The following article was sponsored by IgnoreLimits
Uncovering The Truth
Fat loss does not have to be expensive, confusing, or only attainable by those with “great genetics” or those with countless hours on their hands to commit to mind-numbing cardio.
When I started out five years ago I bought into all the hype, blowing easily a couple of thousand dollars on supplements, while simultaneously chaining myself to the treadmill and ensuring I was eating small meals every couple of hours to “keep my metabolism firing along”…
There comes a point in time where you realize the effort you are expending does not equal the results you are getting.
I was working my ass off but I was struggling to get results. Why? Because I was doing what everyone else was – broscience workouts, dieting principles and just general fuckarounditis jumping from one diet, training regime etc. to the next in what I’d essentially call “shiny object syndrome.”
After much trial and error, along with reading, testing, recording, and the like I discovered what works.
Don’t waste your time jumping from one approach to the next like I did, nor fall victim to paralysis by analysis…
1. You Don’t Have To Count Calories To Get Lean
To look good you don’t have to count calories at all. To burn fat you simply need to consume FEWER calories than your body is burning on a 24-hour basis. There is no such thing as a fat burning food, period.
Acai berries? Nope. Celery? Nope. Grapefruit? Nope.
Consume a high protein diet with a moderate amount of dietary fiber and drink two glasses of water prior to every meal.
A high protein meal will leave you feeling fuller than carbohydrates or fats ever will, fiber and water will leave you feeling fuller quicker too, this is a simple approach to decrease your chances of overeating.
If you want to look the best, however, you’re going to need to calculate your calories. Don’t worry, I’ve got you covered.
2. Weights Are Your Friend
When it comes to fat loss cardio seems to be the go-to thing to do in the gym. Lifting weights is far more beneficial however because:
1. Performing heavy compound movements such as the squat and deadlift burns a ton of calories, not only while you’re performing your lifts… but afterwards during the muscular recovery phase too.
2. By lifting weights you’ll be building muscle, an increase in an muscle will result in an increase in your metabolic rate (the rate at which your body burns calories) as lean muscle mass takes an additional amount of energy to move and maintain.
3. When It Comes To Cardio More Is Not Necessarily Better
HIIT (High Intensity Interval Training) is king. There’s no need to spend 40 minutes to an hour mindlessly grinding away on the treadmill or elliptical when you can burn the same amount of calories in 10-15 minutes of interval training.
Interval training is known to be far more muscle-sparing than the traditional LISS (low intensity sustained state) as well as assisting in increasing speed and explosive power.
4. Meal Timing? Forget It
Want to eat every two hours? Want to eat every 12 hours?
Go for it.
Fat loss (and muscle gain for that matter) is a game of calories in vs. calories out. This is where most guys get caught up and suffer paralysis by analysis. Plan your meals around your schedule and lifestyle – don’t get paranoid if you eat earlier or later than normal.
This may be a controversial point, but from my experience (following styles of dieting eating every three hours vs. fasting with one or two large meals per day within a specified eating window) I noticed no difference in terms of the rate of fat loss, and have seen no studies indicating a significant enough increase in the metabolism to promote accelerated fat loss.
5. Over The Counter Fat Loss Supplements Are Highway Robbery
Most “fat burner” supplements are a complete joke. Here’s why:
- -The majority of these supplements have had the formula ‘padded out’ with filler ingredients
- Run of the mill ingredients are referred to by their scientific name to attempt to trick you into thinking you’re getting something new and groundbreaking
- Proprietary blends are used on formulas to prevent the disclosure of the supplement dosages within
- The effective ingredients in these products are generally just caffeine and green tea, which can be purchased separately for a fraction of the cost of the fat burner itself
6. Diets, Supplementation, and Cardio All Lead To The Same End
A calorie deficit.
Fat loss is impossible without a calorie deficit, period.
Different diets, supplementation and workout regimes are all utilized and manipulated to create a calorie deficit.
My Comprehensive Solution
For the past five years I have walked the walk—my results speak for themselves. If I wasn’t confident I could get you the same results I wouldn’t have written the book.
F.U. Fat is the final product, there’s no upsells. Everything you need to know and all actionable advice is contained within this one book – I don’t try to sell you a course, coaching, or any ridiculous supplement line in the book.
The techniques I share with you are from my own personal experience (i.e. I do/have done all methods discussed) as well as a plethora of referenced studies to back up claims and recommendations.
There is no filler. The book is 140~ pages long on Amazon Kindle. I had no intended length in mind—I said and discussed everything that needed to be said and eliminated any repetitive or unnecessary information. I did not attempt to reach a certain word count or page number, when a book is intentionally dragged out it’s easy to tell.
Prior to hitting the “publish” button I issued just shy of 50 copies of this book to friends, family, training partners, other fitness bloggers etc. and clarified and ironed out any unclear areas.
Check it out here on Amazon.com
Don’t like it? All books in the Kindle store come with a money back guarantee!
In the quest of losing weight i’ve tried several methods (dukan,keto,fast metabolism diet, half-marathon walking, belly blitz and so on) and i’ve achieved some sucess (9 kilos lost within 1 month and 10 ten days). However, i’m at that moment when i’m having a hard at keeping losing more weight. Thanks for the tips. Let’s see if it works for me.
two recommended videos: ‘fat, sick and nearly dead.’ + ‘eat, fast and live longer.’ both can be viewed online for free (might take a bit of searching).
I’ve watched the fat, sick and nearly dead 2 recently but i’m baffled by the idea of juicy fasting. Like, would i have to go to the bathroom all the time? If so, i can’t do it. It would really affect me at my job.
i can only speak from my personal experience, but i wanted to test out both fasting and juicing in 2014, so i tackled them both. juicing doesn’t lead to needing to go to the bathroom every 20 minutes… it’s different from ‘drink as much liquid as you can,’ you know what i mean? also, just go for low-sodium v8 if you don’t have access to fresh veggies or a juicer. fasting… ie. not eating (i would cheat by drinking a cup of coffee with a splash of milk for breakfast) really was just convincing my mind that i didn’t NEED to eat/drink every few hours in order to live. i lost close to 30 pounds over 6 months without killing myself by any means. anyhow, i’m just a regular guy though so check with an MD or nutritionist if you think you might not be healthy enough to tackle either of these two approaches.
Forget the MDs. They’ve been brainwashed with the conventional advice of low fat high carb diet that has created the highest obesity rate in history. If they tell you anything different (which they may or may not believe) they could lose their license to practice medicine.
Yeah. I’m always amazed that not only doctors but America in general has kind of stepped forth as the trailblazer for modern health ideas. Why listen to us? Just look around.
Refined white sugar and high fructose. Were it up to me these substances would be classified as poisons. Not only do they make you fat, they make you lesser able to burn fat.
Look at the land whales. Is that “eat drink and be merry” fat? No. It’s bloated disease fat, from eating poison. Pasty and watery, like a full body inflammation.
Stay away from sugar and curb the more starchy foods (pastas, rice, potato) and you will do well.
agreed dr. jeep. btw, ‘the sugar fix’ is a fantastic book, highly recommended. check it out all!
That and “Wheat Belly”.
and “Wheat Belly Total Health” and “Primal Blueprint”.
Please clarify this phrase. I would appreciate it
quick google search suggests this is a combination of a couple of verses from the bible. personally, i take it to mean, enjoy good food and drink but not to the point of gluttonous consumption. i believe dr. jeep is comparing what i just described to those people in society who have to eat a miniature chocolate bar every 20 minutes (and a can of cola) to feel satisfied (blechh).
Pretty much.
The same people are also the ones with their noses in the iPhone every two seconds.
I have been saying for years that mental and physical obesity are linked.
i was picturing Henry VIII
http://www.nndb.com/people/427/000086169/henry-viii-3.jpg
Back in the day, a female stick figure was not a healthy thing. These days the feminists like to tout those old black and whites of fat models as part of their vindication but they are way off the mark.
But it’s certain that a woman who is wealthy and healthy might gain a few extra pounds and back on those days it was just that: a few. They probably lost it over the winter and Lent too if wine or sweets were the vice to avoided.
I have been over half the world and I can tell the difference. And in the “normal” fat a woman is going to have it in the right places.
