1 beer/2 wines would usually, under normal circumstances, be known as "breakfast"

Are you ready to put your head in the oven yet or what?