Carbs or protein for breakfast?

[jak2002003]

What is all this fuss about?

 

I rarely ever eat breakfast. Simply not hungry in the mornings.  

 

As a treat I will have a full English..but that is lest than 5 times a year!

 

I am healthy and the right weight.  It's a myth that breakfast is essential or the most important meal of the day. 

 

OP...If you are hungry in the mornings eat normal sized portion or different stuff each time. Then you will get balanced diet.  Don't eat the same each day....also that is boring.  

 

If you want to be super healthy eat some raw and stir fried vegetables for breakfast.  Fiber will keep you feeling full and they have lots of nutrients and no fat....plus lower in sugar than fruits. 

 

 

[robblok]

4 hours ago, BigStar said:

No, it's more than that. Naive young men believe in magic to get "swole , jacked, ripped, big, bent," but as a rational senior I don't of course. I will play some attention to a body of evidence about something health/fitness related that seems reasonably indicative if it's not too difficult or expensive to apply. And I'll pay attention to a few educated fitness gurus (not bodybuilders) I respect who aren't selling supplements. Quick Google:

 

https://www.consumerreports.org/healthy-eating/how-older-adults-can-meet-their-protein-needs-a8954254493/

 

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/10-benefits-of-creatine

 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4304302/

 

I can't compare before/after in the absence of any twin or clone, but I'm satisfied that there's likely been a positive effect over the past decade or so. Never underestimate the power of the placebo, of course, as we're so often reminded here.

 

I'm not overly concerned about the delicacy of my taste buds, one of the biggest pitfalls for our overweight members. And I needn't track my weight closely. It never varies much from the ideal for my height/weight/age/build. No yo-yo weight gains and furious attempts to lose (or gain) weight.

Naive young men do believe that but I am not naive, nice to see the creatine benefits. I have used it in the past and it does work to get a extra rep or so out of a set. But im not too concerned about that. 

 

But the other benefits for the brain seem interesting. I stayed away from creatine mainly from a weight tracking point of view as whenever i used it i got heavier. Now that is not a problem, if i knew how much of it was caused by the creatine (ATP binds with water). But should not be much of a problem once you got a base line. 

 

[robblok]

4 hours ago, jak2002003 said:

What is all this fuss about?

 

I rarely ever eat breakfast. Simply not hungry in the mornings.  

 

As a treat I will have a full English..but that is lest than 5 times a year!

 

I am healthy and the right weight.  It's a myth that breakfast is essential or the most important meal of the day. 

 

OP...If you are hungry in the mornings eat normal sized portion or different stuff each time. Then you will get balanced diet.  Don't eat the same each day....also that is boring.  

 

If you want to be super healthy eat some raw and stir fried vegetables for breakfast.  Fiber will keep you feeling full and they have lots of nutrients and no fat....plus lower in sugar than fruits. 

 

 

Do whatever you like i like a good breakfast and I don't believe in the myth of it being the most important meal. I am hungry in the morning unlike you. I do eat the same every day for breakfast but I am not easily bored. A balanced breakfast is a myth unless you include greens in it otherwise its all the same whatever you eat be it rice, oats, bread or whatever.

[scoutman360]

Why planning 3 meals a day? As my uncle always said, "I eat when I am hungry, sleep when I am tired, and wake up when I am rested."

 

Now doctors are promoting the benefits of intermittent fasting. Keeping your food intake to only 4-6 hrs per day. We all need carbs, but the excess consumption is making everyone fat. I currently don't eat until lunch and feel great.

[wn2c]

42 minutes ago, scoutman360 said:

We all need carbs

yes, but nobody needs more carbs than what is found in basic food, I mean that NOBODY needs rice, pasta and bread, because those carbs are TOTALLY useless and the few carbs found in different found are already enough.

By the way, in case you don't know, if someone was not eating carbs at all, the body can transform protein in carbs.

So i repeat, asking if you need to eat carbs is already wrong, the reply is NO, because without knowing you will already eat enough everyday.

 

[wn2c]

On 9/6/2021 at 8:06 AM, Moonlover said:

Carbs for me. Porridge, bread or rice porridge (I know it by its Chinese name of congee). I also like Chinese steamed dumplings, but I don't often get those as I live in the country now.