What I see all around me all of the time is a sickly mutation kind of fat. The kind brought on by being poisoned, with additional complexity of the additional side effect of hormone imbalance too. That’s why you will see women with tiny narrow shoulders but an ass wider than she is tall, or have a big fat meaty head and a skinny neck, or fat rolls on the neck with a straight torso. Lots of men are a mess too.
Thanks. Speaking of the women in the past, one can venture to say that most of the babes and bombshells might have had more “meat” than some of the stick figures of today, but they weren’t “fat” by any means.
Heck, when we men want a sexy women, we don’t want stick figures. We do like curvy voluptuous women. Just not fatties.
You mean visceral fat…the really bad stuff from too much sweets and/or alcohol.
The incredible lack of discipline of today´s society is incredible. Impressive the amount of women and femi-males who eat 0 fat, diet coke but drink a triple chai-latte from starbucks (containing 500 calories). When losing weight and stacking up muscle you gotta keep it simple. For me, my diet became my way of life.
It goes like this:
5:00 A.M. 3 Scrambled eggs with bacon, and a banana dip fried in butter.
6:00 A.M. GYM
7:00 A.M. 3 Scrambled eggs with bacon, with 2 full kiwifruits and 1 apple.
7:00 P.M. 500 gram New York or Rib Eye Strip cooked in butter.
Ive never looked so lean and feel so healthy.
this
Wow that’s pretty good.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
✔✔Make over 13k/M0NTH@af18:
Going Here you
Can Find Out
►►►►► https://WorkOnlineMobile.com/get08/position…
Roosh (or whoever does site maintenance), I believe there are WordPress scripts you can use to auto-tag these kinds of posts for moderation.
Don’t know if they work on Disqus, but these spammers are hitting every post. It’s an eyesore.
You seriously eat that 7 days a week? I’d want to kill myself.
Well then I guess that’s more steak and eggs for the rest of us.
Nice diet man, I like it. I eat similarly and I hover between 8 and 10% body fat without even training hard.
❧❧◔❧❧◔Make over 13k/M0NTH@af6:
Going Here you
Can Find Out,,,,
►►► >>>https://WorkOnlineLink.biz/EarnS/Planes….
►►►Make over 13k/M0NTH@af3:
Going Here you
Can Find Out,,,,,,
►►►► ::>>https://WorkOnlineNetwork.com/get/position…
“7:00 P.M. 500 gram New York”
what is that? im not familiar with american food
New York Strip, or Rib Eye, are meat-cuts from beef.
Thats how they name them.
Those two are the two sides of a Tbone, in case you didn’t know.
Thanks, I was wondering though….
Greatly admire the discipline, my friend. I have enjoyed a similar diet in the past and achieved similar results.
If you’re interested, there are quiche recipes out there which could add some texture and flavor variety to the diet without adding effort or carbohydrates.
The good thing about fats, like bacon, butter and steak (not lean) is that it always tastes delicious.
Breakfast:
300 grams of raspberries and blackberries
100 grams of shredded wheat
30 grams of granola
2.75 cups of milk
30 grams whey isolate
80 grams mixed nuts
Lunch:
Variable.
Dinner:
200 grams of grilled rib eye steak with spicy paprika and chili flakes
400 grams of baked chicken
150 grams baked sweet potato
100 grams boiled broccoli
100 grams boiled asparagus
100 grams boiled carrots
60 grams of cheese
70 grams sauteed onions
Goals: 3000 calories, 110 grams fat, 310 grams carb, 230 grams protein, 4000mg Potassium, high vitamin D, high Magnesium. Less pasta and processed foods.
Life is grand. Calorie counting is very helpful actually because you’d be surprised what you’re overeating and under-consuming. For me, I found I was always eating way too many carbs and way too little protein. If anything, it points you in the right direction.
Another thing to do is MEAL PLANNING. Every weekend, I spend an hour making all my breakfasts and lunches for the entire week. That way I won’t wake up and feel the need to skip making lunch and opting for a carboholocaust from Subway.
Imho if you’re already having that much time in between meals, you might as well do IF/Lean Gains. E.g. 5 AM Meal 1, 7 AM Meal 2, 1 PM Meal 3. No more meals after 1 PM. Personally I prefer veggies over fruit since you can eat more veggies and have less carbs than with fruit, but I guess that’s a personal choice.
I agree with you on the starchy foods, when it comes to maximizing fat burning that is. Otherwise, nothing wrong with a potato, a bowl of real rice with your dinner or even a tablespoon of enzymatic-active honey (“high fructose”) in your tea. Really, the main poisons are refined/junk carb products (table sugar, as well as potato chips fall under here) and nasty industrial seed oils (yuck)…
Table sugar has a lower GI than a potato and your liver doesn’t know whether the excessive glucose in your blood stream came from a baked potato or a potato chip.
Table sugar has a lower GI than Shredded Wheat.
Table sugar is half glucose half fructose….And excess fructose hurts livers.Google fatty liver disease.The GI is only relevant to Insulin surge,how much and for how long.Yes Insulin has a double edged sword effect to the body.It does open the cell doors to blood sugar transportation across the cell membranes,but it also drives blood fat to storage.Glycemic load
(The amount of actual carb)must also be factored in.
“Table sugar is half glucose half fructose….”
Exactly.
“Google fatty liver disease.”
I’m way ahead of you.
The insulin surge is a response to the glucose surge. Excessive insulin is a problem, but it is chronic, whereas the glucose surge is acute. The insulin saves your life.
But then there are those who turn glucose surges into a chronic problem, and they are the basis for what is now considered “normal.”
God help us.
The dose makes the poison my friend.
What’s your take on quinoa? I’ve always had rice with my meat but in the last year I’ve pretty much cut out rice. I just need something to go with the meat. I eat veggies too but it feels “odd” . I’ve been using quinoa as my rice remplacement.
I’ve been having Cous cous with meat instead of rice, if you put some spices an herbs in it then it tastes alright.
Cous cous is just small pellets of pasta.
Just looked at the pack you’re right. Should pay more attention myself.
It feels odd because you are not used to it. Eventually it will feel fine.
Try sweet potatoes if you need a carb.
Stay away from grains of all kinds.
No food can make you fat without eating above caloric maintenance, which is a combination of your basal metabolic rate + physical daily activity. That’s a biological fact. Link me a peer reviewed study in which someone gained fat in a caloric deficit and I’ll eat my words.
To address the article, you don’t need to count calories, but you’ll be better off if you do. You’ll know exactly how much calories and fats, proteins, and carbohydrates you’ve had. Why fuck around with guess work and estimates if you can know the exact amount? It’s not like it takes a long time, after a month it’s an automatic habit, especially if you use myfitnesspal. Takes me 5 minutes per day.
In in my mid 40s, have a 32″ waist, wear the same clothing size I wore in high school. I exercise only a few times a week.
1. I have not picked up a weight in years.
2. I have not counted calories in years.
Just stay off the sugars. No exceptions. Trust me. When I realized what high Fructose was in 2006 that was 15 lbs off in a month right there.
So you don’t eat any fruit?
At least one avocado a day (though I have not been shopping in a while and I have run out this week) but usually 2. Pistachios and at times I practically live on them because I don’t get time to shop and cook. I also eat grapefruits (good fat burning food BTW) and strawberries too when available. Cherries in the summer and plums in early fall when the trees are yielding.
Many people don’t count calories and never gain fat, that’s because they manage, for various reasons, to eat below or at maintenance consistently. I only recommend calorie counting to fat people, athletes, or weekend warriors who want to reach their muscular and strength potential (without drugs).
Sounds like you’re eating at maintenance or below maintenance (probably shifting between the two at various times) consistently, which means you won’t gain body fat, but you’re attributing this to the lack of sugar in your diet. Which may actually be the case, but not for the reason you believe. There’s no inherent biological mechanism in sugar that will make you gain body fat outside of a caloric surplus. Eliminating sugar is what may have helped you remain below maintenance or at maintenance consistently, simply because you removed extra calories. It could have been something else in place of the sugar, if the amount is equivalent, you’d gain the same result.
” There’s no inherent biological mechanism in sugar that will make you gain body fat outside of a caloric surplus. ”
Pretty sure this statement is not true.
Refined sugar is not natural and forces your body into spikes and dips in producing insulin.
Insulin is a fundamental hormone in your body and I bet this has meaningful effects on your overall endocrine behaviour, which is where all that muscle building testosterone comes from in the first place.
Matey, everything causes an insulin response.
Fat doesn’t.
