Training & Nutrition - I finally have found a way to eat that is healthy and keeps the weight off

Here is the way I have been eating for the last year. Never felt better in my life.



4-6 meals a day



1 tbs fish oil Daily

protein size of palm of hand Every meal

non starchy veggies unlimited Every meal

nuts small hand full or 1 tbs oil Every meal

max 20 gram carb from fruit/starchy veg per meal weekday

max 40 gram carb from fruit/starchy veg per meal weekend

Don't eat after 5pm except post workout everyday



only grass fed/free range meats

no grain or grain products

no refined or processed anything

no legumes

no sugars

no juice

no dairy

no salt



Lost 20 lbs of fat and gained 10 lbs muscle all tested with hydrostatic weighing. Just wanted to share since it has worked so well for me. This is how humans ate for the last 2.5 million years up untill recently and after you do it for a while you will know it is what you were designed for.

Note: first couple of weeks you may feel like hell as you detox.



cheers

Humans didnt use lighting, plumbing or central heating either for the previous 2.5 million years.

I prefer to emulate humans of modern times, you can pick the caveman type to emulate. To each his own :)

that's pretty hard core, good for you

i like juice and legumes are a great source of protein! i also think it is good to take in some salt, especially if you've been working out.

v1k1ng1001 (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?u=69128)
Actually juice is all cho and legumes as will with a little protein but the bio availability is super low because it is incased in fiber.

Jarery

Average modern diet = mostly refined carbohydrates = obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2315516&page=1

If you want to believe that the reason for obesity is carbs, thats fine, you stick with your paleo diet.
I'll choose to believe obesity is from overconsumtion of food, and especially crap food, and i'll continue to eat food from all food types and not restrict anything.

"refined carbs" big difference I eat plenty of carbs

I read your link.

They blame sugary drinks as the no 1 cause. They aslo say the following:

"In the developing world, beef is in part the culprit.
Popkin points a finger at the growing consumption of dairy, poultry, and other meat products.
As beef and vegetable oil prices fell, more and more people gave up rice and noodles in favor of fatty meats and fried food, he said.
Using China as a case study, Popkin said that the country now had a 25 percent obesity rate — an unknown phenomenon 20 years ago. "

So according to your posted link, obesity seems to be casued from people moving away from grains and noodles and eating beef. Not really a good link to be posting in defence of your paleo diet.

Interesting I eat allot of beef sometimes a pound a day and my weight has dropped and my performance has gone up. My hdl ldl tryglicerides and blood pressure numbers have improved. I must point out I eat only grass fed beef as the fat is very different than grain fed beef, grass fed is rich in alpha lipoic acid conjugated linoleic acids and omega-3 fatty acids. All I can say is that after switching from a high carb low fat diet my health has improved dramatically and I keep very accurate performance metrics.

The China study was an epidemiological study. Epidemiological studies only show corelations, and correlations do not equal causation. There have been plenty of clinical trials looking at the role of saturated fat and cholesterol on heart disease and overall mortality, so why do you need to justify your position using an epidemiological study that also found all sorts of correlations like smoking decreases cancer rates

1.) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstra ctPlus&list_uids=2643423&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_DocSum (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=2643423&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_DocSum)

In this double-blind, randomized trial, the most powerful study of all, there were no decrease in CHD from lowering saturated fat by half, and decreasing cholesterol from 207 to 175.

2.) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=Abstra ctPlus&list_uids=2571009&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_docsum (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=2571009&query_hl=12&itool=pubmed_docsum)

Here, lowering fat intake and increasing the ratio of polyunsaturated fat to saturated fat did nothing for decreasing CHD.

I do agree very strongly with you in the point of sugery drinks which cause a insulin spike and resulting negative hormonal cascade. I also avoid fried foods.

Here is an excelant resource

http://thepaleodiet.com/

Loren Cordain, Ph.D., is the man if you really want to know how you were designed to eat for max performance imho. Everybody is different and maybe you were blessed with genes that allow you to eat a modern diet and stay healthy I like pizza and icecream as much as the next guy but unfortunatly I am not so lucky and ballon up from my healthy 175 to 212 if I eat unchecked :(

The China study was an epidemiological study. Epidemiological studies only show corelations, and correlations do not equal causation. There have been plenty of clinical trials looking at the role of saturated fat and cholesterol on heart disease and overall mortality, so why do you need to justify your position using an epidemiological study that also found all sorts of correlations like smoking decreases cancer rates


YOU posted a link that mentions china and their population gaining weight. And now your asking me why I need to use it to defend my position?

