![]() |
Originally Posted by AnthonyG
EDIT: OOH OOH, 500 th post. 1 more and we have 500 replies!:D :D
|
Originally Posted by dazed&confused
Its widely known that most hunter gather groups studied in the 1800s and 1900s received a greater amount of food from the gathering function than the hunting function. That would support a more carbo based diet than an atkins plan. Was that different in the far past? Who knows...
The other problem with this diet is that we don't know if it was really healthy. It is unclear what the life expectancy was in the distant past and what killed the people when they died. While I guess cancer and heart disease was not a problem back then, its largely because there were many other things that ended life back then like predation, illness, injury, etc. Without data on health or cause of death, it is difficult to measure the effectiveness of any diet program. how about your very existance as proof. you are a proud descendant of thousands of years of evolution, and that great big brain of yours was brought to you by a high fat diet! While we don't know what they ate, I suspect that it was much harder for them to eat poorly than it is for us today. No corn syrup, "enriched" white flours, sugars, corn fed (ie fatty) hormone injected beef, etc. Every meal involved a workout (you had to find it, pick it or chase it to eat it). Couches, TVs, computers, the internet or desk jobs had not yet been invented. Of course, neither had bicycles or good hygiene, so the distant past was no picnic. I have a wild idea, rather than guessing what people ate in the distant past, why don't you look and emulate the eating and exercise habits of healthy people today? Those people are easy to identify, they just flew past you on the road. Watch them and see how many sticks of butter, or 16 oz steaks they eat in a day. and a number of successful athletes eat a good deal of fat and butter. Here's one, Mike Modano, a six time all star hockey player: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/ma...in&oref=slogin So, before you cram that Krispy Kreme into your pie-hole, ask yourself, "What would Lance do?" |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
and a number of successful athletes eat a good deal of fat and butter. Here's one, Mike Modano, a six time all star hockey player: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/ma...in&oref=slogin
I read that short story about Modano. His diet is similar to another diet I have read called "Turn up the Heat" by Philip L. Goglia. He claims there are 3 different types of metabolisms as does Modano's food guy. Its an interesting program and Goglia is a former body builder, so he doesn't short change active people. The upshot here is that none of this is the Adkins program. I agreed with Dr. Adkins on some points such as the increase in the amount of simple carbs in our diets, but I don't agree that his solution (all protein, all the time and no carbs) is a diet that maximizes sports performance. It might lose a person some weight, but won't give a person the fuels they need to live a active lifestyle. I personally like the Southbeach diet approach which limits sat. fats and simple carbs. Lean proteins and plant sources of fat are encouraged along with healthy veggies. BTW, when I mentioned emulating the healthy people's diet and exercise plan, I didn't mean MY diet and exercise plan. I'm not one of the healthy people passing you on your bike... I gotta go, these emails are getting in the way of work and riding. Just bought a new Trek and I have to go and pick it up. I went in to look at shoes and ended up with a new bike. Dazed&confused |
Originally Posted by dazed&confused
I personally like the Southbeach diet approach which limits sat. fats and simple carbs. Lean proteins and plant sources of fat are encouraged along with healthy veggies. Dazed&confused Well I have to say again that I'm not on or advocating a ZERO carb diet. Just a LOW carb diet and I don't count anything so I don't know what my macro-nutrient ratio might be. As to the Southbeach diet its just a "Politicaly Correct" low carb diet with no more thought to it than that. The Weston A Price Foundation rates it as less desirable than a high carb / low fat diet because without fat or carbs you will become nutrient defficient. http://www.westonaprice.org/bookrevi...beachdiet.html Regards, Anthony |
Originally Posted by dazed&confused
I read that short story about Modano. His diet is similar to another diet I have read called "Turn up the Heat" by Philip L. Goglia. He claims there are 3 different types of metabolisms as does Modano's food guy. Its an interesting program and Goglia is a former body builder, so he doesn't short change active people.