Avocados and pistachios are chock full of (otherwise healthy) fat.
It’s about portion control. Once you instinctively know what a 700 calorie meal looks like, you don’t actually have to count the calories.
Nope. Refined sugar spikes the insulin levels. Insulin facilitates fat storage. Why are you digging in on this one so hard? You get so emotional about neutral subjects Cincy. You’re so invested. Why? Just learn from guys like Emerson Biggins.
So what? You say that like the amount of insulin doesn’t factor in. So give one little kid a sandwich and an apple. Give another little kid a large chocolate milkshake. See which one runs around like a little hyper-charged asshole and see which one acts like a human being. To dismiss the insulin/hormonal havoc caused by refined sugar is ridiculous.
Avocados & grapefruit are like nature’s very own perfectly created vitamin pills. Looks like you’ve got a lot of your vitamin & mineral bases covered.
Why did you ask him this? This does not follow from what he said.
Plenty of vitamin and minerals in beef and other animal products.
Mate, don’t try and fit him into your invalid argument. You are actually starting from your conclusion and working backwards trying remake the world in your image.
You have said things here that are either baseless or demonstrably wrong.
This is such an ignorant statement you should never speak on this subject again. The way that the body metabolizes sugar is well documented and the prosaic somersaults you have to turn to try and convince yourself otherwise are instructive.
If you are not going to bother to educate yourself on this matter please do not contribute to general ignorance by repeating these long debunks myths as if they are fact.
I eat the biggest portions possible. Currently 8% body fat. Calories are bullshit.
Ya, if you are doing heavy lifting. As I put in another post, when I was I had to force myself to eat. According to the fat calculator I would have been maybe 10%
I don’t do any lifting at all.
Then you are a freak of nature or don’t really have 8% bf. When I was 16 I could eat huge portions, not work out, and stay skinny. But if you are not a teenager, bodies just don’t work that way.
No I am a normal animal that eats the diet nature intended for it.
I think you miss my point – calories are bullshit. Its what you eat not how much you eat.
Consider this. Does a squirrel watch its portions or count calories? Why isn’t it fat?
Well, you see fat cats and dogs all the time. Yes, you can eat huge portions of bean sprouts, but your combined statements cannot all be true 1) you eat the biggest portions 2) you aren’t eating rabbit food 3) you don’t lift (exercise?) 4) still have 8% body fat 5) you have a normal metabolism.
.
As a few of the guys here – who seem to know a bit more than either of us – calories are not bullshit, they are everything regarding whether you gain or lose weight. Input minus output: whatever is left is either added to your bodyweight or subtracted.
Speak for yourself. Those guys don’t know more than me.
If you find yourself reducing the complexity of the human body to a simple equation, then you are on the wrong track.
What is the difference between fat dogs and lean squirrels? Who feeds the dogs? Who feeds the squirrels? Which one is eating a natural diet? My cat is not fat. Why is that?
1) I eat until I cannot eat anymore.
2) I eat large portions of fatty meat cuts supplemented by green vegetables.
3) I exercise but nothing approaching heavy lifting.
4) Body fat ranges from 10% to 8%. Last measured at 8%.
5) Metabolism is normal because I don’t eat junk.
No room in there for calories.
Why are dogs and cats fat? Have you looked at the primary ingredients in commercial pet food?
Number 1: GRAIN (corn or wheat).
Simply put, meat eaters get sick on a grain diet. They get fat, they get cancer, and they die early after a sickly life.
I feed my dogs raw meat scraps and they supplement with whatever carrion they find in the woods.
People I know with purebred dogs gape in horror when I tell them my dogs eat raw meat.
WTF? They’re predators. They are built to eat meat. Just like cats.
Not grain.
Humans? Started out as hunter gatherers eating mostly meat and wild foods. Grains were nowhere in the picture until about 10k years ago.
Anthropological studies show that once humans began farming and consuming grain, they became smaller, less vigorous, and arguably less intelligent,.
LCHF all the way! Fat satiates and doesn’t affect your blood sugar levels.
I thought most people here knew about insulin response, blood sugar spikes, false hunger pangs et al.
Evidently some still subscribe to the now thoroughly disproven lipid hypothesis and the completely bogus USDA diet guidelines.
My understanding is that, evolution/survival wise, our bodies only needed to survive 30 to 50 years tops. As science and general abundance increased our average lifespans have increased to over 80 years. This where meat eating poses a problem, over the long term.
Show me a study with someone gaining body fat in a caloric deficit. You won’t find one, because it can’t happen.
We are talking strictly about gaining body fat. That should be clear.
Yep, but how many foods lack other macronutrients? Most are a combination. And most fat only food is eaten with something else. Who eats butter or cooking oil by itself?
Empiricism is half the story.
Fat and protein are usually combined in animal foods (such as beef) necessarily there will be an insulin release to force storage of excess nutrients for later but this is different to the insulin surge you get from eating a nice fatty chocolate cake.
Excellent explanation.
Humans have always lived to 80 years for important evolutionary reasons. Life span reduced relatively recently (i.e. within the last 6000 years) due to “civilization”.
Gonna have to disagree, mate. Carbs cause an insulin response, and fats do not. Protein in sufficiently high doses will trigger it, as the body will convert excess proteins to sugars, but not nearly to the same degree.
While we’re on the subject, don’t ignore organ meats. Plenty of essential nutrients in liver, kidneys, etc. which are available in lesser quantity in muscle meats.
Of course, eggs are the full package. Everything you need to make a fully-functional baby chicken is in there.
Find the long post by J888 on this thread, he addresses your concern. His post is in response to me.
Insulin is important in the regulation of blood sugar, but its importance has been exaggerated because of the diabetes/insulin industry. Insulin itself has been found to account for only about 8% of the “insulin-like activity” of the blood, with potassium being probably the largest factor. There probably isn’t any process in the body that doesn’t potentially affect blood sugar.
Insulin release is also stimulated by amino acids such as leucine, and insulin stimulates cells to absorb amino acids and to synthesize proteins. Since insulin lowers blood sugar as it disposes of amino acids, eating a large amount of protein without carbohydrate can cause a sharp decrease in blood sugar. This leads to the release of adrenalin and cortisol, which raise the blood sugar. Adrenalin causes fatty acids to be drawn into the blood from fat stores, especially if the liver’s glycogen stores are depleted, and cortisol causes tissue protein to be broken down into amino acids, some of which are used in place of carbohydrate. Unsaturated fatty acids, adrenaline, and cortisol cause insulin resistance.
“Professional opinion” can be propagated about 10,000 times faster than research can evaluate it, or, as C. H. Spurgeon said, “A lie travels round the world while Truth is putting on her boots.”
In the 1970s, dietitians began talking about the value of including “complex carbohydrates” in the diet. Many dietitians (all but one of the Registered Dietitians that I knew of) claimed that starches were more slowly absorbed than sugars, and so should be less disruptive to the blood sugar and insulin levels. People were told to eat whole grains and legumes, and to avoid fruit juices.
In an old experiment, a rat was tube-fed ten grams of corn-starch paste, and then anesthetized. Ten minutes after the massive tube feeding, the professor told the students to find how far the starch had moved along the alimentary canal. No trace of the white paste could be found, demonstrating the speed with which starch can be digested and absorbed. The very rapid rise of blood sugar stimulates massive release of insulin, and rapidly converts much of the carbohydrate into fat.
Starch and glucose efficiently stimulate insulin secretion, and that accelerates the disposition of glucose, activating its conversion to glycogen and fat, as well as its oxidation. Fructose inhibits the stimulation of insulin by glucose, so this means that eating ordinary sugar, sucrose (a disaccharide, consisting of glucose and fructose), in place of starch, will reduce the tendency to store fat.Eating “complex carbohydrates,” rather than sugars, is a reasonable way to promote obesity. Eating starch, by increasing insulin and lowering the blood sugar, stimulates the appetite, causing a person to eat more, so the effect on fat production becomes much larger than when equal amounts of sugar and starch are eaten. The obesity itself then becomes an additional physiological factor; the fat cells create something analogous to an inflammatory state. There isn’t anything wrong with a high carbohydrate diet, and even a high starch diet isn’t necessarily incompatible with good health, but when better foods are available they should be used instead of starches. For example, fruits have many advantages over grains, besides the difference between sugar and starch. Bread and pasta consumption are strongly associated with the occurrence of diabetes, fruit consumption has a strong inverse association.
