|
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 1090521)
Good recap on the current state of affairs from Robb Wolf.
US News Ranks the Paleo Diet: 2014. Deja Vu All over again! |
2 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 1090521)
Good recap on the current state of affairs from Robb Wolf.
US News Ranks the Paleo Diet: 2014. Deja Vu All over again! (It was a slight mis-quote, but the general sentiment remained intact.) I'm being serious. All I took away from that article was "this guy sounds like a delusional conspiracy theorist who is rambling on about the secret cabal which controls the media establishment." I have no opinion as to the scientific validity of... whatever he's trying to say, but my superficial impression is that he lacks credibility. People like this do harm to legitimate causes. https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1389407591 |
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1090528)
I don't mean to sound like a contrarian asshole, but I read that whole article and I have utterly no idea what it was trying to convey.
To be fair, the author isn't actually trying to educate anyone. He's trying to verbally fellate everyone who already agrees with him because he understands what his readers like. :party: |
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1090528)
All I took away from that article was "this guy sounds like a delusional conspiracy theorist who is rambling on about the secret cabal which controls the media establishment."
I understand your need to debunk the usual "media bias" articles...but this isn't exactly the same thing. Wolf is responding to a specific article from a specific publication, that ran a very similar article a year prior. |
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1090530)
I'm glad I'm not the only one, but to be fair, the author isn't actually trying to educate anyone. He's trying to verbally fellate everyone who already agrees with him because he understands what his readers like. :party:
There are some points about the 100% paleo diet I am not quite on board with, but there is far more good than bad. It overall looked like just another random paleo advocate fighting the man. Which is why I had such a hard time getting my head around it. Stuff like this polarizes folks such as myself, instead of spurring personal research. Reading through that I just felt like I was being forcefed something, whether I wanted it or not. So overall, I feel that your statement is pretty valid. |
Honestly, I'm past caring what peoples' "impressions" are at this point.
The information and research is available. If you're irritated by the tone of someone pointing you to the research, that's fine. |
Originally Posted by Savington
(Post 1090530)
To be fair, the author isn't actually trying to educate anyone. He's trying to verbally fellate everyone who already agrees with him because he understands what his readers like. :party:
This is hardly a unique phenomenon, of course. You'd get much the same vibe from tuning into any random Rush Limbaugh rant, or picking up a piece of Black Panthers* literature. Regardless of the actual message itself, the tone serves to alienate large groups of the population who might be fairly described as "neutral" or "undecided." Probably best that this not devolve into a political debate, though. Let us simply stipulate that mgeoffriau did not deliberately mean to derail the thread, and that we love and tolerate him in the finest Brony tradition. :giggle: * = I am referring to the present-day hate group which calls itself the "New Black Panther Party" under the leadership of Malik Zulu Shabazz / Hashim Nzinga, and not the original new left Marxist-Leninist Black Panther Party of the 1960s. |
After I did a bunch of blood glucose tests after eating starchy food such as potatoes, and ice cream, which showed my BG spikes are much lower now due to the raw potato Resistant Fiber I've been taking, I started eating more potatoes and desserts. Well, while my BG doesn't spike as much as before, I noticed that my appetite has increased - I get more hungry sooner after meals, and end up wanting to eat more. I still eat til I'm full, without over-eating. Surprise, I gained a pound in about a week. So, it's back to low-starch eating for me.
|
Originally Posted by chicksdigmiatas
(Post 1090533)
There are some points about the 100% paleo diet I am not quite on board with, but there is far more good than bad.
|
I've eaten risotto 7 days in a row, when will I die?
|
Originally Posted by hustler
(Post 1090845)
I've eaten risotto 7 days in a row, when will I die?