The upshot here is that none of this is the Adkins program. I agreed with Dr. Adkins on some points such as the increase in the amount of simple carbs in our diets, but I don't agree that his solution (all protein, all the time and no carbs) is a diet that maximizes sports performance. It might lose a person some weight, but won't give a person the fuels they need to live a active lifestyle. I personally like the Southbeach diet approach which limits sat. fats and simple carbs. Lean proteins and plant sources of fat are encouraged along with healthy veggies. BTW, when I mentioned emulating the healthy people's diet and exercise plan, I didn't mean MY diet and exercise plan. I'm not one of the healthy people passing you on your bike... I gotta go, these emails are getting in the way of work and riding. Just bought a new Trek and I have to go and pick it up. I went in to look at shoes and ended up with a new bike. Dazed&confused you mean Atkins, right? I dont follow Atkins per se either, and at any rate, he recommends eating a lot of vegetables, so it's hardly "no carb." just a lot less carbs than a low fat diet. I dont buy that 3 different metabolisms mumbo jumbo, I believe we all have basically the same metabolism, which is the same as it was 10,000 years ago.. still, some argue that in warmer climates, humans didnt have to rely on meat as much, they could just vist the handy salad bar all around them...I'm skeptical about that... enjoy your new bike! |
another successful athlete who low carbs... sort of...
http://newyorkmetro.com/health/featu...922/index.html Here’s Johnny Johnny Weir is the best male figure skater in the United States—and the most outrageous. This is the fitness routine that got him to the 2006 Winter Olympics in Turin. Johnny Weir could win Olympic figure-skating gold this week. He might get a medal for most quotable athlete, too. Nicknamed “Tinkerbell,” the 21-year-old from the Skating Club of New York is known for his Balenciaga-bag habit, his giant fur stoles, and his arch commentary—he recently described one of his costumes as “Care Bear on acid” and his attitude to travel as “princessy.” Weir does, however, have a serious side: the fitness routine that’s allowed him to overcome devastating knee and ankle injuries. Here’s his daily regimen. The Workout CARDIO Ice time. Five days a week, Weir hits his training rink in Delaware for 75 minutes in the morning and two hours and fifteen minutes in the afternoon, without breaks. Kill drills. While blasting Madonna—“I’m really loving ‘Sorry’ from her new CD,” he says—Weir speed-skates across the rink and attempts a triple jump at each end. He fits fifteen jumps into one minute; a typical performance has eight jumps in four. “I need music that gets me angry,” he says. STRENGTH AND AGILITY Standing roll-ups. Off the ice, Weir is guided by his trainer, Carolanne Leone. To warm up, he tucks his chin to his chest and “rolls” his body forward, then back up, articulating every vertebra in his spine. Bosu-ball push-ups. Leone sets a weighted body bar across the flat bottom of this half-sphere, then Weir does ten to twenty push-ups. The ball’s instability makes balancing difficult. Death squats. Weir stands on the spherical side of the Bosu with a body ball pressed against the wall behind him and another between his knees. He holds a medicine ball outstretched and balances a rubber orange cone on his head, then does ten slow squats. This keeps his body strictly aligned and requires him to stabilize himself using his “core” (deep abdominal muscles). “With the new judging system,” says Weir, “the spins are very difficult. You need a strong core to pull yourself into crazy positions.” Bosu-ball toss. “It’s all about looking cute when you’re working out,” claims Weir. Wearing his customized Nikes—they say dirrty, in homage to his idol Christina Aguilera—Weir stands on top of the Bosu. He uses his core to stabilize himself as he tosses the medicine ball back and forth to Leone. PILATES The Reformer. Leone puts Weir through a full routine on this apparatus with a moving “carriage.” Weir’s favorite part is the ab-killer “the hundreds.” Lying down with arms and legs extended into a V, he contracts his abs and waves his arms downward as he inhales and exhales for five counts, ten times. Pilates plyometrics. To work on the power bursts he needs for triple axels, Weir lays on the Reformer and pushes backward off a springboard. The key is to explode, then stay suspended as long as possible before landing softly. “I’m naturally very long-limbed and stretchy,” says Weir. “There are acrobatic things that we do just because it looks pretty, but it’s hard work.” The chair lift. Weir gets into a push-up position in front of the Wunda Chair, a Pilates apparatus; his toes press down on its tightly spring-loaded foot bar. Weir forces the bar down, then shifts his weight to his shoulders and core, which “lifts” the bar upward. Remaining stable requires immense effort. DIET Extra-low-cal. “I don’t eat as much as an athlete should,” says Weir. “I just don’t like it.” Breakfast is coffee and vitamins. Lunch is fruit nectar. When he eats dinner, it’s steak and salad. Weir treats himself to Zone bars during competition and—once a year—angel-food cake with strawberries and heavy whipped cream. “I love black caviar, but it has to be from Astrakhan,” says Weir. “I drink Vitamin Water nonstop—I should have an IV.” SLEEP Six hours, minimum. “I’m an insomniac,” says Weir. “Ambien is my best friend.” |
Wow you found 1, now go tally up how many compete while on a diet that follows a 30% fat intake.