Cincinnatus, you are correct on this, the body has the ability to turn protein and fat into glucose, if you look at sugar from the energy side of calories, sugar is the most efficient source of energy for the body, for those of you who avoid sugar like the plague, don’t worry about it your body is taking the protein you eat and the fat you eat and turn it to glucose for your brain and your liver, the brain is the largest energy consumer in the human body and it can only run on 2 type of fuel ketone and glucose and the process to make ketone in the liver is very stressful for the body, so if you avoid sugar and don’t eat large amounts of fats or protein and find yourself being moody, space out and hard at concentrating it is your brain asking for more glucose. your liver needs glucose to make T3 from the T4 that your thyroid produces and also the liver needs glucose for the 2 detox pathway. What keeps us fat? slow functioning thyroid, the thyroid is what regulates energy production and expenditure.
A lot of people have been let to believe that sugar is bad for you, but it is not sugar that is the issue it is the body that is not able to move the sugar out of the blood and place it where it is needed, the intake of PUFAS oils is the number one factor of why the body is not able to process sugar, by blocking cellular energy production, the cell is not able to take the sugar (glucose) and burn it in the mitochondria and generation enough ATP for proper energy production.
Anyone interested in learning more about it google Dr Ray peat and Dr Barnes.
It is the result of a lack of activity from being indoors all day. I have had various indoor/outdoor cats over the years. None was ever fat because a good portion of the cats’ day was spent hunting, exploring, climbing, and all the stuff normal cats do in the wild.
Dogs are a bit of different story unless you leave in an isolated rural area with a farm that you can allow them to roam around.
From my studies of Antiquity, it seems from the extant biographies we have that many people lived into their 80’s.
Average lifespans were less than half of today although they have well documented cases of Egyptian Pharaohs living into their 90s
No, Bob’s correct. No BS as far as I can tell. If I want to giant an easy 6 pack (and lose weight) I eat the largest meals I can as often as I can – but I’m not talking about eating 20 tubs of icecream, just to be clear, just everyday foods.
If I want to gain some stomach fat, I’ll eat 3 normal-sized meals a day while sitting at my desk.
Then again, I suffer from a really high metabolism (did too much exercise during highschool days, stuff like cycling, running, etc), so it’s near impossible for me to become a fat fuck.
Counting calories almost never works. Also, you will get fat from eating too many carbohydrates, whereas it’s almost impossible to get fat from eating fat w/ low carb intakes.
You will not gain body fat unless you eat above caloric maintenance. Link me a peer reviewed study that demonstrates someone gained body fat in a caloric deficit. Good luck.
No, that isn’t entirely true. If a person eats over 150 grams of carbs a day they will gain fat weight. To my knowledge there hasn’t been a clinical study done on that level however there are plenty of articles written by people that details how they lost muscle mass and increased their fat mass when they were restricting calories and exercising.
I’m not necessarily disagreeing with you I’m saying there’s more to it than just “calories in, calories out”.
There’s no such thing as ”fat weight”. When sports scientists/biologists/medical scientists talk about weight, they mean the combined mass of the human body stemming from body fat, water, bones, organs. etc. The correct term is body fat i.e. the amount of adipose tissue in proportion to total mass.
Explain the particular mechanism that makes the body convert carbohydrates beyond 150 grams into body fat. I understand biology quite well and keep up to date with science journals related to nutrition and sports science almost on a daily basis and have never seen anything that resembles your assertion. What you’re saying contradicts basic biology taught in high school.
Furthermore, I can tell you from experience that what you’re saying is false. I’ve never once eaten less than 250 grams of carbohydrates per day (generally it’s about 350 – 400) since I’ve started training and have only gained muscle+fat in a caloric surplus. I can state this unreservedly as I track what I eat on a daily basis, like a religious monk.
“The correct term is body fat i.e. the amount of adipose tissue in proportion to total mass.”
And if you compute the percentages you get the lean and fat weights. I’m afraid you’re just wrong on this one.
This calculator will do it for you:
http://fitness.bizcalcs.com/Calculator.asp?Calc=Body-Fat-Navy
“Counting calories almost never works.”
And yet I do it successfully at will.
” . . . it’s almost impossible to get fat from eating fat w/ low carb intakes.”
And yet I do it successfully at will.
Well excuuuuse me, Mr. Scientist! Didn’t mean to try to throw you off with the wrong terminology. Good thing a petty nitpicker caught that otherwise I’d be using the wrong phrase for a minor point.
Anyways, the particular mechanism that triggers “body fat” storage is a little thing called insulin. Maybe you’ve heard of it. Consuming more than 150 – 200 grams of carbohydrate over the course of a day elevates a person’s blood sugar to the point the liver starts producing insulin to regulate it. I’m sure you know how insulin regulates blood sugar, right? I’m sure you do but for the sake of argument I’ll go over it as lightly as I can.
When you produce too much insulin over a period of time, as happens when a modern diet is high in processed carbohydrates, several things go wrong. First, muscle and liver cells just aren’t able to store a whole lot of glycogen (the stored form of glucose), so it’s easy to exceed storage capacity. The average person can only store a total of about 400 grams (less than one pound) of glycogen in liver and muscle tissue (even a highly trained athlete can only store perhaps 600 total grams). When your liver and muscles become filled with glycogen, any glucose remaining in the bloodstream that isn’t used in “real time” by your brain or muscles (such as during an intense workout) gets converted into triglycerides in the liver and sent to fat cells for storage.
When blood insulin levels are high, those same fat cells store not only the excess glucose but the fat you ate at your last meal. Moreover, high insulin signals the fat cells to hold on to the fat and not release it for energy. If the pattern of high insulin-generating meals continues, fat cells swell up and you gain weight. Eventually especially among people who don’t exercise much, muscle and liver cells start to become insulin resistant–their receptors become desensitized to insulin’s nutrient storage signals. Inactive folks generally have plenty of muscle and liver glycogen stored at all times. Because they are unpracticed at burning energy and inefficient at restocking energy from dietary nutrients, insulin takes ingested carbohydrates and fats on an express train, passing right through the liver, to their ultimate destination in fat cells.
Unless you are exercising incessantly to burn stored glycogen and fat, the more insulin your pancreas produces, the more resistant your muscle and liver cells can get. This happens because the genes responsible for these receptor sites turn themselves off or “down-regulate” in response to– and in defense against– the excessive insulin in your bloodstream.
The average man’s body has about 5-6 liters of blood, of which you only need about 4 grams (1 teaspoon) of dissolved glucose in order to properly fuel your brain and nerves. A 20 oz Coke has about 60 grams. A Powerbar has about 22 grams. If you are quite active your body will burn those up due to your enhanced metabolism. However, most people aren’t all that active throughout the day, therefore they won’t burn all that excess glucose. The worst thing I see at the gym are people that get on a treadmill and bust ass for damn near 2 hours, then get a 1000 calorie smoothie that has upwards of 80 grams of sugar.
The below link is by Tim Noakes, one of the original proponents of “low fat, high carb”. He has radically changed his views on carbohydrates and fat consumption in the diet. He is Carbohydrate Resistant (CR) and limits his intake to 50 grams a day.
http://www.runnersworld.co.za/nutrition/novel-dietary-ideas/
If you are in a caloric deficit you will store the excess glucose as fat to get it the hell out of your bloodstream, but; you will then release fat to cover your energy needs. The net effect is 0.
Note that I said you are in a caloric deficit. Factors that may prevent you from going into a caloric deficit, such as reducing your energy needs, are therefore not relevant.
Only if you are not continually in a high-insulin state. If a person is in a high-insulin state, then the energy from fat does not get released into the bloodstream. This is why fat people eat so much. They are literally starving because their cells aren’t getting any energy from their fat deposits, because insulin in their bloodstream is preventing its release. The cells start to wither and the impulse to eat is sent to the brain. Continuous high-insulin leads to Metabolic Syndrome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metabolic_syndrome
“Only if you are not continually in a high-insulin state.”
I don’t know about you, but I sleep.
I am quite familiar with metabolic syndrome, Tim Noakes, Peter Attia, Greg Ellis, Jeff Volek, Stephen Phinney, et al. The last time I was familiar with a carb was last summer when my blueberries ripe and I ate – a handful.
“They are literally starving because their cells aren’t getting any energy from their fat deposits . . .”