|
Joe Perez, regarding vegetable (but also fruits) consumption, there are many positive benefits of eating veggies which are not limited to,
High fiber, high nutrients, verity of vitamins, antioxidants, easy to digest, filling, environmentally more sustainable than meat. Let me point out, not only should one eat veggies, one should eat a good amount of "live" uncooked food also.This is about "antioxidants" and there is also research that points to caloric restriction leading to a longer life. I believe most of these things are intertwined and but my take on eating less food and or foods which are easier for the body to process, is that it is much kinder on the body. That's why I think fasting is also beneficial as it gives your stomach and body time to "rest." I also believe that toxins build up not only in your organs but in your muscles and fat. I think this is another reason it is good to periodically detox your body by slimming down. That said, I fully understand the importance of fat and the role it plays in good health. Joe Perez, sorry if I missed it but what are your goals for tinkering with your diet? Also, ya'll should try coconut oil, it's the shit. Smells and tastes like butter and fruits and is healthy. It's also good lotion. |
on saturday i ate nothing but a large cup of coffee with about a teaspoon of sugar in it until about 2:30pm when I had a small handful of trail mix. I did not eat a meal until about 7pm. I barely felt mental effects from this impromptu fast, but then again I was working fairly hard on a house project all day.
I did not get the shakes or the cold sweats but when I was all done and ready for dinner, I told my wife I wanted a huge serving of delicious, unhealthy I-dont-give-a-f*ck because I was quite famished. |
Originally Posted by Hinano
(Post 1090988)
Joe Perez, sorry if I missed it but what are your goals for tinkering with your diet?
Examples of this type of thinking here from within this thread would be post #5 (Down with carbs), post #33 (Grains contain "anti-nutrients"), post #112 (Sweden Becomes First Western Nation to Reject Low-fat Diet Dogma in Favor of Low-carb High-fat Nutrition), etc. Basically, I am skeptical about "magic bullet" diets, and while I'm certain that some of what was been written is indeed applicable to people with abnormal metabolic conditions, I suspect that in many such cases, causality is being reversed. (eg: A study finds that people who drink diet soda are fat, therefore, diet soda causes you to become fat. But what if, in reality, people who have unhealthy eating habits in the first place merely tend to drink a lot of sweet-tasting beverages in the first place, and therefore a large percentage of the subset "people who drink diet soda" are inherently going to fall into the set of "people with unhealthy eating habits.) Examples which I'd site to support the skepticism would be things like post #117 (For 10 weeks, Mark Haub, a professor of human nutrition at Kansas State University, ate one [Twinkie] every three hours, instead of meals. To add variety in his steady stream of Hostess and Little Debbie snacks, Haub munched on Doritos chips, sugary cereals and Oreos, too. His premise: That in weight loss, pure calorie counting is what matters most -- not the nutritional value of the food.) Being open to new ideas, however, I've decided to actually test this theory on myself, by eating a high-calorie, high-fat, high-protein diet which is low in carbs (except for green vegetables, newly introduced), rather than just being a typical internet user and slinging around a bunch of conjecture. Incidentally, over the course of the past week after having returned to this diet, I'm up from 215 to 217 lbs, which is easily a new record high for me. |
The majority of low carb proponents don't recommend high protein, but rather a moderate protein intake.
|
1 Attachment(s)
This is the wierdest thread on this forum.
"How can that be?" you might inquire increduosly. After all, there have been all sorts of bizarre posts about My Little Ponies and the "brony" subculture, threads that you thought were doomed to failure but turned out pretty well (e.g. "Trubo.net, give me guidance on starting a new business"), FNG threads that went sideways with great humiliation and humor, and plenty more. How can this seemingly benign thread that started out about "health food," be the wierdest thread on a Miata forum that has a thread dedicated to cats that is hundreds of posts long? Because, in this thread, Joe Perez and JasonC have flipped roles with the former playing "intentionally obtuse and willfully ignorant" and the latter playing "surprisingly patient and genuinely attempting to educate." Adding fuel to the bizarro world fire, is Mark losing his patience and basically telling Joe to "fuck right off, chap." https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1389645994 |
Bizarro, I love you!
|
I hear none of the penis pills really work either!
|
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1090860)
When people start getting fat as they get older, it's because their metabolism starts breaking from doing that for decades.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/gh...=w1254-h836-no |
FWIW there are lots of fat people (with obviously broken metabolisms) who exercise a lot, eat low-fat, and don't lose weight.