I'm happy you found something that works for you. I am able to eat from all food groups, including ice cream. And i dont have to worry about my weight ballooning. So i'll end this by sayign i'm happy for you. You dont need to try to convert me, im happy with a non restrictive diet thanks :)

Cool have a good one.

And eat some ice cream for me you lucky guy :)

Jarery

Average modern diet = mostly refined carbohydrates = obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2315516&page=1

Average modern human doesn't exercise.

If you exercise regularly...then you can pretty much eat whatever.

Jarery

Average modern diet = mostly refined carbohydrates = obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=2315516&page=1Dude, then why has obesity only been a problem in the last 30-years? And mainly with Americans? Humans have not evolved genetically that much in a single generation. Look at the humans with the longest life-expectancy, the Japanese. What's the major portion of their diet? WHITE RICE!!!

The main problem I see, and it's pretty obvious when you compare with your parents' lifestyle is:

- much less exercise, modern humans like convenience, driving their cars everywhere, sitting in offices and working at a desk instead of hard sweaty labour in a manufacturing plant.

- we eat A LOT more!!! My parents are always amazed at all the huge Super Big-Gulps, SuperSize/Biggie-Size this & that. Heck, in their days, a standard soda was 8-oz and they drank those all the time. But only 8-oz at a time...

- change in composition of diet, we eat a LOT less vegetables & fruits and have replaced that with carbs & fat (fast food). We don't have to go to the extreme of low-carbs, that's overcompensating, just reduce them and eat more fruits & veggies like the old days.

It's all about balance, if you tip the scales too much to one side of anything, you've exaggerating the side-effects as well.

Hammero2:
I exercice like a mad dog and can still get fat depending on what I eat, part genetics part age.

Danoxyx:
"Humans have not evolved genetically that much in a single generation" exactly my point 2.5 million years no rice only fruit & veggies, grains have only been around for only the blink of an eye how can you go wrong eating paleo?

"- change in composition of diet, we eat a LOT less vegetables & fruits and have replaced that with carbs & fat (fast food). We don't have to go to the extreme of low-carbs, that's overcompensating, just reduce them and eat more fruits & veggies like the old days"

Did you read what I actally eat?

1 tbs fish oil Daily

protein size of palm of hand Every meal

non starchy veggies unlimited Every meal

nuts small hand full or 1 tbs oil Every meal

max 20 gram carb from fruit/starchy veg per meal weekday

max 40 gram carb from fruit/starchy veg per meal weekend

Don't eat after 5pm except post workout everyday

only grass fed/free range meats

no grain or grain products

no refined or processed anything

no legumes

no sugars

no juice

no dairy

no salt

OLD SCHOOL BABY!

Sometimes a whole chicken 2 heads of cabbage 6 cups of brocolli and more fruit than you can shake a stick at just like great great great great grampa back on the farm all natural super nutrient dense food

Dude, then why has obesity only been a problem in the last 30-years? And mainly with Americans? Humans have not evolved genetically that much in a single generation. Look at the humans with the longest life-expectancy, the Japanese. What's the major portion of their diet? WHITE RICE!!!

The main problem I see, and it's pretty obvious when you compare with your parents' lifestyle is:

- much less exercise, modern humans like convenience, driving their cars everywhere, sitting in offices and working at a desk instead of hard sweaty labour in a manufacturing plant.

- we eat A LOT more!!! My parents are always amazed at all the huge Super Big-Gulps, SuperSize/Biggie-Size this & that. Heck, in their days, a standard soda was 8-oz and they drank those all the time. But only 8-oz at a time...

- change in composition of diet, we eat a LOT less vegetables & fruits and have replaced that with carbs & fat (fast food). We don't have to go to the extreme of low-carbs, that's overcompensating, just reduce them and eat more fruits & veggies like the old days.

It's all about balance, if you tip the scales too much to one side of anything, you've exaggerating the side-effects as well.


It is interesting that you mention the Japanese. From what I understand is that Asians tend to have the least dense bones in comparison to Europeans and Africans. But I also understand that they have the least incidence of fractured hips in the elderly, as well as a longer life span. From what I gather many elderly Asians are very active in their lifestyles with Tai chi and the like. This supposedly develops or maintains strength and balance, and is very easy on the joints as well.

I have also heard that soft drink consumption leads to leaching of calcium from the bones and teenage females need to promote bone density, but in fact many do the opposite by drinking pop.

I heard an anecdote as well that few elderly women earlier in the 20th century developed osteoporosis and broken hips were much less of a problem. It was claimed that people were exhumed and their bone densities were looked at, and these people had much higher bone densities than many people in the present.