. . . and are not in a caloric deficit. They move less.
“. . . and are not in a caloric deficit. They move less.”
No, it’s because they have high-insulin. If they ate less carbs, they would lose weight. Exercise has very little to do with it.
” . . .because they have high-insulin . . .”
. . . they store sugar as fat, but are resistant to releasing it, which causes them to have less energy, which causes them to move less, because, they don’t have the energy to do so and are thus not in a caloric deficit.
If you are going to move, you must have the energy to do so. If you don’t eat it, it must come from your existing body mass.
You are listening to the right people, but you have not yet understood what they are saying.
Here’s how it works the other way around a bit:
Because they have high insulin, and do not move less, but are not releasing fat, they are driven to overeat to meet their energy needs, i.e. to be in caloric surplus.
“Because they have high insulin, and do not move less, but are not releasing fat, they are driven to overeat to meet their energy needs, i.e. to be in calo ric surplus.”
The caloric surplus is irrelevant. What’s relevant is insulin production. If someone were to eat enough sugar to be in a constant high-insulin state, they would not lose body fat regardless of how much they moved around, because insulin would be preventing the release of energy from fat cells. Yes, I agree activity is important, but not as important as keeping insulin levels down.
“The caloric surplus is irrelevant.”
But it exists.
“What’s relevant is insulin production.”
And I stipulated to insulin being a prime mover of the chain of events (although the prime cause is elevated glucose in the bloodstream which must be removed quickly).
“I agree activity is important . .. ”
Oddly enough, I don’t. You can loose weight easily enough by going to bed and staying there. The problem is that you will lose a disproportionate amount of muscle mass as well as fat.
” . . .they would not lose body fat regardless of how much they moved around, because insulin would be preventing the release of energy from fat cells.”
And so they would die. Dead people don’t move much and should not operate heavy machinery.
But if your protein intake is too low, you will lose muscle mass and perhaps put on some fat. Would that not be the case?
Dude, no one is saying that.
You successfully count calories? You must be a math whiz.
And you successfully get fat from eating high fat/low carb? Really?
There are loads.
Well said but do avoid siting from Wiki.
Calorie surplus/deficit is a red herring.
You only really need to worry about your insulin levels. If you are not eating foods that promote fat storage you will always be eating the appropriate amount of food to compensate your energy expenditure. The body naturally drives towards homeostasis.
And fat gain in a “calorie deficit” has been demonstrated (on a body fat percentage basis).
And they do die. Heart disease, stroke, diabetes.
It is demonstrated that hyperinsulemic obese people move less than fit healthy people…
Agree. Feeling hungry all the time sucks. the LFHC diet leaves you constantly thinking about eating and feeling hungry.
BTDT.
LCHF diet leaves you not feeling hungry, leaner, meaner, higher T, higher energy, and healthier blood chemistry overall.
Keep on truckin’ man!
I’m still waiting to see a peer reviewed study demonstrating someone gaining adipose tissue while in a caloric deficit.
It raises your test too man. Makes you a fucking predator!
Hyperinsulemia will prevent the release of nutrients from fat, as will general excess insulin.
“The body naturally drives towards homeostasis.”
Which is one of the reasons you should avoid statins. Your body is in the state it is because it needs to be. Forcing one aspect of the system inherently forces all aspects of the system with potentially disastrous results.
Better to change ones operating environment so that homeostasis naturally falls is some optimum range.
Note that a person who is over fat or under muscled is in homeostasis and will naturally tend to remain that way unless some new environmental element is introduced.
” . . . on a body fat percentage basis . . .”
Certainly. I can do that at will. It’s the real reason exercise is important in “weight” loss. It doesn’t have anything to do with burning calories. As I noted you can lose weight easily enough by going to bed.
It’s about lean mass retention.
The hardest thing I have to do when getting someone lean, particularly women, is getting them to understand that weight is a red herring (with some caveats for power to weight ratio athletes, who are the only ones have any real use for a scale).
Exercising for the purpose of burning calories is one of the dumbest things we do, and yet if you read the literature you would think it’s the only reason.
As I’ve written here before, exercising to burn calories is like driving your car to burn petrol (with a caveat for pre oil injection SAABs).
“You must be a math whiz.”
I went from 6th grade to college physics. Greg Ellis can maintain a precise 100 calorie deficit (or surplus), but he is an exercise physiologist. He makes his food in two equal portions and burns one in a bomb calorimeter.
Such measures are only necessary at the extremes of precision. Eat three eggs a day and no math is required at all. You are in a calorie deficit or you are dead. On a few occasions I have eaten nothing at all for a week, but I do not recommend that.
Right now I’m in my spring lean out. I’m eating one pound of beef and a dozen eggs a day. The calories were calculated years ago and no further math is required. I am in a calorie deficit. The amount of the deficit varies day to day, but I don’t care.
“And you successfully get fat from eating high fat/low carb? Really?”
Really. No problem at all. On “zero” carbs. I’ve been doing it all winter, that’s why I’m leaning out now. I only stay really lean for the competitive season. It’s not healthy and I don’t recommend it to the general populace.
Cincinnatus, no one will provide that paper. They instead will continue to recite the thoroughly debunked “insulin hypothesis,” explain insulin’s role in fat storage without any relevant context (such as…what happens to insulin and lipolisys in a timeframe beyond consumption of insulinogenic food with a net calorie deficit).
If you eat a 2000 calorie dose of sugar one day, and fast for 6 days, you will lose weight due to the calorie deficit – insulin will have decreased post absorption, and lipolysis will have resumed. Similarly, if you need 2500 calories for maintenance in 1 day, and eat 1250 calories of purely refined carbohydrate only, insulin will have gone up and down, and there will be a net loss.
It is ridiculous to argue that carbs make you fat because they trigger insulin, while ignoring the post-absorbative timeframe in a calorie deficit. “Calories are bullshit” is an asinine comment. You know when carbs make you fat? When there isn’t a sustained post absorbative lypolitic period exceeding temporary fat gain – as in, when there is a maintained calorie surplus.
People who argue that reducing the complexity of metabolism to a simple calorie counting equation is wrong, yet simultaneously reduce the complexity of metabolism to an explanation of insulin’s role in in fat storage in the post-prandial time frame are ignorant.
They are probably also unaware that some of the most insulinogenic foods are protein based and often carb-free – Look up the insulin response of beef and whey.
Some interesting points – look up the elevated fasting blood glucose levels of chronic low carb dieters. This is due to the physiological insulin resistance their bodies develop to handle a low carb/high fat diet. Typically quickly reversed within a few days of carb intake.
Dietary fat is stored more efficiently than carbs as body fat. Carbs undergo a less efficient process on their journey to fat cells since they are not fat.
And this writing will probably have been a huge waste of time, some will think it was too long. The people that disagree will keep disagreeing. The people who agree with keep agreeing. At least I’ll know there are still people that will adamantly defend the magic of low carb, say calories are bullshit, and ignore the truth about human metabolism and energy balance, defending their positions with statements like “why aren’t wild squirrels fat.”
If you’re low carb and think the absence of carbs and their effect on insulin per se is the cause of your fat loss or weight maintenance, add 1000 calories a day of your fat of choice to your current dient (heavy cream, butter, lard, etc.) and see if you maintain the same body composition and weight.
First of all, fat storage can happen without insulin by the
mechanism of the acylation stimulating protein. Secondly, carbohydrates are not the most insulinogenic, many proteins are equally insulinogenic or even more so. Thirdly, without insulin you will become ill and eventually die.
I think you’ve been reading too many paleo and low carb nuts,
who are charlatans after a quick buck. Nearly everything you eat
causes an insulin response. There’s nothing evil about insulin and it’s actually extremely important for someone wanting to gain high levels of muscle mass and strength.
Insulin is stimulated from the pancreas by an increase in
blood sugar, which happens whenever you eat protein or carbohydrates. Insulin binds receptors in cell membranes, allowing the storage of glucose in the cell and muscle tissue through glycogen synthase, the latter is used for muscular contraction. Some glycogen is also stored within the liver specifically for the purpose of maintaining optimal blood sugar levels. The mechanism behind this is the hormone glucagon, which converts the glycogen stored in liver cells into blood glucose to maintain the proper function of various organs in the body.