 

The morning is my most active period of the day so I like to have a good reserve of fuel to keep me going. 

 

show us your belly ?

 

 

[robblok]

On 6/12/2022 at 11:12 PM, wn2c said:

show us your belly ?

 

 

No problem, i can show my belly im lean on carbs. The stupid myth that carbs are bad per definition needs to die. 

 

 

[Bohemianfish]

Many skip "break fast". Intermittent fasting and low-carb.

[BigStar]

On 6/15/2022 at 9:13 PM, robblok said:

No problem, i can show my belly im lean on carbs. The stupid myth that carbs are bad per definition needs to die.

But @wn2c didn’t imply one couldn’t be lean “on carbs,” whatever that means. He merely speculated that, based on the sample menu, @Moonlover probably isn’t, other things equal. If he is, he can of course say so with some informative, inspiring context. Crickets.

Nothing to do with you at all, really.

 

On 6/15/2022 at 9:13 PM, robblok said:

The stupid myth that carbs are bad per definition needs to die. 

Accordingly, what must first die is the stupid myth that a stupid myth exists that carbs are bad per definition. Then it can’t be used in stupid straw man arguments.

[robblok]

13 minutes ago, BigStar said:

But @wn2c didn’t imply one couldn’t be lean “on carbs,” whatever that means. He merely speculated that, based on the sample menu, @Moonlover probably isn’t, other things equal. If he is, he can of course say so with some informative, inspiring context. Crickets.

Nothing to do with you at all, really.

 

Accordingly, what must first die is the stupid myth that a stupid myth exists that carbs are bad per definition. Then it can’t be used in stupid straw man arguments.

The myth exists its common among low carb people. (carbs are evil ect)

 

You can deny all you want the idiot keto / super low carb people are what caused this.

 

Im just an example of how you can be lean on (moderate and mainly unprocessed carbs) Oats / sweet potatoes even some white bread (oh the low carb devil will come for me)

 

Its more about amounts than certain foods. 

[BigStar]

34 minutes ago, robblok said:

The myth exists its common among low carb people. (carbs are evil ect)

Merely continuing to spread the myth about the myth while throwing in some gratuitous demonization of low carb people. Counterproductive and a usual attempt to derail the topic. 

 

Try for once to stick to the topic. Focus. Think. Did @wn2c or anyone else in this topic state or even imply any such myth? Quote the exact words that triggered your own mythologizing.  

 

 

[robblok]

32 minutes ago, BigStar said:

Merely continuing to spread the myth about the myth while throwing in some gratuitous demonization of low carb people. Counterproductive and a usual attempt to derail the topic. 

 

Try for once to stick to the topic. Focus. Think. Did @wn2c or anyone else in this topic state or even imply any such myth? Quote the exact words that triggered your own mythologizing.  

 

 

Ok lets stick to the topic then even though carbs are not necessary they are certainly not harmful or and you wont get fat from them either unless you consume too much. Calories that is, otherwise the guy on the twinkie diet would never have lost his weight.

 

No need to go low carb or keto to get to your goals. Low cab people need to learn that there is not one way to lose weight but many. That people respond differently (as research has shown). Some do amazing on low carb others amazing on higher carbs. On average meta-analysis shows no advantage of low carb (meta-analysis makes sure you cant cherry pick studies).

 

However there are people who respond great to low carb, same as to higher carb. Food selection is far more important then the difference between carbs fat and protein. 

 

So constantly bringing up carbs is not helpful in the least.

Do we need carbs (no)

Do you need to go low carb to lose weight (no)

Is it a good idea to cut processed foods (yes)

Is it ultimately about food intake (yes after cutting out processed foods)

 

 

 

 

[WaveHunter]

This whole debate really boils down to nothing more than personal preferences.  There is no "right" answer of whether protein or carbs are more important at breakfast time, or whether breakfast is even important or not.

 

Everything you eat gets converted to macronutrients and the timing of when you ingest your food really has no significant bearing on that.

 

What is important is that the metabolic machinery of your body is capable of efficiently using those nutrients.  As you age, that machinery becomes less efficient at this task.  Molecular proteins (as opposed to nutritional proteins) like rNA and dNA become altered and often mal-adapted.   Such proteins can become structurally altered (protein folding). 