Socratese I know even less than you... but it is refined cho that leads to leaching of calcium from the bones.

Socratese I know even less than you... but it is refined cho that leads to leaching of calcium from the bones.

I don't know if that is true, and I am not saying that is isn't, but there are alot of refined sugars in pop. I think I heard it explained that it is the acid in pop that leaches minerals from the bones.

Dannoxyx when you say Japanese I assume you mean Okinawan and don't forget the Sardinian's and Seventh Day Adventist when analyzing longevity.

I am 60YO and my body prefers a plant based diet over an animal based diet for maximum performance.

Soc, net calcium bal lance is a function of net renal acid load refined carbs tend to be very acidic.

Potential Renal Acid Load per 100 grams

Refined carbs
Bread, rye flour mixed
4.0Bread, rye flour 4.1Bread, wheat flour mixed3.8Bread, wheat flour whole meal1.8Bread, white bread3.7Cornflakes6.0Crispbread, rye3.3Noodles, egg6.4Oat flakes, rolled oats10.7Rice, brown12.5Rice, white, easy cook4.6Rice, white, easy cook, boiled1.7Rye flour, whole5.9Spaghetti, white6.5Spaghetti, whole meal7.3Wheat flour, white plain6.9Wheat flour, whole meal8.2

now look at vegi's

Asparagus-0.4Broccoli, green-1.2Carrots, young-4.9Cauliflower-4.0Celery-5.2Chicory-2.0Cucumber-0.8Eggplant-3.4Leeks-1.8Lettuce, average 4 varieties-2.5Lettuce, iceberg-1.6Mushrooms, common-1.4Onions-1.5Peppers, green-1.4Potatoes, old-4.0Radish, red-3.7Spinach-14.0Tomato juice-2.8Tomatoes-3.1Zucchini-4.6

Joe1946 (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?u=44038)

I am with you I eat literally tons of fruit and vegetables and you cant beat them as your source of cho, but I also eat allot of meat as my species is omnivorous and my performance/body comp declines when I eat like a herbivore.

It is interesting that you mention the Japanese. From what I understand is that Asians tend to have the least dense bones in comparison to Europeans and Africans. But I also understand that they have the least incidence of fractured hips in the elderly, as well as a longer life span. From what I gather many elderly Asians are very active in their lifestyles with Tai chi and the like. This supposedly develops or maintains strength and balance, and is very easy on the joints as well.

I have also heard that soft drink consumption leads to leaching of calcium from the bones and teenage females need to promote bone density, but in fact many do the opposite by drinking pop.

I heard an anecdote as well that few elderly women earlier in the 20th century developed osteoporosis and broken hips were much less of a problem. It was claimed that people were exhumed and their bone densities were looked at, and these people had much higher bone densities than many people in the present.I think this shows that exercise is more important than diet. The elderly in Asian countries aren't as pampered here; there's no rest/retirement homes. They still have to do a lot for themselves. I'm sure the TaiChi helps with coordination greatly. My grandma (who's Asian), lives in Canda fell on the ice and had no problems breaking her hip! :(

Yeah, the phosphoric acid in soda can inhibit calcium-absoption. But also high iron-intake will do the same as well. A lot of women take iron-supplements and overdoing those will reduce your absorption of calcium. However, bone-density relates more to stress-levels than calcium intake anyway (your body will only absorb as much as it needs, you can't force more). The bone-strength has more to do with weight-bearing on the bones and as you stress them more, they build up density to deal with the load. Contrast the bones in the pitching-arms of baseball pitchers vs. the dormant arm. Strength-exercises in the gym and running have been shown to really help older people maintain bone-density, much more than taking calcium supplements.

Soc, net calcium bal lance is a function of net renal acid load refined carbs tend to be very acidic.

Potential Renal Acid Load per 100 grams

Refined carbs
Bread, rye flour mixed
4.0Bread, rye flour 4.1Bread, wheat flour mixed3.8Bread, wheat flour whole meal1.8Bread, white bread3.7Cornflakes6.0Crispbread, rye3.3Noodles, egg6.4Oat flakes, rolled oats10.7Rice, brown12.5Rice, white, easy cook4.6Rice, white, easy cook, boiled1.7Rye flour, whole5.9Spaghetti, white6.5Spaghetti, whole meal7.3Wheat flour, white plain6.9Wheat flour, whole meal8.2

now look at vegi's

Asparagus-0.4Broccoli, green-1.2Carrots, young-4.9Cauliflower-4.0Celery-5.2Chicory-2.0Cucumber-0.8Eggplant-3.4Leeks-1.8Lettuce, average 4 varieties-2.5Lettuce, iceberg-1.6Mushrooms, common-1.4Onions-1.5Peppers, green-1.4Potatoes, old-4.0Radish, red-3.7Spinach-14.0Tomato juice-2.8Tomatoes-3.1Zucchini-4.6


So in other words the acidity of colas due to the nature of thier high carb content may weaken bones.