Insulin also increases glucose transport proteins, raising
muscle cell glucose saturation. It further raises the uptake of amino acids into muscle tissue and stimulates RNA translation, aiding protein synthesis. Insulin is as important for increasing muscle mass as it is for energy production, hence the reason bodybuilders inject it, as it’s one of the most anabolic hormones in the body.
And that’s just for athletes and weekend warriors. Without
optimal insulin levels, the nutrients we consume are near enough useless. Food that we consume is converted into various molecules (amino acids from protein, triglycerides from fat, and glycogen from protein) and used for energy, repair
of tissues, and cellular function. Without insulin, this cannot happen. Period. Furthermore, with the omission of insulin
and its function of transporting and storing nutrients, blood glucose will increase significantly leading to a number of health complications.
Insulin can lead to fat storage, but only if you’re in a caloric
surplus and under some circumstances in maintenance, but it cannot happen in a deficit. Why? Because in a caloric deficit, your body uses nutrients and their converted molecules to maintain the proper function of the body. Hence the reason you lose fat and muscle in the deficit, stored fat and lean tissue is utilized by a body in a deficit to make up for it.
I’m still waiting for some to show me a person gaining adipose tissue in a caloric deficit in a controlled study. You’ll be in a coffin having died from old age before you find it.
Swallow your egos people and listen to this guy, he knows what he’s talking about and judging from most of the posts here, you do not.
Have you had proper schooling or spent time reading through stuff yourself (perhaps both)?
LMFAO. I’ve just googled all your paragraphs and they are almost all word for word copy/pastes you’re passing off as your own. Don’t get involved in discussions if you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Wow, you got me. Now disprove anything I’ve posted or go fuck yourself.
Go read J888s post in response to me, he’s already done it.
No, bitch. YOU respond to me. If you’re gonna divert your eyes and have your boyfriend talk for you then go make me a sandwich while I hang out with the guys.
Why would I waste time typing out an elaborate response with the same information when someone else has already done it? No need to get upset, admit you were wrong, man up, and move along. Acting like a little man child just makes you look pathetic.
I haven’t seen anything by you or him to refute my points. Calling people ignorant and stating “it’s debunked” doesn’t make it so. Show me where I’m wrong or go fuck off. I thought you were really into the science of dieting and shit? Why are you relying on someone else to make your points for you? And please, I’d like to know what part of his post was the strongest?
First of all, they’re not your points, you copy/pasted them from a book.
Secondly, J8888 and myself (in my long response to EnglishBob) go over the reason why insulin cannot store body fat in a deficit, though j8888 does so in more detail, whereas I went over purpose of insulin.
Thirdly, I’m not relying on someone else, j8888 made his post independent of me. I’m not going to type out several paragraphs saying the same thing when someone else has done it to a very high standard. And it’s a bit hypocritical to accuse someone of relying on someone else when you copy/pasted nearly everything.
Fourthly, I’ve already broken my number one rule: don’t debate on the internet, for obvious reasons, and don’t feel like wasting anymore time than I already have. The info is all there, I can’t connect the dots and make it make sense for you, only you can do that. If you ask j8888 nicely, maybe he’ll help you out.
I made those points in response to YOU. I was debating with YOU. I even gave some links to show where I was coming from. Instead, you changed the subject and attacked my sourcing of the posts. I didn’t include citations as it wasn’t relevant to a short Internet discussion. If I had posted those as an article, in order to prove myself as an expert, or make money, then you’d have a point. I was merely trying to explain myself, from a diet regimen that I’ve found to be beneficial.
His points about storing body fat in an deficit is patently ridiculous. How does eating 2000 calories of carbs and then starving for 6 days an indicator of normal metabolism or diet? I’ve looked up some links on protein consumption and nowhere does anyone say protein consumption raise insulin anywhere near glucose. How about some links? I’ve re-read his post 3 times now and I’m still not sure what he’s trying to say. I’m not familiar with a lot of the lingo and neither he nor you have made any attempts to clarify yourselves.
I started off partially agreeing with you and trying to engage in a friendly debate. Instead, you’ve issued ultimatums and when I tried to explain myself, you discarded it out of hand.
“I can ‘t connect the dots and make it make sense for you”
If you are such a goddamned expert, then why can’t you take the time to explain yourself in a civilized manner? Nitpicking over “fat weight”? Pointing out my post was mostly from a book? So what?
Honestly you haven’t engage in debate, you’ve only made declarative statements and then dared me to disprove you with evidence that doesn’t exist for a viewpoint that nobody is holding.
All good points, especially the one about weight. I have gained about 2 pounds in the past week and my waist has gotten smaller while strength has increased. Not a problem for me.
Only drug pushers recommend statins. According to my vitals I should be on them. By why would I take something that makes me sick?
You are a bodybuilder? How do you define “really lean”?
Pump your brakes dude nobody said insulin was evil. Controlled studies don’t prove anything outside of the unrealistic and highly specific circumstances in which they are set. They provide interesting results that generally create more questions than they answer. At some point you have to use logic.
For starters the body does not metabolize calories it metabolizes nutrients and it metabolizes different nutrients differently. Once you recognize this you quickly realize the irrelevance of calories. Otherwise, explain to me how if petroleum contains calories why I can’t drink it and why if drink in excess of my maintenance level why it won’t make me fat.
Maintenance level is basically a truism if you are not eating junk. If you let your body guide your food consumption you will always be at “maintenance” without needing to count calories anymore than a squirrel counts his calories.
Last explain to me how I am able to lose fat and gain muscle while being in “maintenance”? According to your hypothesis this should be impossible.
No, I’m a cyclist. I used to road race, but these days I only do “traditional British” riding; timed events on a fixed wheel. Mostly through Strava. Except for the odd club run for social purposes I’ve lost my taste for organized events and prefer riding in solitude. I predicted a lot of things about computer communications back in the day, by I admit that being able to participate in actual sport was one I missed completely.
I learned to manipulate my body composition because pursuit like events and hill climbs have different optimums and I enjoy them both too much to give one up, so I concentrate on one for a while, then the other.
I define really lean in the 5 to 7% range. Below that my ability to produce power completely falls apart. Hormone levels get all fucked up and fat won’t release for energy.
And I only go that low when I’m seriously going after a record. Off season I’ll run 10 to 12% which seems to be the sweet spot for “Health and Fitness,” although there’s nothing wrong with 15 for the average Joe.
I like to get things done, have no interest in posing and look just fine naked. I may only show ab definition for several weeks out of the year, but my legs are so fine that even straight guys do double takes. Women cat call, and I’m old enough to be their grandfather.
False.
In the study below, subjects eating
the low carb diet (where 30% of their calories came from carbs) saw a drop of 43% in their testosterone to cortisol ratio. Not good.
Meanwhile, the control group (who got 60% of their calories from carbs) saw no change in their testosterone/ cortisol ratios.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20091182
No, that isn’t entirely true. If a person eats over 150 grams of carbs a day they will gain fat weight.
That statement is kind of simplisic, since it depends on a lot of factors. The kind of activities you are engaged in, intake of other macronutrients, etc.
Emerson,
Regarding protein raising insulin, read this http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.full.pdf
That was published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, and demonstrates the insulin index of various foods. You can see clear examples, such as fish raising insulin MORE than white pasta.
Regarding the link you posted by Tim Noakes, he states that his diet with 50g carbs/day is the level that “allows [him] to regulate [his] body weight effortlessly without hunger.” He provides no data on his calorie intake. He explains that he is “carbohydrate resistant” but provides no data on why, then explains that he “believes” “CR” is more widespread than people think with no explanation.
Regarding energy balance. A person has a daily calorie need – whether from the body or from food. As an overly simplistic explanation; if a person expends 2500 calories in a day, and eats 2000 calories, 500 will need to be sourced from non-dietary sources – the body. This, even if 300g of his 2000 calorie diet is from carbs (or 1200 calories).
Your explanations regarding insulin typically ignore relevant context. Your explanations all explain what happens at the time of carbohydrate intake. Perhaps you are unaware, but for the insulin effects you discuss to result in weight gain, there must be a maintained dietary calorie surplus. Essentially, you are assuming the existence of a dietary calorie surplus in your explanations of insulin’s role in weight gain.