 

Protein structure is crucial to metabolic health and when it is not optimal, serious health problems result.

 

You guys are missing the bigger picture..  The human body is nothing more than a machine.  Quite literally, you exist because of molecular machinery within every cell in your body.  When I say "machine" I mean that quite literally.

 

Mitochondria within every one of your cells is what powers your body.  Within mitochondria is ATP Synthase, and this is quite literally nano-scale rotary engines just like you would find in a car!  They produce power in an entirely mechanical way by spinning like little propellers!

 

As incredible as that sounds it is absolutely true.  See this animation to see how it works:

 

What's my point in all of this?

 

My point is simply that "nutrition" is like fuel in the gas tank that runs this engine.  Regardless of what you eat or when you eat, this engine will degrade as you age.  Whether you are on a high carb diet or a high protein diet makes no difference.

 

Beyond avoiding highly processed carbohydrates, what you eat or when you eat it makes little difference to your metabolic health.  Of course that's just my opinion, but I have been on all sorts of nutritional regimens over the years.  Growing up in the 1970's my nutritions was based on the classic food pyramid that included a lot of newly emerging processed foods, which of course was bad and so I started exploring alternatives.  I was a whole food Vegan for a time, then i went the other direction exploring low carb / keto, then Paleo.  And in the final analysis, there were pros and cons to each, but really there was no single regime that was ideal.  In the end, it really didn't matter!

 

What does matter to me now is doing what I can to keep the metabolic machinery running well.  All of those maladapted molecular proteins that arise simply from aging are the real threat to metabolic health, and the body actually has a way of dealing with this!

 

Simply put, the natural mechanism for dealing with this is called autophagy.  This is a natural process that goes on in your body 24/7 to sequester these maladapted proteins and then break them down into basic amino acids that can be recycled to build new, and fully functional proteins.

 

Sometimes though, the damage is too great for the body to deal with them though, and that is where periodic fasting comes to play.

 

I know there's been a lot of BS from health "gurus" about the virtues of periodic fasting, but there is an element of truth to it, and that element of truth comes from the groundbreaking research of one man, a Japanese scientists.His name is Yoshinori Ohsumi.

 

He was awarded the Nobel Prize for discovering and documenting the precise way autophagy can be markedly ramped up when one is in the fasted state.

 

In simple terms, in as little as 72 hours of being in the fasted state, a significant amount of damaged proteins can be broken down and replaced with new proteins.

 

Without going into lots of detail, my metabolic strategy these days is just to eat sensibly whenever I am truly hungry...and that is it!  Periodically (usually every 3 months, just so I can mark it on a calendar), I do a 72 hours water fast along with electrolyte supplementation for induced autophagy.

 

I'm not claiming a miraculous difference is a result of this, but I do feel healthier as a result, and I no longer fuss about dietary protocols  other than just staying away from highly processed foods and excessive carbs.

 

Anyway, I just find the actual science behind how our bodies really work to be a fascinating subject.  There are just too many unfounded myths and misinformation out there to lead people astray, but if you just stick to ACTUAL science that has gold-standard research to back it up and has been peer-reviewed,  rather than "bro-science" you pick up on YouTube or at the gym, you'll be a better person for it.

 

Oh, and one last thing...I know the jist of most thread like this is really about losing fat.  I think too much emphasis is placed on dieting these days! 

 

Dieting with the goal being only to lose fat is short sighted and usually is doomed to fail!  The only nutritional strategy that works is to eat in order to be healthy...PERIOD! 

 

If you eat for satiety rather than for pleasure, simply avoid heavily processed carbohydrates, and get some reasonable exercise every day, you should have no need to count calories or macros, or religiously stand on your bathroom scale every day!

 

All of these crazy diets and complicated protocols to shed fat are just a waste of time and of no benefit except to the marketers and health gurus promoting them IMO.

 

[BigStar]

On 6/17/2022 at 10:59 AM, WaveHunter said:

Everything you eat gets converted to macronutrients and the timing of when you ingest your food really has no significant bearing on that.