I think this shows that exercise is more important than diet. The elderly in Asian countries aren't as pampered here; there's no rest/retirement homes. They still have to do a lot for themselves.

Yeah, the phosphoric acid in soda can inhibit calcium-absoption. But also high iron-intake will do the same as well. A lot of women take iron-supplements and overdoing those will reduce your absorption of calcium. However, bone-density relates more to stress-levels than calcium intake anyway (your body will only absorb as much as it needs, you can't force more). The bone-strength has more to do with weight-bearing on the bones and as you stress them more, they build up density to deal with the load. Contrast the bones in the pitching-arms of baseball pitchers vs. the dormant arm. Strength-exercises in the gym and running have been shown to really help older people maintain bone-density, much more than taking calcium supplements.

So when rapid bone growth is happening it is being inhibited by phosphoric acid. As well you say, and as I understand it, bones like to incoporate heavy elements into them, as well as calcuim. I am thinking that in the end calcium supplementation will not increase bone mass on it's own. At best it will keep the body from liberating stored calcium to keep blood levels at appropriate levels unless, the bones are actually being used as in a weight bearing exercise. So do lots of weights and don't drink pop.

In the U.S. calcium intake is one of the highest in the world, yet paradoxically we also have one of the highest rates of bone de-mineralization (osteoporosis). Bone mineral content is dependent not just upon calcium intake but upon net calcium balance (calcium intake minus calcium excretion). Most nutritionists focus upon the calcium intake side of the calcium balance equation, however few realize that the calcium excretion side of the equation is just as important.
Bone health is substantially dependent on dietary acid/base balance. All foods upon digestion ultimately must report to the kidney as either acid or base. When the diet yields a net acid load (such as low-carb fad diets that restrict consumption of fruits and vegetables), the acid must be buffered by the alkaline stores of base in the body. Calcium salts in the bones represent the largest store of alkaline base in the body and are depleted and eliminated in the urine when the diet produces a net acid load. The highest acid-producing foods are hard cheeses, cereal grains, salted foods, meats, and legumes, whereas the only alkaline, base-producing foods are fruits and vegetables. Because the average American diet is overloaded with grains, cheeses, salted processed foods, and fatty meats at the expense of fruits and vegetables, it produces a net acid load and promotes bone de-mineralization. By replacing hard cheeses, cereal grains, and processed foods with plenty of green vegetables and fruits, the body comes back into acid/base balance which brings us also back into calcium balance

Well good for everyone who's lost weight doing "this and/or that". What works for you may not for me or may seem extremely stupid. I lost 120 pounds over 2~6 month periods by: Not eating fast food, riding my ass off and counting calories.

I know people who can eat McDonalds every day and not gain weight. Does that mean they are healthy?

Words like "detox" irk the hell out of me.

Everyone has their "thing" in regards to eating healthy and losing weight. Everyone loves to see my before and after pictures and are extremely interested up until the point that I tell them that I didn't use <insert fad diet here> or <insert magic pill here>. When I tell them that I ride x hours per day and eat x,xxx calories per day, they lose interest.

If it works for you, cool. Me? I couldn't live on that kind of diet. Paleo's didn't drink wine, and I love wine.;)

In the U.S. calcium intake is one of the highest in the world, yet paradoxically we also have one of the highest rates of bone de-mineralization (osteoporosis). Bone mineral content is dependent not just upon calcium intake but upon net calcium balance (calcium intake minus calcium excretion). Most nutritionists focus upon the calcium intake side of the calcium balance equation, however few realize that the calcium excretion side of the equation is just as important.
Bone health is substantially dependent on dietary acid/base balance. All foods upon digestion ultimately must report to the kidney as either acid or base. When the diet yields a net acid load (such as low-carb fad diets that restrict consumption of fruits and vegetables), the acid must be buffered by the alkaline stores of base in the body. Calcium salts in the bones represent the largest store of alkaline base in the body and are depleted and eliminated in the urine when the diet produces a net acid load. The highest acid-producing foods are hard cheeses, cereal grains, salted foods, meats, and legumes, whereas the only alkaline, base-producing foods are fruits and vegetables. Because the average American diet is overloaded with grains, cheeses, salted processed foods, and fatty meats at the expense of fruits and vegetables, it produces a net acid load and promotes bone de-mineralization. By replacing hard cheeses, cereal grains, and processed foods with plenty of green vegetables and fruits, the body comes back into acid/base balance which brings us also back into calcium balance


I can sort of see your reasoning here, calcium being a positively charged, while any acid is negatively charged. But the bicarb carbonic acid balance is supposed to be the main acid base chemical buffer. Would not calcium be excreted in excessive amounts because too much bicarb has been excreted? I think this would indicate some sort of renal pathology, in that bicarb is being wasted by the kidneys instead of being re-absorbed.