BTW here's a guy who studied ketogenic dieting and did an Ironman event: Low Carb Triathlon Training |
|
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1091500)
FWIW there are lots of fat people (with obviously broken metabolisms) who exercise a lot, eat low-fat, and don't lose weight.
The supposed logic behind the "low fat" trend escapes me for much the same reasons as that behind the "low carb" trend. Neither one seems to make an obvious accounting for total caloric load. What's really kind of funny is when you look at two products side-by-side on a supermarket shelf, wherein one is a low-fat alternative to the other. (Peanut butter is a good example here.) The "low fat" version almost invariably has a caloric density similar to, and in many cases higher than, the version which it purports to replace. Actually, a lot of things about the grocery store confuse me. Like laundry detergent. Typically, we expect to experience a cost-per-unit savings when buying in bulk. This is certainly true when purchasing things like cars, iron ore, cocaine, and so on. So why does the 128oz bottle of liquid laundry soap cost $15.99 while the 64 oz bottle costs $7.99? That's an extra 0.015625 cents per ounce, and I'm certain that the smaller bottles cost more (on a per-ounce basis) to manufacture and distribute- more plastic, more handling, more transactional costs, etc. Or the container of laundry soap that proudly exclaims "25% MORE LOADS than 72 loads." Well, yes- 90 is 25% more than 72, but how exactly is this relevant to anything at all? Is 72 a historically standard number of loads of laundry to get out of a box of soap? For that matter, what standards agency determines the formula for dividing mass (of soap) by loads (of laundry), to come out with a ratio of ounces to loads? Couldn't I advertise a box of soap as containing any arbitrarily large number of "loads," simply by specifying the amount of soap to be used per load as an arbitrarily small measure? Is there some kind of ANSI or ISO standard for how much effective cleaning power a "load" of soap is defined as, and how this is to be measured? At least with motor oil we have API standardized tests run by independent labs. So far as I've been able to determine, there is no American Soap Institute. |
i made stir fry and rice last night, but i cant cook rice, so it was a healthier dinner since we didnt eat the rice.
|
I used to cook rice like TuningDoneRong tuned cars; add enough fuel, add a little more for safety, just a little more, fuck it dump it all in. You end up with a black smoke belching slow POS and a pan full of solid cement-like rice.
I'm also down to 190lbs today. Started at 212ish mid-December. Today was a good day. |
Good work, Oscar. Just think: when you get back into your Miata, you'll have a better weight-to-power ratio without even turning a wrench on the car.
Joe - Did you compare "serving size" on that laundry detergent? That is, some of the more concentrated formulas require much less to be used per load of laundry. Comparing concentrated vs non-concentrated would skew the numbers quite a bit. |
Originally Posted by Oscar
(Post 1091983)
I used to cook rice like TuningDoneRong tuned cars; add enough fuel, add a little more for safety, just a little more, fuck it dump it all in. You end up with a black smoke belching slow POS and a pan full of solid cement-like rice.
I'm also down to 190lbs today. Started at 212ish mid-December. Today was a good day. |
To be honest, I haven't seen a gym from the inside since I had physical therapy for a knee injury 6 years ago. I take out my MTB a couple of times a week and have been on a keto diet alone. I can only imagine if I actually start proper exercises :party:
|
Have you been taking Potato Starch?
|
No, I've had some trouble finding something comparable to the unmodified starch you mentioned earlier. I did order psyllium for my pooping needs. Should be here tomorrow or the day after.
|
Bob's Red Mill store finder:
http://www.bobsredmill.com/dealer-locator.html And here's an alternative, plantain flour: Plantain Flour Uses and Information I suspect that a lot of potential issues with a long term keto diet will be mitigated by Resistant/Indigestible Starch/Fiber |
bob's Red Mill sponsors my buddy's cycling team. We got dem grains, son.
|
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1092223)
Bob's Red Mill store finder:
http://www.bobsredmill.com/dealer-locator.html And here's an alternative, plantain flour: Plantain Flour Uses and Information I suspect that a lot of potential issues with a long term keto diet will be mitigated by Resistant/Indigestible Starch/Fiber Location: Amsterdam area, the Netherlands ;) |
Originally Posted by Oscar
(Post 1092246)
Here's a hint:
Location: Amsterdam area, the Netherlands ;) |
Originally Posted by Oscar
(Post 1092246)
Here's a hint:
Location: Amsterdam area, the Netherlands |
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1092254)
What state is "the Netherlands" in? Never heard of it. :giggle:
https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1389824796 |
1 Attachment(s)
|
oh LOL I never noticed you were in Dutchland!