Begs the question. Consider the implication of this: if you don't eat, then there's nothing to convert. Oh--you did consider that.???? 

 

On 6/17/2022 at 10:59 AM, WaveHunter said:

Regardless of what you eat or when you eat, this engine will degrade as you age.  Whether you are on a high carb diet or a high protein diet makes no difference.

The TVF Fatalistic Principle to avoid acting on matters of health and fitness except to visit docs. Related to the shrewd die early to avoid a longer period in the bedsit advice. Misses the point of attempting to slow the process of degradation and so compress morbidity.

 

And in fact some diets do typically have better effects on the lipids panel. Few know this or pay attention, and indeed you have only an "opinion" based on your experiment of one unsupported by the numbers. 

 

On 6/17/2022 at 10:59 AM, WaveHunter said:

Dieting with the goal being only to lose fat is short sighted and usually is doomed to fail!  The only nutritional strategy that works is to eat in order to be healthy...PERIOD! 

P_i_ssin' the wind. Our members have long determined that health is derived from meds, docs, and hospitals. Not long ago there was an amusing example of a poster congratulating himself on his "healthy" blood pressure for his age. Turned out it was owing to one of a list of meds he was taking, and in fact he has a somewhat alarming TG/HDL ratio. Guess he's in search of another med for that. 

 

So the goal has to be "lose fat," specifically belly fat.???? Everyone knows the conventional methods, and most of the overweight have already tried them and given up. So here we are going round and round. 

 

[BigStar]

On 6/17/2022 at 10:19 AM, robblok said:

Ok lets stick to the topic then

Unfortunately you’ve proven yourself incapable of doing so. You've been doing some backpedaling here but only to misdirect and obfuscate.

You were asked for the exact quotation from the thread where anyone has stated or even implied such a myth. You’re unable to find one, because it doesn’t exist. So you just made up that myth to hijack the topic merely because you don’t like any mention of low carb.

<SNIP! Further fallacious regurgitated straw man “arguments”--no low carber claims that low carb is the only way to lose weight, an obvious absurdity>

 

On 6/17/2022 at 10:19 AM, robblok said:

So constantly bringing up carbs is not helpful in the least.

The opposite, of course. Constantly attacking low carb is not helpful in the least. Now of course you could end that silly vendetta.

 

Some find low carb helpful if it’s OCCASIONALLY brought up by the small minority of low carbers here. Most have tried and failed to follow other strategies.

 

And they and everyone else already know the other strategies, nothing new in your own constant harping. Starve 'n' Sweat, Whole Foods, and Push Away From The Table are right up there on the TVF Scroll Of Known Truths along with Chinese Don't Spend, Women Only Want Money, and TAT Tells Porkies.

 

Low carb has always been Whole Foods, BTW, long before the Whole Foods fad started. We don't dare call it a fad, however.???? The fad isn't quite so simple, unfortunately.  Moving to lower and slower carbs will certainly help, but maybe not as much as one might hope.

 

 

 

And you can google for countless testimonials that Whole Foods didn't work.

 

The Known Truths are merely derived from the countless hack diet & fitness sites saturating the internet with their plans, consultations, supplements, equipment, memberships, apps, subscriptions, and mostly dreams. Fantastic repeat business model (as you know quite well) basking in the vast financial resources of the food, pharma, vegan, and climate change industries responsible for so much funding of biased medical studies and misguided public policy. Inevitably, they all hate low carb.????

 
We’ve in fact had some notable success stories from members who’d heard about low carb on the forum. Low carb info is comparatively hard to find otherwise amid all the noise generated by the above industries and even here on our lowly forum what with wannabe bodybuilders blowing smoke. Excluding of course the intellectually honest @tropo, a low carber himself with whose low carb you hypocritically have no problem whatsoever. ???? I miss him.

Come to think of it, I don’t recall any posters who were converted to starve ‘n’ sweat etc. with subsequent success--after learning about it here. Even wannabe lifters soon disappeared after wasting money on equipment.