Now that I type you have spurred me on to think. I do not know how well you know this subject; and for myself I am happy to still be learning, but how about this. You serum calcium levels are naturally very low, with a large portion of the calcium in your blood being bound to albumin, so it is not available to act as a buffer. Now the small amount that is free as ionised calcium is available in the blood to act as a buffer in a small way, essentially to accept a proton. But I would think that this may lead to some sort of calcification maybe leading to something collecting in the form of a stone in the kidneys or thereabouts. So if calcium has indeed buffered the acid to a very very small degree there is now less calcium in your blood. So now PTH comes to the rescue and stimulates osteoclasts, tells the GI to absorb Ca, and the kidneys not to excrete ionised Ca.

So since this is happening at such a slow rate, because of the naturally low serum Ca, this is why as a teen you may not see any immediate effects. So as you get older and have not changed your habits you have set yourself up for a broken hip, and the golden years, if you made it that far, are spent in a wheelchair.

Well good for everyone who's lost weight doing "this and/or that". What works for you may not for me or may seem extremely stupid. I lost 120 pounds over 2~6 month periods by: Not eating fast food, riding my ass off and counting calories.

I know people who can eat McDonalds every day and not gain weight. Does that mean they are healthy?

Words like "detox" irk the hell out of me.

Everyone has their "thing" in regards to eating healthy and losing weight. Everyone loves to see my before and after pictures and are extremely interested up until the point that I tell them that I didn't use <insert fad diet here> or <insert magic pill here>. When I tell them that I ride x hours per day and eat x,xxx calories per day, they lose interest.

If it works for you, cool. Me? I couldn't live on that kind of diet. Paleo's didn't drink wine, and I love wine.;)


It is good to hear the voice of reason that says that we are individuals, and will react to specific things in different ways.

If Frank Zappa were a cyclist instead of a guitarist, he would have said just got on your damn bike and ride.

Check out the book "UltraMetabolism" at http://www.ultrametabolism.com

Written by the first honest doctor I've ever come upon.

Average modern diet = mostly refined carbohydrates = obesity, heart disease, cancer, diabetes.

Yeah and those cavemen were living to be 80 years old like my grandmother who is sitting in my living room. Heck, my grandfather who smoked for 50 years lived to be 76...still far outliving any caveman. Whatever....

But, 4-6 meals a day does work. You never get the chance to get really hungry so you never overeat. Your metabolism also stays revved up.

A balanced diet and exercise-where the hell is that coming from.

Im kinda with kmckay, being an Atkins fan. Less sugar and less corn syrup will not hurt anyone. I prefer whole wheat bread to white bread. Being from the south, I do eat rice with beans and gumbo too and I like fried fish usually with a cornmeal batter, but if u wanna try a fish batter with no carbs, try crushing a bag of pork rinds real fine and rollin them filets in that. Good eatin there and 0 carbs!

Well good for everyone who's lost weight doing "this and/or that". What works for you may not for me or may seem extremely stupid. I lost 120 pounds over 2~6 month periods by: Not eating fast food, riding my ass off and counting calories.

I know people who can eat McDonalds every day and not gain weight. Does that mean they are healthy?

Words like "detox" irk the hell out of me.

Everyone has their "thing" in regards to eating healthy and losing weight. Everyone loves to see my before and after pictures and are extremely interested up until the point that I tell them that I didn't use <insert fad diet here> or <insert magic pill here>. When I tell them that I ride x hours per day and eat x,xxx calories per day, they lose interest.

If it works for you, cool. Me? I couldn't live on that kind of diet. Paleo's didn't drink wine, and I love wine.;)yeah, it's about having a balanced diet and not being too extreme on any one end. In the end, the final and ultimate concrete measurement is calories-in vs. calories-out. Regardless of what kind of miracle diet you're on, Atkins, high/low-carb, paleo, Pritikin, South Beach, etc. if you eat more than you burn off, you'll gain weight. And conversely, if you eat less than you burn off, you'll lose weight. Simple. Just that eating low calorie-density foods like fruits & veggies allows you to eat more volume without piling on too many calories.