Hmm, how about just sticking a raw green plantain in your morning smoothie? heh many years ago I visited Holland and met up with Nico Van Steen. This was before gay miata owners got together and created mt.net. |
get it from ireland.
|
Originally Posted by Oscar
(Post 1092270)
^ How you see us.
How we see you: |
Just needs a bible for my part of the country.
|
Originally Posted by z31maniac
(Post 1092314)
Just needs a bible for my part of the country.
|
Originally Posted by y8s
(Post 1092326)
the fish logo symbol is enough lip service for the good "Christian" of the south.
|
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 1090536)
Honestly, I'm past caring what peoples' "impressions" are at this point.
The information and research is available. If you're irritated by the tone of someone pointing you to the research, that's fine.
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1090794)
Different people define "paleo" differently. If you were to take a strict definition, i.e. dairy wasn't consumed by paleolithic humans... well, lots of people consider that diet to be a *starting* point. Lots of human populations for example do have a genetic mutation to digest lactose into adulthood. Tubers (potatoes) and white rice are well tolerated by most people, provided you don't eat enough to produce a large blood sugar spike, etc. From that said starting point, you have to tailor it to you as an individual. I for example, tolerate dairy well, but starches not. I seem to do well with nightshade veggies (a lot of people don't), cruciferous veggies, and nuts. Large amounts of wheat (a big paleo no-no), and hydrolyzed veg protein, gives me headaches. And so on.
Grains make me poop and fat, and I never liked "preservativey" stuff. It really did open my eyes on that plasticy fake butter, however. I never did use the stuff, but they (officers with masters and doctorates) were telling me to tell people to use it so I did. I will never understand the whole veg protein thing. "They" always advocate for it and vegans, especially claim to do it for health reasons, but they are just choking down tons of sugar and processed stuff. How is that healthy again? As for the dairy, I see no problem with it on the "as tolerated" basis. I rarely drink milk, and usually do yogurt and cheese. (I got an awesome raw cheese care package yesterday and it is fabulous. I wonder how many state lines it crossed before getting to KSA? :rofl:) I don't like milk and I feel that soy milk is just another "food product" and also nasty. People need to realize that more goes into bone health other than calcium, like vitamin D, silicone, boron, iron, and actually using them.
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1091815)
Edit, this quote was a gem. Translation: By embracing eggs, beef, wild salmon, chicken, lamb, pork, kale, chard, romaine lettuce, spinach, blackberries, blueberries, raspberries, apples, broccoli, sweet potatoes, beets, carrots, oranges, sardines, organ meats, shellfish, fennel, onions, garlic, asparagus, seaweed, butternut squash, yellow squash, zucchini, tomatoes, strawberries, cantaloupe, almonds, macadamia nuts, sunflower seeds, pumpkin seeds, pecans, walnuts, and tuna, you’re at risk of missing out on a lot of nutrients. All those foods might taste nice and look pretty on a plate, but they are incredibly nutrient-sparse.
Originally Posted by Oscar
(Post 1092270)
|
Interesting stuff.