Personally, i dont want to emulate anyone nicknamed 'tinkerbell' but hey, go ahead there freddy. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
another successful athlete who low carbs... sort of...
http://newyorkmetro.com/health/featu...922/index.html And of course, Weir tanked at the Olympics and didn't even medal- lost his second place standing- probably to someone who ate carbs. Koffee |
Originally Posted by koffee brown
And of course, Weir tanked at the Olympics and didn't even medal- lost his second place standing- probably to someone who ate carbs.
Koffee just the fact that he was there puts him in the top 1% of athletes in his field.. but since he lost, of course, it was the lack of carbs, yes, for sure, it was the carbs, clearly... (actually, sounds like the guy had a really poor diet, carbs or not) |
Originally Posted by
[B EDIT: OOH OOH, 500 th post. 1 more and we have 500 replies![/B]:D :D
What do I win???? |
a good read on the health benefits of vegetarianism
Vegetarianism: What the Science Tells Us By Sally Fallon and Mary G Enig, PhD Health writers may denigrate animal foods with insouciance but, in fact, the scientific literature offers very little in the way of long-term studies on the value of a vegetarian diet. Dr. Russell Smith, a statistician, analyzed the existing studies on vegetariansim1 and discovered that while there have been ample investigations which show, quite unsurprisingly, that vegetarian diets significantly decrease blood cholesterol levels, studies evaluating the effects of vegetarian diets on mortalities continue to be few in number. In fact, Smith speculated that the available data from the many existing prospective studies are being shelved because they reveal no benefits of vegetarianism. For example, mortality statistics are strangely absent from the Tromso Heart Study in Norway which showed that vegetarians had slightly lower blood cholesterol levels than nonvegetarians.2 In a review of some 3,000 articles in the scientific literature, Smith found only two that compared mortality data for vegetarians and nonvegetarians. One was a 1978 study of Seventh Day Adventists (SDAs). Two very poor analyses of the data were published in 1984, one by H. A. Kahn and one by D. A. Snowden.3 The publication by Kahn rather arbitrarily threw out most of the data and considered only subjects who indicated very infrequent or very frequent consumption of the various foods. They then computed "odds ratios" which showed that mortality increased as meat or poultry consumption increased (but not for cheese, eggs, milk or fat attached to meat.) When Smith analyzed total mortality rates from the study as a function of the frequencies of consuming cheese, meat, milk, eggs and fat attached to meat, he found that the total death rate decreased as the frequencies of consuming cheese, eggs, meat and milk increased. He called the Kahn publication "yet another example of negative results which are massaged and misinterpreted to support the politically correct assertions that vegetarians live longer lives." The analysis by Snowden published mortality data for coronary heart disease (CHD), rather than total mortality data, for the 21-year SDA study. Since he did not eliminate the intermediate frequencies of consumption data on meat, but did so with eggs, cheese and milk, this represents further evidence that both Kahn and Snowden based their results on arbitrary, after-the-fact analysis and not on pre-planned analyses contingent on the design of their questionnaire. Snowden computed relative risk ratios and concluded that CHD mortality increased as meat consumption increased. However, the rates of increase were trivial at 0.04 percent and 0.01 percent respectively for males and females. Snowden, like Kahn, also found no relationship between frequency of consumption of eggs, cheese and milk and CHD mortality "risk." Citing the SDA study, other writers have claimed that nonvegetarians have higher all-cause mortality rates than vegetarians4 and that, "There seems little doubt that SDA men at least experience less total heart disease than do others. . ."5 The overpowering motivation to show that a diet low in animal products protects against CHD (and other diseases) is no better exemplified than in the SDA study and its subsequent analysis. While Kahn and Snowden both used the term "substantial" to