This is how humans ate for the last 2.5 million years up untill recently

What was the human life expectancy up until recently?

Question here.... so are bones with less calcium lighter?
Being born with big bones I am looking for a better weight/power ratio....
Should I not run in the off season so my bones can get lighter?
I still have to work on the love handles and belly but if you shave grams on carbon parts I sure can shave some kgs on my frame.
Ciao
Paolo

I have found that if I eat for my blood type, I feel physically more in tune.
http://www.drlam.com/blood_type_diet/

I have found that if I eat for my blood type, I feel physically more in tune.
http://www.drlam.com/blood_type_diet/

That has to be the Dumbest Diet on the Planet. :rolleyes:

yeah, it's about having a balanced diet and not being too extreme on any one end. In the end, the final and ultimate concrete measurement is calories-in vs. calories-out. Regardless of what kind of miracle diet you're on, Atkins, high/low-carb, paleo, Pritikin, South Beach, etc. if you eat more than you burn off, you'll gain weight. And conversely, if you eat less than you burn off, you'll lose weight. Simple. Just that eating low calorie-density foods like fruits & veggies allows you to eat more volume without piling on too many calories.


Calories in calories out?

So you are saying that x numbers of calories from olive oil = x of rice cakes = x of spinich?

I hope not because then you are tottaly discounting the insulin respone and hormonal cascadeds that something like ultra high gi rice cakes cause.

Is it because of what kind of animal you were in your previous life or what animal you evolved from?

Man that sucks, I should not eat breads and dairy, but I love bread and cheese!
At list it says: thrive on intense physical exercise and animal protein.....
I guess riding and Prosciutto is alright.
Ciao
Paolo

That has to be the Dumbest Diet on the Planet.


Yes, it is...It does seem to have one redeeming quality..according to my blood type and "Dr." Lam I should avoid Lima beans! ;)

Calories in calories out?

So you are saying that x numbers of calories from olive oil = x of rice cakes = x of spinich?

I hope not because then you are tottaly discounting the insulin respone and hormonal cascadeds that something like ultra high gi rice cakes cause.

I'm with Danno on this as far as weigt goes. One can gain or lose weight based on the # of calories consumed assuming the diet reasonably provides both macro and micro nutrients necessary to support life. Carried to any extreme..ie no fat, then one can literally starve to death while consuming copius amounts of calories to the exclusion of other sources. Have you ever heard or rabbit starvation?

Sure a load of rice will cause a greater insulin spike than will olive oil. That rice will also provide a lot of nutrients that the olive oil will not provide. The insulin spike will only last for a short time, the glucose will be stored, until you need it, and then released as a trygliceride several hours later. Ideally, one would eat a little of all the items and have a balnced diet that is short on nothing.

Calories in calories out?

So you are saying that x numbers of calories from olive oil = x of rice cakes = x of spinich?

I hope not because then you are tottaly discounting the insulin respone and hormonal cascadeds that something like ultra high gi rice cakes cause.


A calorie is a calorie. The things that you eat may cause your metabolism run at different rates. Sure the insulin will cause you to store excess calories as fat. Usually after a high carb meal if one sits around they get really tierd. Now if you eat a high fat meal and tons of carbs, like at christmas, you have the carbs raising your insulin, and you are absorbing the fat that you have just ate as well. Maybe this is why when people are advocating eating several small meals a day it is because you are not slowing down your metabolism, but keeping enough gas in the tank to keep it going at the optimal rate. As well from what I understand it takes more calories to turn carbs into fat than it takes to turn animal fat into human fat. If you gorge on CHO's then sit around you will probably get fat. It you space out your meals and try to remain active you will reamin at a healthy weight as well.

Also when you eat all sorts of carbs you may cause an insulin crash as well, then you are twice as hungry as you were before, thus end up taking in more calories

That has to be the Dumbest Diet on the Planet. :rolleyes:
If you say so. I am sure you will probably tell me that there is no such thing as food allergies and that everybody genetic makeup allows for them to process food the same way.

If you say so. I am sure you will probably tell me that there is no such thing as food allergies and that everybody genetic makeup allows for them to process food the same way.

My issue with the "Blood Type Diet" is that there is absolutley no scientific basis for it...it's only purpose is to sell books by Dr. Lam. If the Blood Type Diet helps you to get your Calories In under control, well then it has some value for you...but, the same could be said about every other quack diet out there.

As for food allergies...sure, some folks have them, and need to adjust their food intake accordingly.