Understanding Genetic Differences In Carb Metabolism There is nothing more controversial in the nutrition world then carbohydrates. There are some people/groups that condemn carbohydrates as a terrorist infiltrating our society. At the other end of the spectrum we have people/groups that condemn fat in the same manner and preach a higher carbohydrate diet for the masses. There is research that supports both arguments so who are we supposed to believe? The answer lies in your genome. Our gene pool began to differentiate between one another when we began to settle in various locations around the globe. Some hunter-gatherer groups settled in cold climates, some in warm climates, and everything in between. Each location offered its own challenges and evolutionary pressures, one of them being diet. For example, colder climates may have relied more heavily on animal meats for food and warmer, wetter climates may have relied more heavily on plant food (Diet and the evolution of human amylase gene copy number variation). This led to diversity in one specific gene responsible for the breakdown of carbohydrates, alpha-amylase (AMY1). AMY1 is a salivary enzyme that begins the breakdown of starch in the mouth and makes it taste sweet. AMY1 variation exists between different members of the human species. This may be a major reason why there is so much variation from person to person when it comes to carbohydrate intake. Some people thrive on a higher carbohydrate diet and others thrive when carbohydrates are kept in check. This is also a reason why there will never be just one perfect human diet. The USDA recommends that the entire population consumes 45% to 65% of their daily calories in the form of starch. Is this a correct recommendation to the part of the population that contains fewer copies of the AMY1 gene? It is not only unfair, but may be setting them up for a future filled with weight issues and all the diseases that accompany increased weight. Abigail Manell and Paul Breslin have done some amazing research at the Monell Chemical Senses Center in Philadelphia. One study in particular looked at starch digestion between differing AMY1 groups. The experimental group was healthy, non-obese individuals and they were divided into a high amylase group and a low amylase group. They came into the lab twice, once to ingest starch (experiment) and glucose (control). The low amylase group had higher blood glucose levels then the high amylase group during starch consumption. This increase in blood glucose levels lasted for the two hours that the participants remained at the lab! Interestingly, when the low amylase group consumed the glucose blood sugar levels remained relatively consistent with the high amylase group and the blood sugar did not stay elevated as long as when they ingested the starch (High Endogenous Salivary Amylase Activity Is Associated with Improved Glycemic Homeostasis following Starch Ingestion in Adults). Recommending a high starch diet to people with low amylase gene copies is setting them up for insulin resistance and diabetes. Another thing to think about is the diversity within each group. Humans can contain anywhere between 2 and 15 copies of the AMY1 gene (PLOS ONE: Individual Differences in AMY1 Gene Copy Number, Salivary). This means there is a wide difference from person to person on blood glucose levels following the exact same intake of starch. The research by Manell and Braslin was published in the Journal of Nutrition in 2012. This is an extremely new phenomenon when looking at the individuality of carbohydrate digestion. All we know about this topic is that some people respond to the same meal of starch differently. We do not know optimal starch intake for each variation yet. 45% to 65% of calories coming from starch may still be too much for even the people that contain 15 copies of AMY1 gene, we do not know the tolerable upper intake level. Underlying inflammation is also going to be a variable. Carbohydrate metabolism gets dysfunctional when inflammation is present. Someone with 15 copies of the AMY1 gene that exercises, sleeps well, has friends, and manages stress may respond more favorable to the same starch meal that someone with 15 copies that is sedentary. Also, food quality is still going to play a role. Just because someone has a higher number of AMY1 copies does not mean eating a high grain diet will be beneficial, remember the inflammation piece. Who knows where the future of this information will take us. It does bring to light a few things. Everyone is truly their own unique snowflake. It also brings to light that there is a lot we do not know about the human body. We need to remain humble and actually listen to our patients/clients. They know more about their body then science does. |
1 Attachment(s)
|
Holy crap, what's with all the donuts? Are you a cop?
|
lunch. what's with the ice cream in the fridge?!
|
2 Attachment(s)
|
Are the soy sauce packets for the donuts or the leftover pizza?
|
fresh chicken breast, carrots, broccoli and asparagus covered in soy sauce, honey, ginger, and garlic along with poorly cooked brown rice. |
Originally Posted by Braineack
(Post 1092640)
hey this looks like my leftovers last night. but i made it myself.