describe the effects of meat consumption on mortalities, it is more obvious that "trivial" is the appropriate descriptor. It is also interesting that throughout their analyses, they brushed aside their totally negative findings on foods which have much greater quantities of fat, saturated fat and cholesterol. The second study was published by Burr and Sweetnam in 1982.6 It was shown that annual CHD death rate among vegetarians was only 0.01 percent lower than that of nonvegetarians, yet the authors indicated that the difference was "substantial." The table below presents the annual death rates for vegetarians and nonvegetarians which Smith derived from the raw data in the seven-year Burr and Sweetnam study. As can be seen, the "marked" difference between vegetarian and nonvegetarian men in Ischemic Heart Disease (IHD) was only .11 percent. The difference in all-cause death rate was in the opposite direction, a fact that Burr and Sweetnam failed to mention. Moreover, the IHD and all-cause death rates among females were actually slightly greater for heart disease and substantially greater for all causes in vegetarians than in nonvegetarians. Annual Death Rates of Vegetarians and Nonvegetarians IHD All-Cause Male vegetarians .22% .93% Male nonvegetarians .33% .88% Female vegetarians .14% .86% Female nonvegetarians .10% .54% These results are absolutely not supportive of the proposition that vegetarianism protects against either heart disease or all-cause mortalities. In fact, they indicate that vegetarianism is more dangerous for women than for men. The claim that vegetarians have lower rates of cancer compared to nonvegetarians has been squarely contradicted by a 1994 study comparing vegetarians with the general population.7 Researchers found that although vegetarian Seventh Day Adventists have the same or slightly lower cancer rates for some sites, for example 91 percent instead of 100 percent for breast cancer, the rates for numerous other cancers are much higher than the general US population standard, especially cancers of the reproductive tract. SDA females had more Hodgkins disease (131 percent), more brain cancer (118 percent), more malignant melanoma (171 percent), more uterine cancer (191 percent), more cervical cancer (180 percent) and more ovarian cancer (129 percent) on average. About the Authors Mary G. Enig, PhD is the author of Know Your Fats: The Complete Primer for Understanding the Nutrition of Fats, Oils, and Cholesterol, Bethesda Press, May 2000. Order your copy here: www.enig.com/trans.html. Sally Fallon is the author of Nourishing Traditions: The Cookbook that Challenges Politically Correct Nutrition and the Diet Dictocrats, and Eat Fat, Lose Fat (both with Mary G. Enig, PhD), as well as of numerous articles on the subject of diet and health. She is President of the Weston A. Price Foundation and founder of A Campaign for Real Milk. She is the mother of four healthy children raised on whole foods including butter, cream, eggs and meat. References 1. Russell L Smith, Diet, Blood Cholesterol and Coronary Heart Disease: A Critical Review of the Literature, Vol 2, Vector Enterprises, November 1991. The author was a statistician who subjected the many studies on coronary heart disease to appropriate rigorous statistical analysis. 2. V Fonnebo, "The Tromso Heart Study: diet, religion and risk factor for coronary heart disease," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1988, 48:739 3. H A Kahn et al, "Association between reported diet and all-cause mortality," American Journal of Epidemiology, 1984, 119:775; D A Snowden et al, "Meat consumption and fatal ischemic heart disease," Preventive Medicine, 1984, 13:490 4. J T Dwyer, "Health aspects of vegetarian diets," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1988, 48:712 5. G E Fraser, "Determinants of ischemic heart disease in Seventh-Day Adventists: a review," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1988, 48:833 6. M L Burr and P M Sweetnam, "Vegetarianism, dietary fiber and mortality," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1982, 36:873 7. P F Mills, et al, "Cancer incidence among California Seventh-Day Adventists, 1976-1982," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, 1994, Vol 59 (Supplement), Pages 1136S-1142S. |
EDIT: OOH OOH, 500 th post. 1 more and we have 500 replies!