As for genetic differences in how we process foods...a million years of evolution has pretty much standardized the process. If there are differences, they're likely very small.

Bottom line...no body is immune to the laws of thermodynamics. Calories In vs. Calories Out is the basis for all successful weight loss, no matter how much we want to blame our weight on "my hormones", "my genetics", "my blood type".

Bottom line...no body is immune to the laws of thermodynamics. Calories In vs. Calories Out is the basis for all successful weight loss, no matter how much we want to blame our weight on "my hormones", "my genetics", "my blood type".


Could it not be a combination for some people? Sure calories in, calories out is fine way to look at it, but what affects the rates of people metabolism? Hormones for one thing, look at thyroid disorders, in some you can eat lots of food and never put on weight, in others metabolism is slowed considerably. Some people will naturally have a faster metabolism, and then others will alter it chemically to increase the amount of calories out. The good thing about biking is that you alter you metabolism for long periods of time, probably a lot more than any other sport.

Foods can also affect levels of hormones that circulate through the body, so IMO what you can eat can affect if you put on because your metabolism is being altered by the food you eat by affecting hormones. Circadian rhythms fluctuate throughout the day, and this is in part to hormones. Of course if one is like most of us here you will probably bike a lot and can burn off the extra that you eat that may not be that good for you.

Could it not be a combination for some people? Sure calories in, calories out is fine way to look at it, but what affects the rates of people metabolism? Hormones for one thing, look at thyroid disorders, in some you can eat lots of food and never put on weight, in others metabolism is slowed considerably. Some people will naturally have a faster metabolism, and then others will alter it chemically to increase the amount of calories out. The good thing about biking is that you alter you metabolism for long periods of time, probably a lot more than any other sport.

Foods can also affect levels of hormones that circulate through the body, so IMO what you can eat can affect if you put on because your metabolism is being altered by the food you eat by affecting hormones. Circadian rhythms fluctuate throughout the day, and this is in part to hormones. Of course if one is like most of us here you will probably bike a lot and can burn off the extra that you eat that may not be that good for you.

In your examples, the hormones are changing the calorie out side of the equation. The equation still holds.

Thyroid hormones speed up cellular metabolism by stimulating the mitochondria ( I believe). The stimulated mitochondri speed up the oxidation of glucose and fatty acids and release additional energy as heat. A person experiencing hypothyroidism will have a lower body temperature than will a euthyroidic or hyperthyroidic individual. This extra heat from the stimulated mitochondria has to come from somewhere, and it comes from increased caloric intake if the person is to maintain their weight. On the flip side, the hypothyroidic individual will gain weigt with less food intake. Again, the equation still holds.

If you want to believe that the reason for obesity is carbs, thats fine, you stick with your paleo diet.
I'll choose to believe obesity is from overconsumtion of food, and especially crap food, and i'll continue to eat food from all food types and not restrict anything.


Umm, this is nowhere close to a paleo diet. I have eaten largely this same way most days per week, with a relaxed day once a week, and I dropped over 100 pounds and gained 30 of musscle. However, I don't worry about salt and I eat more unrefined grains like whole wheat bread and oatmeal. However, I'd never cap myself off at 5pm and no eating after that - I always eat 5-8 meals per day depending on how much I'm working out - and a protein shake before I go to bed. That way my body never hits a catabolic state. I'd hate to lose al that hard-earned muscle.

There's nothing wrong with eating "poor" 10% of the time, if you eat like the OP does 90% of the time. I don't worry about the pizza and beer on Saturday because I eat clean most every day.

to the OP: good on ya, mate!

In your examples, the hormones are changing the calorie out side of the equation. The equation still holds.

Thyroid hormones speed up cellular metabolism by stimulating the mitochondria ( I believe). The stimulated mitochondri speed up the oxidation of glucose and fatty acids and release additional energy as heat. A person experiencing hypothyroidism will have a lower body temperature than will a euthyroidic or hyperthyroidic individual. This extra heat from the stimulated mitochondria has to come from somewhere, and it comes from increased caloric intake if the person is to maintain their weight. On the flip side, the hypothyroidic individual will gain weigt with less food intake. Again, the equation still holds.

Yes, I agree with you totally, but I think calories in and calories out, is a very simplistic way to say it. It comes across as if we will burn calories at the same rate, when there are modifiers to how we quickly the calories are burned. I agree with calories in and calories out, but there is so much in between that can affect it, including the type of food you eat.

