|
Originally Posted by WarrenG
Fats are kept relatively low on days of heavy training or racing. Normally, saturated fat is usually less than 15 grams a day, good fat is usually around 15-25 grams a day, protein is about 1.1 to 1.4 grams per kg of bodyweight per day (depending on type of training), carbs as needed. Total daily calories is around 2600-3500 depending on training and racing needs.
Training schedule is appropriate for a guy who was a Masters National Champion in 2004 and 2005, and wants to do that again in 2006. Blood work for cholesterol factors is always excellent and rarely checked because it's been that way for at least 20 years. Blood sugar is not problem if I pay attention to low glycemic carbs when that's appropriate and have high glycemic carbs when that's appropriate. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
so, if OP reaches his goal on <30% carbs, what is the problem?
|
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
so, you buy into the good fat/bad fat mythology (regarding sat. fats - I hope you have the good sense to avoid trans fats), you consume high glycemic carbs? better get that blood sugar checked.
|
You couldn't be more wrong. I know first hand what saturated fats can do. Over the past 3 years I've been getting blood panels every 3 months and have tracked what I've eaten as I've altered my diet. As saturated fat was reduced from my diet, my LDL went down. If you think my carbs are out of control, I only eat complex carbohydrates (fruits, vegetables). If you look at my previous post you'll see the dramatic change I made in my cholesterol numbers by almost eliminating saturated fats from my diet.
Have you been tracking your blood lipids? |
We could all strip down to our underwear and fight it out with Wiffle Bats on Public Access Television. Think of the ratings!
|
Originally Posted by Javelina
We could all strip down to our underwear and fight it out with Wiffle Bats on Public Access Television. Think of the ratings!
|
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
You couldn't be more wrong. I know first hand what saturated fats can do. Over the past 3 years I've been getting blood panels every 3 months and have tracked what I've eaten as I've altered my diet. As saturated fat was reduced from my diet, my LDL went down. If you think my carbs are out of control, I only eat complex carbohydrates (fruits, vegetables). If you look at my previous post you'll see the dramatic change I made in my cholesterol numbers by almost eliminating saturated fats from my diet.
Have you been tracking your blood lipids? sounds like you werent controling your carbs when you were eating the sat. fats, a high fat low carb diet does not worsen LDL to any significant degree, and dramatically improves HDL, triglycerides, blood sugar, etc. this has been well established in study after study after study. yes, I've tracked mine and my results fit nicely within the previous statement. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
sounds like you werent controling your carbs when you were eating the sat. fats, a high fat low carb diet does not worsen LDL to any significant degree, and dramatically improves HDL, triglycerides, blood sugar, etc. this has been well established in study after study after study.
yes, I've tracked mine and my results fit nicely within the previous statement. http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/...tkins_Diet.htm I'm not the guy mentioned in the link, but its pretty close to what happened to me, with the exception that I caught it before any coronary damage occured. |
Originally Posted by WarrenG
The problem for some people is not whether they can get to a goal, it's how well they get there. There are many ways to lose weight. Some are better than others. More carbs (greater than 30%) would allow for better performance during exercise/training. The weight would likely come off quicker in the long run, he might enjoy his exercise more because of being able to perfom better along the way, and be generally more fit. Would you rather exercise at low intensity for 10 hours a week or exercise with some higher intensities for about 3-4 hours of that total time? This is even more important if time available for exercise is under 10 hours per week.
perhaps some more carbs could give me a performance boost (and I'm still waiting for just one study showing me this is even a possibilty...) I dont really care. btw, I would guess that I've been eating a diet of 70% fat and very little carbs (whatever you get from normal sized servings of brocolli, squash, eggplant, and a few bits of fruit, etc.) since christmas. every day this week I did an hour on the stairmaster in the morning and an hour in the pool in the evening, and everyday I've felt like I had more in the tank when I stopped. Yesterday I even did a few sprints to see if my arms would fall off as predicted here (not true - I did fine! maybe slower than a sugar eater, but who cares?) |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
In fact, I was on Atkins prior to my chest pain. I was following the program religiously (much as I am following what I do right now). The Atkins program almost killed me. Here's something to chew on...