 
Being fit and healthy is ridiculously simple, but no one can make a living out of telling people how simple it is, so most people never find out.
     —P. D. Mangan

So, contrary to your hopes, interested members here needn’t and shouldn’t be deprived of mentioning, or learning about, a long-established, well-researched, now mainstream and proven successful dieting/lifestyle strategy merely because of @robblok ‘s little hobbyhorse hostility. In fact, the low carb message seems to be gathering momentum even here. That’s obviously distressing, but just gon’ have to suck it up.

My point now proven (thank you), and having wasted enough time, I’ll bow out and you may continue arguing with yourself and hijacking the topic.

 

[WaveHunter]

23 hours ago, BigStar said:

Begs the question. Consider the implication of this: if you don't eat, then there's nothing to convert. Oh--you did consider that.???? 

 

The TVF Fatalistic Principle to avoid acting on matters of health and fitness except to visit docs. Related to the shrewd die early to avoid a longer period in the bedsit advice. Misses the point of attempting to slow the process of degradation and so compress morbidity.

 

And in fact some diets do typically have better effects on the lipids panel. Few know this or pay attention, and indeed you have only an "opinion" based on your experiment of one unsupported by the numbers. 

 

P_i_ssin' the wind. Our members have long determined that health is derived from meds, docs, and hospitals. Not long ago there was an amusing example of a poster congratulating himself on his "healthy" blood pressure for his age. Turned out it was owing to one of a list of meds he was taking, and in fact he has a somewhat alarming TG/HDL ratio. Guess he's in search of another med for that. 

 

So the goal has to be "lose fat," specifically belly fat.???? Everyone knows the conventional methods, and most of the overweight have already tried them and given up. So here we are going round and round. 

 

I'm not exactly sure what points you are trying to make.  You are missing my point entirely about foregoing the goal of losing fat.

 

I am saying it is entirely wrong to diet in order to lose fat because that should not be the goal.  Dieting to lose fat is like putting a band-aid on an infected wound.  It's not going to fix the problem.

 

People are fat because they have let the metabolic machinery of their body fall into disrepair.  It happens naturally as we age.  It also happens if we make bad decisions about our nutrition and eat heavily processed foods and over-indulge in carbohydrates.

 

Caloric restriction diets are not the answer.  They are just a temporary stop-gap (like a band-aid on an infected wound).  How many people go on weight loss diets only to find themselves regaining all the weight they lost and then some, and having to repeat the process over and over and over again?  Diets designed only to reduce calories only benefit the marketers who promote them.

 

The only thing that works in the long-term is to take nutrition seriously and cut out heavily processed foods and too many carbohydrates, and then just eat to reach satiety, and GO NO FURTHER.  That all by itself, combined with moderate daily exercise will reduce body fat to proper levels.  That is really as far as your dieting strategy should go.

 

When you restrict calories in a typical diet, the body responds by reducing your basal metabolic rate.  So, even though you are consuming less calories, your bodies reacts to this by slowing you down to burn less calories.  No net loss will occur.

 

Worse, when you finally return to your old habits and eat again, in your reduced metabolic state, you will pile on more fat then you started with!

 

It is this classic "yo-yo" syndrome that is common in all calorie-restricted diets.

 

DIeting is NOT the answer.  You need to address the underlying reason WHY you are fat in the first place, and the reason that many people don't consider is that their basic metabolic machinery has been damaged, either by natural aging, or by very poor nutritional lifestyle!

 

The absolute best way to fix the metabolic damage that's been done from natural aging and form a poor lifestyle is periodic fasting.  I base this comment on sound scientific research, not health guru mumboo-jumbo or pseudoscience!

 

First of all, when you enter into a fasted state, your body can actually make the essential glucose it needs to function in the short term through gluconeogenesis, and then once ketone bodies began to be produced, ketones will take over to provide an alternate fuel source to glucose, so the lack of exogenous macronutrients is not a real concern during the duration of a typical self-imposed fast.

 

Remember that, unlike a typical diet, the purpose of a fast is NOT to lose fat, but to fix your damaged metabolic pathways that will enable your body to maintain proper body fat levels and optimal metabolic health WITHOUT THE NEED OF DIETING

 

That can typically require a fast that last as little as 72 hours for most people, and perhaps as long as 7 days for others with more serious issues.  Everybody is different.