As well as to say that certain things can't possibly account for the reason for different types of metabolism you have; it appears as shutting your eyes to something, like it can have no effect on the whole balance. On the other hand, homeostasis is a delicate balance with more than one factor contributing to it working. Saying there is no scientific reason for it also sounds like people are shutting their eyes, science has not discovered everything that works for individuals. Of course there are many things that are fads, and when it comes to the latest diet there is a new one coming out all the time trying to sell some people on some variables that will make you loose weight, or become more healthy.

If eating for blood type has helped some people then maybe it was because that it made them look at the food that they are eating and improve their habits. Some people change the way they eat and also change their lifestyle as well. How did this person eat before, what was their knowledge of healthy food, what was their attitude towards health? etc...

My issue with the "Blood Type Diet" is that there is absolutley no scientific basis for it...it's only purpose is to sell books by Dr. Lam. If the Blood Type Diet helps you to get your Calories In under control, well then it has some value for you...but, the same could be said about every other quack diet out there.

As for food allergies...sure, some folks have them, and need to adjust their food intake accordingly.

As for genetic differences in how we process foods...a million years of evolution has pretty much standardized the process. If there are differences, they're likely very small.

Bottom line...no body is immune to the laws of thermodynamics. Calories In vs. Calories Out is the basis for all successful weight loss, no matter how much we want to blame our weight on "my hormones", "my genetics", "my blood type".


I agree with what you are saying.

What I am simply saying that when I eat certain foods that I have found on the list that is associate with my blood I feel better then when I don't. Could it just be in my head? Maybe, but I feel that it works for me and that is what I care about most. Trust me I don't diet and pretty much have a hard time simply keeping weight on. I am 6'2" and ~155lbs. You are correct calorie in vs. calorie out is the only way to loss weight. There are no short cuts to losing weight if you need to and I am not suggesting to try this as a diet.

But due to evolution different blood types have evolved. The different blood types occurred due to genetic mutations because of a need for adaptation. This evolution occurred as population moved from one part of the world to another. Their diet changed as well because the food supply changed. Since we consider ourselves the most highly evolved thing on this planet, don’t you think man will adapt to it new home and try to suck the most calories possible out of everything that it is eating for energy? Therefore, certain foods will be more beneficial to certain blood types or populations of people. That is why the interaction between certain food and different blood type has occurred.

In today's world, this really doesn't matter, because we are at the top of the food chain. The food that is out there today is over processed, highly saturated and has way more caloric energy in it then most people need on a daily basis. The end result is an overweight society blaming their fatness on everything that looks like an easy scapegoat instead of taking action by eating less calories or eating more healthy alternatives.


I am not trying to start some debate over this issue because I have not seen any scientific evidence to support the Blood type/Diet hype either. I am just speaking from my own personal experience.

Calories in calories out?

So you are saying that x numbers of calories from olive oil = x of rice cakes = x of spinich?
They're equal as far as generating power from stored reserves. So 1000 calories of fat will give you roughly the same energy as 1000 calories of stored glycogen, albeit at vastly different rates.


I hope not because then you are tottaly discounting the insulin respone and hormonal cascadeds that something like ultra high gi rice cakes cause.High-GI can only force conversion of carbs to fats only if you have excess calorie intake and high blood-sugar already. Eating two rice-cakes for a snack or right after a ride will do nothing to cause too-high insulin levels. And even then, even if you could convert ALL 100-calories into fat, what's that in terms of weight on your body? However, consuming 1000-calories of sodas in a day on top of your energy-expenditures WILL be a problem.

But as far as piling on fat from excessive consumption, carbs vs. fats are actually not equal. Excess carbs are converted to stored fat in adipose tissue at 40% of their caloric values. About 60% of the energy is consumed in the conversion process. Ingested fats on teh other hand are already very similar to what's used for storage, so not much conversion needed and it piles on at 98%. In the end, in order to pile on 1-lb of body-fat, you can either eat two extra loaves of bread or have a large plate of nachos w/bacon; the cheese sauce alone is close to a pound of fat.

So let's say you burned off 2000 calories today and you ate the following extra calories:

3500 calories of excess carbs = 0.4 lbs of fat on the body
3500 calories of excess veggies = 0.4 lbs of fat on the body (but you're getting a tonne of fibre & vitamins as well)
3500 calories of excess fats = 0.98lbs of fat on the body


What a lot of people who see thing in black & white, all-or-nothing, yes/no terms don't realize is that it's the numbers that makes the difference. The problem isn't carbs or fats, it's eating too much of them. But for an equal-calorie amount, the fats will pile on weight faster.

umm...Danno....did you raid the pound or something? Thee's a gaggle of big nosed biscuit eaters licking my screen :)