I'm down to 211 lbs, shooting for a return to 200 before I try the lo-carb thing again. Feels good to be riding again, too. I may never be at the level of doing the sort of 50-100 mile enduros that Hustler and Emilio are talking about over in the carbonlust thread, but even just 5-6 miles a day of ordinary stop-and-go commuting makes a big difference in how I feel. * = yes, this is the only description given of the sauce. It is, in fact, delightful. |
Originally Posted by mgeoffriau
(Post 1092543)
Joe, I would consider changing your experiment to substituting grains with more veggies and/or tubers (e.g. sweet potato, cassava, potato), and removing industrial seed oils. Or at least properly prepare your own grains (and legumes and seeds) a la the Weston Price foundation (soak em overnight, throw water, then cook, to get rid of the phytates, and lectin anti-nutrients): Be Kind to Your Grains...And Your Grains Will Be Kind To You - Weston A Price Foundation |
More good stuff about how to fine tune your N=1 experiment.
The Dangers of Metabolic Adaptation The concept of metabolic adaption is scary to me. Not because it’s right or wrong, but because it’s often prescribed to dieters without any examination. People are told that if they have been dieting for a long period of time and are now having problems losing weight, then their hormone levels have been compromised by all the dieting and therefore they must ‘eat up’ for a length of time to restore their hormone levels. And this *MAY* be true, but it also may not be true. The problem with telling a person that their hormones levels are up or down is that you typically do not have any kind of baseline measurements. It’s rare to hear that a person has a record of their blood profiles that were recorded when they were at their healthiest or at their ideal (ie. not overweight and not dieting). Even if blood samples were taken right before a diet started, these numbers would be confounded by the fact the person most likely has extra fat to lose (so the levels may not be a true ideal, but instead depressed or elevated by the extra fat). Most of the time, ‘metabolic adaptation’ is being diagnosed, and changes in hormone levels are being blamed, without a baseline measurement to compare to. And without a baseline, you’re just guessing. Yes, we do have population averages – but typically these are wide ranges, sometimes very wide. And while coming in high or low of a population average is reason for further check up, it does not automatically indicate that this is the cause of your weight loss problems. This is my problem with prescribing metabolic adaptation – you’re guessing when you should be measuring. To be clear, there is NOTHING wrong with ‘eating up’. Generally I like people on Eat Stop Eat to be on no more than a 15% calorie deficit on the days they are not fasting, and I’d even like them closer to ‘maintenance’ the leaner they get. I don’t mind large caloric deficits for short periods of time (in people who can afford to be in a large deficit), but in general I like people to eat and then occasionally take a break from eating. People often hear the last part of that statement, but seem to want to ignore the first part icon wink The Dangers of Metabolic Adaptation S0 my problem with ‘eating up’ isn’t the application or idea (which I like), but the reasoning (which concerns me). This happens to a lot of good ideas in health and nutrition – We figure out that something helps, then we guess at why it helps, then when those guesses are questioned or proven wrong we throw the whole thing out, ignoring the fact that even if the ‘why’ was wrong, whatever you were doing WAS somehow helping. The danger in guessing is that self-diagnosing could actually cause you to become a crazy fanatic worrier (because you’re worrying without facts), or worse, it could cause to you miss the diagnoses of a larger, potentially more dangerous problem. If you think something is wrong, get it checked, compare it to some kind of baseline then move forward. When it comes to dieting either go by feel (You feel tired and lethargic so you’re going to up calories a bit), go by measurements (Your Testosterone or Thryoid or Cortisol measurements are drastically lower then they were when you had them measured before you started this new diet, it’s time to change something), but don’t go by guessing (I’m feeling tired, therefore my adrenals are fatigued). - See more at: The Dangers of Metabolic Adaptation | Brad Pilon's 'Eat Blog Eat' |
Yet more paleo diet misrepresentation, by Michael Pollan this time:
Michael Pollan Explains What's Wrong With the Paleo Diet | Mother Jones Good reply from "Livin' La Vida Low Carb" Jimmy Moore: ~ With all due respect, Michael, nearly all of your "suggestions" are the very CORE of what Paleo living is all about--consuming pastured animals, adding in fermented foods, learn to get back in the kitchen and cook again, etc. While most Paleo peeps don't agree with him that bread is necessarily a healthy part of the human diet, even his logic with that runs exactly opposite his position on consuming meat. What's most disappointing is the fact that Pollan probably has a lot more in common with the supporters of Paleo than not. So why this antagonistic article? Makes no sense at all. Well the medical research establishment now has an official term which apparently Pollan is unaware of: "Non Celiac Gluten Sensitivity". |
Michael Pollan is good friends with my wife's boss who is very into the Paleo diet and works on food issues.