 

Assuming you have more than say 10% body fat, and no pre-existing medical conditions this duration of fasting is entirely safe as long as you have consulted with a doctor, have had your blood tests done, and monitor electrolytes, all of which are very easy to do.

 

The only macro lacking during an extended fast is protein, and contrary to what most believe, short term lack of exogenous protein is NOT a bad thing.  If you conduct a fast properly, there will be negligible muscle protein breakdown.

 

Yes, protein will be catabolized during the initial 72 hours of a fast until sufficient ketone bodies are produced BUT that does not mean that those proteins will be those associated with muscle mass

 

The human body is smart enough to spare essential proteins that are necessary for survival, and focus on compromised proteins such as those within the mitochondria of every cell in the body that have become damaged through advanced age, disease, OR A POOR NUTRITIONAL LIFESTYLE.

 

YES!!!!  A poor nutritional lifestyle based on habitual consumption of heavily processed foods and an over-abundance of carbohydrates will completely screw up the essential metabolic pathways and result in damaged proteins WITHIN THE CELLS in the form of misfolded proteins and glycated proteins.

 

The human body has a natural mechanism to deal with this that goes on 24/7 within our bodies and it's called "autophagy". A lot of health gurus have latched onto this claiming all sorts of fantastical things about it, most of which is just plain BS designed for self-serving purposes, but this is a very real process nonetheless.

 

Unfortunately, the natural rate of autophagy sometimes can not deal with the extreme damage done, especially if that damage is self-induced through an extremely poor nutritional lifestyle.

 

Fasting comes into the picture because of the work of the Japanese scientist who was awarded a Nobel prize for his discoveries and documentation that fasting significantly ramps up the rate of autophagy.  Google Yoshinori Ohsumi in the link of my original post to learn more.

 

Positive and clinically proven improvements in metabolic health can occur within as little as 72 hours of being in a fasted state. 

 

The only "diet" that makes any scientific sense at all is fasting, and the purpose is NOT to lose fat, but instead to repair metabolic pathways that have been damaged and cause fat accumulation to occur.  Again, the typical caloric restriction diet does nothing to repair the damage.  It is only a band-aid on an infected wound.  In simple terms, the purpose of autophagy is to sequester damaged proteins within our cells, and break them down into basic amino acids that can then be recycled into new fully functioning, healthy proteins.

 

Conducting such a fast every 90 days is an excellent and clinically proven way to maintain metabolic health.  Think of it as seasonal house-cleaning for you body!

 

If your metabolic machinery is in good condition with the aid of a periodic fast to induce ramped-up autophagy  and you eat and exercise sensibly, you will NEVER have a need to go on a fat-loss diet...EVER, regardless of how old you are. 

[robblok]

@WaveHunter

 

The slowing of metabolic rate is grossly overstated. You can bring it up but its basically not a real factor.

Everyone who loses weight will burn less calories no matter what diet you use. I mean you log around less weight so you burn less calories. 

 

There is indeed an adaptation that goes further then the loss you have from just carrying around less bodyweight. But that loss is not big enough to stop a diet. (see below)

 

I can attest to a site full of gym goers who all lost weight while cutting calories.  It just works nothing has ever been proven that it does not work

 

Quote

 

Below your own words

The only thing that works in the long-term is to take nutrition seriously and cut out heavily processed foods and too many carbohydrates, and then just eat to reach satiety, and GO NO FURTHER.  That all by itself, combined with moderate daily exercise will reduce body fat to proper levels.  That is really as far as your dieting strategy should go

 

 

That is basically cutting calories I mean what else is it., and yes that is the strategy one should go for.  Because its sustainable. You can diet, but its not a long term solution.

 

Quote

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/study-shows-metabolism-slows-weight-loss-causing-diets-fail-rcna13543

 

A new study shows how the body's metabolism slows as a way to balance the lower amount of calories that are consumed.

An analysis of data from 65 dieting white and Black women, ages 21 to 41, revealed that their bodies could adapt to burn, on average, 50 fewer calories a day. 

 

 

 

If 50 calories are going to kill your diet your doing it wrong.

 

I have always advocated for whole foods and cutting out processed foods, im just not the type that will cut out carbs and it works for me and many others. 