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
Do I get a prize? :)
Originally Posted by Mike Cavanaugh
What do I win????
Regards, Anthony |
Low carb rubbish. I live on bread, potatoes, pasta, Earth Balance, olive oil and vegetables and some legumes (chickpeas, mainly). Sometimes I'll have the first 5 in the same meal.
I have 9% body fat. Wanna lose weight? There's only ONE diet that works reliably: put down the fork. And ride your bike more. Just sayin. Don't forget to drink lots. http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a1...s/highcarb.jpg |
Originally Posted by iBarna
I have 9% body fat. Wanna lose weight? There's only ONE diet that works reliably: put down the fork. And ride your bike more.
|
Originally Posted by DannoXYZ
Funny how the ones pushing low-carb are typically the ones who have problems with their weight. Personally I think a good diet-plan would be to eat everything with chopsticks. With rice, you might actually burn off more calories chasing the darn things around your plate than you'd get from eating them... :)
Regards, Anthony |
Originally Posted by simiCyclist
...Just ask any cardiologist who they're giving bypass and angioplasties to. Hint: Its not lifetime runners, cyclists, or vegetarians.
and later, snarkily: Don't know any practicing cardiologists, eh? this is from something called "journal watch cardiology" http://cardiology.jwatch.org/cgi/con...ull/2004/709/1 Time to Take Low-Carb Diets Seriously? In two randomized trials, researchers compared low-carbohydrate diets with low-fat diets to assess effects on cholesterol levels and weight loss. In a 24-week study, 120 overweight, hyperlipidemic adults (mean BMI, 34) were randomized to eat a low-carbohydrate diet (starting at <20 g/day of carbs, plus nutritional supplements) or a low-fat diet (<30% of daily energy from fat, <300 mg of daily cholesterol, and intake of 500-1000 kcal/day less than usual). Both groups received exercise recommendations and support at group meetings. The retention rate was significantly higher in the low-carb group than in the low-fat group (76% vs. 57%). By 24 weeks, low-carb dieters had fared significantly better than low-fat dieters in mean weight loss (–12.0 kg vs. –6.5 kg), triglyceride change (–74 mg/dL vs. –28 mg/dL), and HDL change (+5.5 mg/dL vs. –1.6 mg/dL); LDL changes were similar in the two groups. In another study (a 1-year follow-up of previously reported 6-month results; Journal Watch Cardiology Aug 8 2003), 132 severely obese adults (mean BMI, 43; about half with hyperlipidemia, about 40% with diabetes) were randomized to eat a low-carb diet (≤30 g/day of carbs) or a conventional calorie- and fat-restricted diet (intake of 500 kcal/day less than usual, ≤30% of calories from fat). Both groups received support at group meetings. At 1 year, the low-carb and low-fat groups did not differ significantly in retention rates (69% and 63%) or mean weight loss (–5.1 kg and –3.1 kg). However, low-carb dieters fared significantly better than low-fat dieters in changes in mean triglyceride levels (–58 mg/dL vs. +4 mg/dL), HDL (–1 mg/dL vs. –5 mg/dL), and hemoglobin A1C (–0.7% vs. –0.1%); LDL changes were similar in the two groups. Comment: Results from these studies should mitigate concerns about adverse lipid effects of low-carbohydrate diets, and even suggest some benefit. Some caveats are that dropout rates were high (particularly among low-fat dieters in the shorter study), dietary adherence was suboptimal, and (in the longer study) 6-month weight-loss advantages in the low-carb group eventually were reduced. Nevertheless, one can no longer dismiss low-carbohydrate dieting as fad. An editorialist recommends encouraging overweight patients to engage in regular physical activity and to experiment with various diets, including low-carb, with an emphasis on healthy sources of fat and protein. — Joel M. Gore, MD Published in Journal Watch Cardiology July 9, 2004 |
to further respond to semi, I would just take a wild guess that most cardiologists patients are there due to any of the following: bad genetics, bad lifestyle - smoking, stress, no exercise, etc. and bad diet - meaning lots of fat AND carbs....
unfortunately we have two or three generations of doctors and experts who have ignored the carbs and focused on the fat... nevermind that the science doesnt support that position (see above, and loads of other studies posted in this thread). |
Just ask any practicing cardiologist to whom they're giving angioplasities and bypass operations. I have. I can tell you the answer is not lifetime runners, cyclists or vegetarians.
You know, its interesting that every time someone has an intelligent counter to your assertion, the best you can do is google up a random report that you don't fully understand yourself. Then when someone with a response grounded in science finds the flaw in your fishing expedition, you sheepishly cry about medical community conspiracies. Even if someone who has actually experienced cardio problems and has sucessfully solved them through specific means, then they must be some kind of mutant and should be ignored. This is called selective science. You only choose the findings that fit your agenda. |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
Just ask any practicing cardiologist to whom they're giving angioplasities and bypass operations. I have. I can tell you the answer is not lifetime runners, cyclists or vegetarians.
You know, its interesting that every time someone has an intelligent counter to your assertion, the best you can do is google up a random report that you don't fully understand yourself. Then when someone with a response grounded in science finds the flaw in your fishing expedition, you sheepishly cry about medical community conspiracies. and you're right, I'm not a scientist, but even you must admit there are a LOT of studies with the same finding = a low carb diet, that includes sat. fat, does NOT adversely affect CHD indicators, and actually improves some of them. Find me one single study that proves the opposite. I'll be waiting... and waiting... and waiting.. Even if someone who has actually experienced cardio problems and has sucessfully solved them through specific means, then they must be some kind of mutant and should be ignored. This is called selective science. You only choose the findings that fit your agenda. |
By your response, are you suggesting that most runners and cyclists eat low carb diets?
|
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
By your response, are you suggesting that most runners and cyclists eat low carb diets?
??? um, is this a trick question? I'm saying the obvious, exercise is good for the heart. |
ask your cardiologists how many patients they have that have been following low carb diets for five years or more?
btw, Dr. Atkins and that South Beach guy, Agaston, were/are cardiologists.... |
STFUAR works best.
I defy anyone to argue against the STFUAR method. |
Originally Posted by mrfreddy
ask your cardiologists how many patients they have that have been following low carb diets for five years or more?
btw, Dr. Atkins and that South Beach guy, Agaston, were/are cardiologists.... Your point is irrelevant. If what you claim, that the high consumption of carbs will contribute to heart disease, then we should see a preponderance of lifetime runners and cyclists getting their plumbing re-done. In fact, its the patients consuming too much saturated fat that end up getting the bypass operations. I suspect is difficult to find many patients that have been following a low carb diet for five years. Most people can't even get to a goal weight, let alone stay on it for five years. Atkins' bankruptcy last year and the sharp decline in the public desire for low carb foods pretty much supports that. |
Originally Posted by SimiCyclist
Your point is irrelevant. If what you claim, that the high consumption of carbs will contribute to heart disease, then we should see a preponderance of lifetime runners and cyclists getting their plumbing re-done.
anway, all I know is that Sat. fat have never been proven to cause heart disease. Got any studies, or just more semantics? In fact, its the patients consuming too much saturated fat that end up getting the bypass operations. I suspect is difficult to find many patients that have been following a low carb diet for five years. Most people can't even get to a goal weight, let alone stay on it for five years. Atkins' bankruptcy last year and the sharp decline in the public desire for low carb foods pretty much supports that. bottom line: you have no science to back up your claim that Sat. fat is the problem. If you do, let's see it. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:54 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.