I wonder if they have had this conversation before... |
Originally Posted by Joe Perez
(Post 1092650)
* = yes, this is the only description given of the sauce. It is, in fact, delightful.
|
"S.S.G.G"
Salt/Shoyu, Sugar, Ginger, Garlic. When in doubt, SSGG. This will make anything taste good. Also, I would ask the local Chinese restaurant if they use MSG. If so, avoid it. |
2 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by JasonC SBB
(Post 1092657)
Joe, I would consider changing your experiment to substituting grains with more veggies and/or tubers (e.g. sweet potato, cassava, potato),
Regardless, I'm not a big potato person. When (if?) I resume the experiment, it'll involve a more usual quantity of veg (broccoli, brussels sprouts, green beans) but I don't intend to suddenly start wolfing down lots of potatoes. Never have in the past, don't want to start now. Point of curiosity, when you say "...substituting grains with more veggies and/or tubers" I interpret this as meaning that you thought I was consuming grains in the prior test regime. Aside from one Mission-brand low-carb tortilla per day as a wrap at lunch (6g net carb, 220 calories mostly from fat and protein), and an occasional tin of lahana sarma when I just couldn't take any more sliced fresh mozerella with olive oil and herbs as a side dish, that was the entire extent of my grain intake. I'm consuming much more in the way of grains at present, since I'm having a fair-sized helping of short-grain brown rice pretty much daily, and I am losing body fat and suffering no perceivable ill-effects. If anything, I feel "normal" again. (Details of present dietary regime near bottom of this post.) and removing industrial seed oils. So, after three weeks on the Precious Diet (so named because the nearest Chinese takeout place to my apartment is called Precious), I'm down from 217 to 204.8 (my scale reads in weird increments.) I know it sounds weird, and I didn't even set into this intentionally, but I've wound up on the Chinese takeout version of the Twinkie diet. Haven't made any changes other than to replace my large, high-fat / protein dinners (meat & cheese) with takeout from Precious. The portions are so huge that a single order (entree plus steamed brown rice), easily makes 2-3 full dinners, so it's even cost-effective Roast duck, in brown gravy, with shiitake mushrooms, snow peas and green pepper: https://www.miataturbo.net/attachmen...ine=1390845075 So far, feeling great. Jeans have loosened a tad, and I have plenty of energy throughout the day. |
Also, Jason, you'd expressed an interest in blood glucose, and I have some data there as well. I did a couple of proper fasting measurements (first thing in the morning), and they were 82 and 85. So that's dead-nuts in the middle of the 70-100 "normal" range that I see cited by most reputable sources. I did the second one (that returned an initial 85) at 9:30 am on a Saturday, and proceeded to spent the next three hours pounding down rum and diet cola*, just for kicks. So much, in fact, that by noon I was so hammed I could barely stand up, and this is highly unusual for me. At the end of this binge, blood glucose had gone from 85 to 83. This was just a point of curiosity, which I did to see if these two things, by themselves, caused any sort of blood-glucose spikes. They don't.
Also, I've been doing before-and-after dinner measurements as well. Before dinner (~6 hours after lunch), a typical reading is around 90. One hour after a reasonably-sized plate of the aforementioned cuisine (from the last post), range will be maybe 120-130. This is higher than the one-hour-after measurement of a completely carb-free, sugar-free meal, but not massively so. I conclude that my body has no quarrels whatsoever, in this regard, with a big plate of mango chicken and brown rice. * = I selected two different colas for this test; Diet Pepsi and Diet Rite, as they seem to contain highly different sweetener / additive packages. |
Originally Posted by Hinano
(Post 1094936)
Salt/Shoyu, Sugar, Ginger, Garlic. When in doubt, SSGG. This will make anything taste good.
Originally Posted by Hinano
(Post 1094936)
Also, I would ask the local Chinese restaurant if they use MSG. If so, avoid it.
|
| All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:30 PM. |
© 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands