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/...tkins_Diet.htm I'm not the guy mentioned in the link, but its pretty close to what happened to me, with the exception that I caught it before any coronary damage occured. thanks for the link from the radical animal rights folks, that adds a lot to the convesation.... you must be a mutant if what you're saying is remotely true. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
thanks for the link from the radical animal rights folks, that adds a lot to the convesation....
you must be a mutant if what you're saying is remotely true. |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
In fact, I was on Atkins prior to my chest pain. I was following the program religiously (much as I am following what I do right now). The Atkins program almost killed me. Here's something to chew on...
http://www.atkinsexposed.org/atkins/...tkins_Diet.htm I'm not the guy mentioned in the link, but its pretty close to what happened to me, with the exception that I caught it before any coronary damage occured. anyway, how does one square your story and Mr. Gorran with the mountain of evidence pointing in the opposite direction? http://www.advance.uconn.edu/2006/060123/06012310.htm Low-carbohydrate diets reduce heart disease risk, researcher finds by Janice Palmer - January 23, 2006 The most popular method in the United States for losing weight – low-carbohydrate diets – can reduce a person’s risk of developing heart disease, according to a study conducted by a UConn researcher. Jeff Volek, an assistant professor of kinesiology, reviewed more than a dozen clinical trials conducted since 2003 and examined low-carb diets and related risk factors for cardiovascular disease. His findings were published last year in the Journal of Nutrition, the official publication of the American Society for Nutritional Sciences. Volek’s analysis found that very low-carb diets outperform low-fat diets in lowering triglyceride (fat in the blood) and increasing HDL (good cholesterol). “This type of replication across studies performed at different institutions is rare, and it shows how robust and consistent the favorable effects of a low-carbohydrate diet really are,” says Volek, a registered dietitian and a member of the UConn Human Performance Laboratory in the Neag School of Education. During the last five years, Volek has published more than 10 of his own scientific studies specifically examining various aspects of low-carb diets and their connection to heart disease. Although a portion of his previous research has been funded by the Dr. Robert C. Atkins Foundation, the studies he reviewed for this project were sponsored by a variety of federal and private sources. According to Volek, recent research studies provide “impressive evidence” that the potential adverse effects of saturated fat on risk for heart disease are only observed when carbohydrates are present in moderate to large amounts. The reason for this, he explains, is that the body processes saturated fat completely differently on a low-carbohydrate diet. “It simply doesn’t have the same harmful effect,” he says. Jeff Volek, left, an assistant professor of kinesiology, has published a study of low-carb diets and related factors for cardiovascular disease, based on a review of more than a dozen clinical trials. Photo by Peter Morenus The studies Volek reviewed show that low-carbohydrate diets not only improve triglycerides and HDL cholesterol, but also several other risk factors that lead to metabolic syndrome – a condition that puts an estimated 25 percent of adult Americans at a three-fold risk for cardiovascular disease. His own research, along with those he reviewed, indicates that a low-carbohydrate diet improves all aspects of metabolic syndrome, while a high-carbohydrate diet, even if it’s very low in fat, exacerbates this disorder – unless the person loses significant amounts of weight or increases his or her activity level. “Low-carbohydrate diets improve metabolic syndrome independent of weight loss and physical activity,” he says. These scientifically proven facts about low-carb diets have been slow to reach health practitioners or have been ignored, according to Volek. Yet there have been a number of new studies and papers that continue to have consistent findings. With this in mind, he was inspired to conduct his review study with the goal of better organizing the scientific evidence in a way that might more fully inform health practitioners. Says Volek, “We hope to encourage health practitioners to at least consider low-carb diets as an option, rather than casually dismissing them.” |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
100% true. You can talk about what you have read. I can talk about what I experienced. I hope you never have to do the same.
|
Wiffle bats!
Wiffle bats! Strip off you shirt and pants, And settle this like men With Wiffle bats! |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
can you tell me how you did atkins? what did you eat? for how long? what were you eating before then and for how long?
|
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
A typical day would have been bacon and eggs for breakfast, Chicken breast salad with cheese and lettuce with olive oil dressing for lunch, and pan fried steak with spinach and sour cream for dinner, and a snack which could be a couple slices of ham. I was on it for about a year and was into the OWL phase when the chest pain occured. I don't remember the exact numbers I was taking in since its been a few years but, trust me, it was spot on. Prior to that I might eat dry cereal with milk for breakfast, a chicken sandwich and fries for lunch and some meat dish with veggies. I just ate too much of it. I've never had much of a sweet tooth, so candy has never really been an issue.
|
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
gee, do you think your heart condition might have something to do with your pre-atkins diet?
|
LOL....
Be careful before picking sides in this wiffle bat competition.... remember where all this started from... I am 6'3" and about 265 lbs.... I may be on a low carb diet, but I will still take even Lance Armsrong on in that challenge!!!!! LOL :D |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
No. I consulted with my doctor prior to starting Atkins. He gave me a physical, including a blood panel which showed relatively normal results. It was when I went into the ER that my numbers were dangerously out of range.
and btw, the blood panel before atkins is meaningless. to know if you had blockages, that is. I'm no doctor but I think it takes a long time to build up a heart blockage like you described. a long time of eating things like french fries (high carb cooked in transfat, yummy!). so to blame sat. fat is still a stretch. anyway, glad you're doing better and still amoung us! |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
well, if you're telling the truth (and I have my doubts - annonymous internet poster, links to radical animal rights site to support his argument??? hmmmm), and if sat. fat really is the problem, you are rare indivdual. very rare.
and btw, the blood panel before atkins is meaningless. to know if you had blockages, that is. I'm no doctor but I think it takes a long time to build up a heart blockage like you described. a long time of eating things like french fries (high carb cooked in transfat, yummy!). so to blame sat. fat is still a stretch. anyway, glad you're doing better and still amoung us! As I mentioned in an earlier post, the imaging that is being done each August is now showing the artery is passing a greater volume of blood. According to my cardiologist, this is the result of the level of plaque decreasing on the artery walls, and he attributes it to the diet I am on now, and the high level of activity I engage in (riding and gym training typically gets my HRM to 80% - 90% MHR). |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
No doubt what I was eating prior contributed to the condition. But after a year on Atkins, it pushed it over the edge (I was riding a bike from the start and had the coronary event after a year on Atkins).
As I mentioned in an earlier post, the imaging that is being done each August is now showing the artery is passing a greater volume of blood. According to my cardiologist, this is the result of the level of plaque decreasing on the artery walls, and he attributes it to the diet I am on now, and the high level of activity I engage in (riding and gym training typically gets my HRM to 80% - 90% MHR). I have no doubt your new diet and especially the exercise get the credit for fixing your problem. but unless you are a rare case of someone who is sensiitive for some reason to sat. fat, and you just might be, I think you are unfairly fixing the blame. btw, ask your doctor how much time he's spent studying nutrition. he's just going along with the pc herd, blaming fats when the science points in the opposite direction. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
obviously I take issue with blaming atkins for pushing it over the edge. for one thing sounds like you could have been eating too much processed meats - bacon and ham every day is possibly not such a great idea, depending on your take on nitrites...
I have no doubt your new diet and especially the exercise get the credit for fixing your problem. but unless you are a rare case of someone who is sensiitive for some reason to sat. fat, and you just might be, I think you are unfairly fixing the blame. btw, ask your doctor how much time he's spent studying nutrition. he's just going along with the pc herd, blaming fats when the science points in the opposite direction. The overwhelming consensus in the scientific community concurs with what I'm doing regarding diet including the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association and others. You may consider myself an exception, however, most people don't follow through on a weight loss plan, so you won't find a whole lot of people that have lost weight and kept it off, regardless of the weight loss plan they choose. I'm an exception in that its rare that someone actually looses weight and keeps it off. But as far as physiology is concerned, I'm probably pretty typical. |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
Bacon and ham was an example, not the rule. I ate a variety of foods on Atkins.
The overwhelming consensus in the scientific community concurs with what I'm doing regarding diet including the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association and others. But as far as physiology is concerned, I'm probably pretty typical. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
only because they continue to ignore the actual scientific evidence... which by the way, continues to pile up, sooner or later they'll have to face the reality.
not if you are actually sensitve to saturated fat in while controling carbs, you're not. this isnt even debatable, the studies are out there and pretty much irrefutable. but I suspect something else is going on in your case... |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
You may have hit the answer a few messages ago. I must be a mutant.
Please pass the deep-fried pork skins and let me take my nap. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:10 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.