I used the 7 day example to demonstrate the importance of net intake and time. On a smaller timeframe, if someone who needed to consume 2500 calories in a day to maintain bodyweight ate 400 grams of carbs in one sitting (imagine the insulin response!) and nothing else the whole day, 900 calories would still need to be sourced from the body to satisfy the person’s energy needs. This is where context is relevant. After eating that large carb load, insulin would be produced, fat oxidation would be suppressed, muscle and liver glycogen stores would be replenished, and yes, there may be some fat synthesis from those carbs due to the possibility of a surplus in that small timeframe. Then across the rest of the day, insulin levels would decrease, fat oxidation would resume, and if no more calories were taken in, the person would have more fat used for fuel than was created from the meal.
Look into examples of “the potato diet” made famous after a person decided to eat nothing but potatoes for 30 days and lost weight rapidly. Plain potatoes are very filling, and it is tough to eat enough per day to get enough calories for weight maintenance. 500+g of carbs/day, yet dramatic body fat loss. At 128 cal per potato, one would need to eat over 15/day to get 2000 calories. http://www.calorieking.com/foods/calories-in-fresh-or-dried-vegetables-potatoes-baked-flesh-skin_f-ZmlkPTcxMDc0.html.
And it is very fascinating that low carb diets can cause a type of insulin resistance. Cells effectively become insulin resistant to ensure glucose priority goes to the brain. This is often accompanied by elevated fasting blood glucose. Look up physiological insulin resistance.
I’ll answer any more specific points you have to make if you want, or any I missed. I think I’ve hit the big ones. I used to believe as you do, in the insulin hypothesis, which is why I changed my fairly high carb diet that got me so lean I had veins on my abs, and adopted a near 0 carb diet. I ignored the layer of fat accumulating on my abs, because I was sold on the insulin hypothesis.
Then, when I finally admitted to myself that I was gaining weight, and maybe I was wrong, a couple of major questions came into my mind. If carbs:insulin are the cause of obesity and weight gain, how does the metabolism respond to a low calorie high carb diet – does it just magically drop to below your dietary intake if carbs are high? If someone eats nothing but protein and fat, and eats 3-4000 calories per day, does their body just magically use the extra calories or shit them out? Why do the leanest people usually eat carbs, while low carb advocates usually look…not not in shape? Once I learned how easily dietary fat is stored as fat, relative to carbs, I couldn’t look back (remember that carbs must be converted to fat, an inefficient process). And really, I loved eating fatty foods so much and didn’t really care that much about carbs – well finally accepting that I’d need to pay attention to calories (when low carb works its because of calorie reduction), and carbs are necessary for peak physical performance, has resulted in me returning to top physical shape.
Finally, here are a couple of posts written by a neurobiologist that studies body fat regulation professionally. They thoroughly discuss the insulin hypothesis, why it is wrong, and the studies that thoroughly refute it. Remember, I started my first post in response to Cincinnatus’ calling for someone to provide a source demonstrating that weight gain can happen in a calorie deficit (still nothing provided to that effect). Once I realized the only way I could continue to believe the insulin hypothesis was by rereading pro-lc arguments and by ignoring (rather than refuting) the evidence that the insulin hypothesis of obesity was wrong, I changed my views.
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2011/08/carbohydrate-hypothesis-of-obesity.html
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/01/insulin-and-obesity-another-nail-in.html
How much sugar would one need to consume to be in a constant high insulin state?
First, where has fat gain in a calorie deficit been demonstrated?
Second, has it been demonstrated as an increase in fat mass? The way you worded your response (on a body fat % basis) would not necessarily be a measure of fat gain; if a person lost more lean mass than fat, his bf% could theoretically increase, with an actual fat mass loss.
There are quality calories and there are empty calories and there are downright nasty calories (aka alcohol). Your point is well taken but the trick is getting a healthy combination of calories.
Jeep didn’t mention caloric deficits at all. You just took the ball and ran to a subject you wanted to comment on.
A guy who eats 3000 calories via lean meat, milk, beans, fruits will have far more balanced insulin levels, therefore less fat storage.
A guy who eats 3000 calories via starch, sugar and fructose will pack a lot more fat due to the skyrocketed insulin.
Insulin facilitates fat storage. That’s why the land whales exist. They’re not all knocking down 9000 calories a day.
The problem is modern life is sedentary, and has been for a long time. The human body is designed to be active for the majority of the day.
There was an archeological study of the leg bones of Neolithic settlers in Central Europe. The results were ‘interesting’ in comparing the lower leg bones of the earliest settlers to their descendants 3000 years later.
“Macintosh concluded that the mobility of early farmers–7,300 years ago–was about at the level of today’s student cross-country runners.
In just over 3,000 years mobility was reduced to the “level of those students rated as sedentary.”
Over time, our leg bones changed due to less intense activity.”
http://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/from-athletes-to-couch-potatoes-humans-through-6000-years-of-farming
Calorie maintenance is a myth. I don’t count calories, I don’t worry about macro-nutrient ratios. 8 – 10% body fat without training hard.
The older you get the clearer it becomes that calories are bullshit.
All that means is you’re eating at maintenance or below maintenance consistently and have consequently re-comped. Calories are not bullshit, go read a science book. What you’re saying is at odds with modern science. You should write a paper, you’ll get a nobel prize for discovering something new.
“Maintenance” is a red herring. If you are not eating junk by definition you will be at “maintenance”. This is says nothing about how the body metabolizes different nutrients. If you are below “maintenance” on one particular day your body will reduce its energy expenditure or you will consume an increased amount the following day. Homeostasis.
How did you measure your body fat percentage, did you do it yourself? And what kind of equipment was used?
My thoughts exactly brother
True,i believe some people are just unable to digest carbs properly,there is no way in hell i can get shredded if i don’t completely cut out my carbs,even if my calories are good i lose weight for 2-3 weeks and then stop completely because my metabolism adapted,but when i go on ketogenic diet,i eat as much as i want and lose fat like crazy,i lost 7kg in 2 weeks already and i gained some strength (my main lifts have gone up),1kg per week is my goal now,easy.No refeed days as well.
You have just disproved the calorie hypothesis.
Agreed. And I afraid I will have to recommend strongly against wasting your money on this book. His central thesis is the debunked calorie myth and this will ultimately lead you to failure.
The Calorie Myth takes no account of the way your body metabolizes food and actually becomes self-contradictory once you start to explore it. Furthermore, it implies that the complex universe that is the human body is as simple as a child’s calculator (calories in equals calories out). It is not.
Anyone that tells you calories in equals calories out is the answer to fat loss is demonstrating their ignorance of human metabolism, basic science and >i>basic math!. This equation is an equality! This means it is a truism – calories in will always equal calories out!
The key to fat loss is stop eating things that contribute to fat storage. As you said Dok, this is primarily sugar.
I think maybe it’s not calories you eat, but the calories your body absorbs. If you have shitty (no pun intended) intestines and does not take in as much calories and you shit it out, then you don’t get fat. You’ll look malnourished.
Yeah agreed, it’s nonsense to say that all calories are the same and it doesn’t matter what type they are. The body metabolizes, processes, stores and uses different types of energy in completely different ways, using completely different metabolic processes, and it’s just glib to ignore that and reduce this subject to a trite formula like “calories in = calories out.”
Further more, meal timing DOES matter, the new research coming out now is showing a very strong link between your body clock i.e diurnal rhythm and your body mass composition. It’s hormonal.
TLDR; do NOT buy this book. It’s written by an ignorant imbecile and is WRONG.
THIS. “Like a full body inflammation.”
That’s how I understand the fat epidemy nowadays.
People are destroying their bodies with wheat, sugar & carbos, and their bodies try to alert them via inflammation. But the vast majority of the people prefer their vices over health.
It’s a complete shame.
Increase your profit margin by willfully misleading people seems to be the industry standard. Ignorance == Ka-ching!
I’m understanding that sugars and starches are being tied to feeding cancer cells.
I’m just beginning to think whatever the media or health care industry pushes, just look at the polar opposite, therein lies the truth.
Yet fruitarians (people who consumes >60% of calories from fruit) are unanimously lean.
hmm….
Bullshit pseudoscience. As long as you hit your protein requirements and eat less calories than you burn you will lose fat and retain muscle.. A sugar calorie is in no way more fattening than a fat calorie. Low carb diets are generally low in calories since fat and protein are satiating, and also since eating nothing but meat, cheese and leaves gets old fast and you will naturally want to eat less. So eating low carb is one way to lose fat that can be successful but it is not magic and sugar is not poison.
Ignore Limits, I enjoyed this article and wish you the best with your book. I notice that when it comes to achieving excellent physical fitness, you’re promoting a diet rich in protein… I’m with you! You glaze-over (pardon the pun) fat consumption though. I for one am pro-fat (ie. fatty fish, butter and even the fat off of a steak from time to time). Note: I am NOT however in favor of the fat that comes along with mc-milkshakes and other processed/sugary garbage. Any thoughts?
If the shit hits the fan, all those lean guys will die like flies but the land whales will have their fat bellies to live on. Fat is good! Haha
I fooled them, Grandma, I learned how to live off their fat bellies, and it’s not like they can out run me.
How will the tubbies evade predators or catch food? Their slow ponderous gaits will leave them at the mercy of the leaner, quicker, and more intelligent members of the species.
History doesn’t lie boys.
A good culling is what the species needs.
Just like a deer herd needs wolves and mountain lions to keep it healthy.
Take away the predators, and the herd population explodes and herd members with inferior genes procreate in this artificially safe environment. Proven.
Put humans in here and add a government which subsidizes reproduction of the most inferior members of the species and you have a very sick herd that’s on the precipice of a population crash.
The main key is to keep your body’s insulin production to a minimum. That means restrict carbs to only get from leafy vegetables. Avoid all grains like wheat, oats, barely, millet, rice, and corn. Pass on legumes like beans, lentil, peanuts, and cashews. Lift weights and walk. Avoid injuries by lifting moderate weights.
I checked the comments on amazon, to be honest they don’t look genuine to me. They’ve all been submitted within a very short period of time and are all overwhelmingly positive and lacking critical notes.
Just saying …
I lost weight in my teen years. It was pretty simple actually.
Stop snacking on garbage. No chips, pretzels, pastries, cereal or whatever other kind of junk food you can think of. No processed crap. Eat fruit whenever you get hungry in between meals. Never eat just because you’re bored or to pass the time. Ever. Eat to live, not the other way around. If you are a late night snacker or can’t fall asleep hungry, eat an apple and chug some water and get the fuck to sleep. Lack of sleep does way more than just put bags under your eyes.
Drink plenty of water and give up soft drinks completely. I cant even drink soda anymore, it is far too sweet for my taste buds now. No redbull or energy drinks, not even the sugar free snake oil. Give up beer too, if you can. It is still my guilty pleasure, and if I didn’t drink beer, I’d be really trim but I’m working on it.
Stay active, move your body, or at least dedicate time almost everyday to do something physical. Even if it is just walking for 30 minutes, something to get your heart pumping and blood flowing.
It really is pretty basic. Stop eating shit food and drinks and start being physical. The reason people fail is because they have no discipline or will power. End of story.
Fuck you guys. I’m fat and you just don’t know how to handle this much woman! Besides, bones are for dogs, REAL men like meat! And I’m beautiful no matter what, it’s society that’s brainwashed all you Douchebag-Awkward-Creepers to think thin is beautiful! We’re ALL beautiful on the inside and outside! To conclude – THE END
Did you enter ‘cliché’ into Google translate for that?
If you’re joking I just looked pretty stupid
“Did you enter ‘cliché’ into Google translate for that?”
That would be a yes.
“If you’re joking I just looked pretty stupid”
Naaaaaaah! Just new here. Stick around and it will go away by itself.
You sound like a fat acceptance feminists.
Yeah;
Feminist logic.
On themselves;
“We are all beautiful on the inside and outside. Every inch of every one of us is perfect.”
On men;
“Men with receding hairlines should be killed.”
And short guys. They need to be shoved into ovens. I don’t care if you can fix fat but you can’t fix short, still, not okay!
Sarcasm meter detects sarcasm here.
Or if faulty reading, this poster is seriously fucked in the head.
If not, great post.
Lol
Once I found out how carbs and sugar work to jack up insulin levels (and thereby cause fat gain) I looked at how much sugar is in most food. It’s no surprise this country has a weight problem.
Solid post SJ – all good points that keep it simple as it needs to be.
Most food listed as low or reduced fat are full of sugar which turns to fat when it goes into your body. A lack of education an discipline is contributing to the fatopolypse.
I’d rather choose the sugar-free item (which has more fat) than the fat-free item (which has more sugar) Sugar is horrible for the body and there are so many misconceptions about fat
Exactly right.
Artificial sweeteners are poison too. And in some ways worse for you than real sugar.
Thumbs up for your transformation.
The article misses the most important point: It’s all in your head. But you mention it in your book.
If you truly want to lose fat, the “how” is going to take you 10 minutes to figure out. So it was for me when I weighed 260 pounds. When I decided (not wished) to lose it, I realized that I had always known what to do: Fucking eat less and healthy.
Also, I am challenging the idea that you can build muscle while losing fat. Keyword anabolism vs. catabolism. Training may be good anyway, but calorie deficit is key. I’d even say that training heightens your desire to eat more, thus I would not train during fat loss phases; assuming that training primarily destroys muscle fiber (to build it back up), it could also be a bad thing to do it in a catabolic state (where muscle fiber and fat are broken down for energy).
” . . . thus I would not train during fat loss phase . . .”
Don’t do it. Continuing to train minimizes muscle loss. At higher body fat percentages it may even eliminate it. You need to continue providing the stimulus that muscle mass is necessary.
Source?
Every exercise physiologist on the planet that I know of, but I’ll recommend Lyle McDonald. Just read his stuff, don’t try to converse with him directly – trust me on this one.
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/
Ive lost 30 pounds since the superbowl with minimal exercise. Caloric deficit is the answer. Ive found that lots of meat and salad goes a long way to achieving it. Pass on the carbs for a bit.
At 48, I am still trying to find what works for me. When I was younger and lifting 3 times a week I had to force myself to eat or else I would burnout half way through the workout.
Breakfast: egg, fruit, yogurt smoothie; and some sliced meat.
Lunch: 1/4 lb of meat (steak, lean hamburger, quality cold cuts) two veg (corn, peas, carrots, beans or the like) a garden salad and a glass of milk.
Dinner: Similar to lunch with a side or rice or potatoes
Plus a snacks in between meals: nuts, yogurt, or some fruit.
Again, what was weird was that I had to eat even when I wasn’t hungry. I didn’t lose any weight but dropped fat and gained muscle.
.
At the moment I don’t have ready access to a gym or weights so my exercise is limited to calisthenics, jump rope and those rubber tube with handles thingies. However, I have cut my diet way down although I splurge if I am out on a date. Generally high fibre cereal, fruit smoothies, high-water veg, low fat ham and hot-and-sour soup. I’ve dropped 5 or 10 lbs recently but have a persistent spare tire.
By cutting your diet way down your metabolism has over time adjusted itself to your current caloric intake.
Also, I suspect that your protein intake is on the low side. Those pounds you dropped are most likely water weight combined with some loss of muscle mass.
Part of the loss is just a colon cleansing, but I drink lots of fluid and use ham, eggs and soy protein to keep the count up.
I have no idea what your body composition is. In order for you tot find out you can have it measured in a BodPod to get accurate numbers. You can calculate what your needs are based on those results and your daily activities. As a baseline.
Regarding protein requirement, according to the RDA handbook 0.8 g/kg (0.36 g/lb) protein per day should suffice. For a 200 lb man that’s a 72 grams of protein per day.
Guys like Alan Aragon and Lyle McDonald recommend 1.5 g/lb protein per day for strength- and power athletes. So for a lean 200 lb that’s 300 grams of protein per day.
Interestingly the countries with the lowest levels of diabetes are mostly in Africa. Starvation works.
For those interested in hearing one of the world’s most brilliant minds when it comes to nutrition and health: https://youtu.be/nhzV-J1h0do. His take home: reduce sugar and carbohydrate as some of the other seasoned posters have stated.
This documentary provides an example of how it all works in practice:
Lyle McDonald sums it up nicely. It boils down to creating a caloric deficit. But not haphazardly; protein and fat intake must be set, otherwise you will end up skinny fat.
=================================
The Fundamentals of Fat Loss
Ok, before I talk details, let me spell out how I would set up the most basic fat loss diet on the planet. These criteria are in order of importance, by the way and are:
1 Create an appropriate caloric deficit/set caloric intake appropriately
2 Set protein intake
3 Set dietary fat intake
4 Everything else depends
http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/fat-loss/the-fundamentals-of-fat-loss-diets-part-1.html/