 

Below a really good vid about obesity (and he says its not a choice and he points out the problems different people have the differences between bodies and so on. Really interesting watch). I agree with him that different people have different problems. 

 

This guy always his points backed up by science.

 

 

[WaveHunter]

What's right for one person may not be right for another.  That's one thing I think everybody in this thread can agree on.

 

The other thing I think everybody can agree on (if they really think about it for a while) is that it's very hard to accumulate excess fat if you ONLY eat when you are truly hungry.

 

The human body is a remarkable machine that's evolved over thousands of years.  If you stay away from junky processed foods that alter the body's natural satiety signals, it will regulate your appetite so that you consume only what your body actually needs to work optimally.

 

You should NEVER have the need to go on any sort of weight loss diet, EVER.  If you have a need for that then there is an underlying metabolic dysfunction that should really be addressed, and that is simply in your selection of foods.

 

Historically speaking, obesity and resultant syndromes like Diabetes-2 were never at the epidemic levels that they are today.  There's no mystery to that fact.  The reason is simple.  It's highly processed, carbohydrate rich foods that just did not exist until several decades ago! 

 

It's no coincidence if you look at the statistics of obesity and diabetes-2 that the epidemic rise started almost precisely when processed foods came into being.

 

Such foods are intentionally designed to be addicting in the truest sense of the word.  They are intentionally designed to be just as addictive as any controlled drug, and some scientists say even more addicting than heroin, in the case of refined sugar!

 

Years ago, Lay's potato chips coined a phrase that many would come to recognize and never forget - "Betcha can't eat just one!"  The advertising slogan referenced the addictive nature of potato chips and the unlikelihood that anyone would be satisfied with just one.

 

The real health danger of excessive carbohydrates is not in getting fat.  The real danger is what they do within each and every cell of your body.

 

They damage cellular proteins like RNA and DNA within every cell in your body through a process called "glycation"

 

Glycation is the most general term describing the adduction of a carbohydrate to another biomolecule, such as a protein, lipid, or DNA.  This results in cellular structures that become sticky and brittle, with impaired function. These impaired molecules are called advanced glycation end products, or AGEs.

 

Glycation end products are believed to play a causative role in many diseases such as coronary diseases and diabetes type 2, and consuming an excessively high-carbohydrate diet is the main driving factor for out-of-control glycation and AGE accumulation in the body...PURE AND SIMPLE, and the scientific evidence of this is overwhelming!  GOogle it and find out for yourself.

 

I am a big advocate of periodic fasting for only one real reason, and it is NOT as a diet to lose weight.  Instead it is an easy and efficient way to go "cold turkey" from highly processed foods, and secondarily, to repair the damage that has been done to your cells through glycation end products.

 

Remarkably, simple water fasting allows this to happen in as little as 72 hours.  I know this sounds like a wild claim,but it is soundly backed up by the Nobel prize winning research of Yoshinori Ohsumi

 

It's actually so simple and intuitive once you understand what heavily processed foods really do to you, and how the body is designed to reverse this.

 

[bangkokairportlink]

It's funny how the carbs "experts" here cannot understand that carbs can work for them BECAUSE THEY DO NOT OVER EAT,

but carbs do not works for people like me who cannot eat 100g carbs/day, I need MANY plates, so the only solution was to quit definitively.

But stop saying that carbs are not the cause for MOST OLD MEN to be fat, this is and there is no other reason.

If all old foreigners would quit carbs, they would not be fat and sick anymore.

Then do what you want if you are not able to understand anything correctly...

[bangkokairportlink]

On 6/15/2022 at 9:13 PM, robblok said:

No problem, i can show my belly im lean on carbs. The stupid myth that carbs are bad per definition needs to die. 

 

 

so wrong to post this when most people are not able to understand correctly.

The simple solution for me and ANYBODY ELSE is no carbs or very low carbs, you like it or not. this is the only way for people who do not exercise enough. Nobody needs more carbs than what is found in food that not mainly carbs.

 

 

 

[robblok]

2 hours ago, bangkokairportlink said:

so wrong to post this when most people are not able to understand correctly.

The simple solution for me and ANYBODY ELSE is no carbs or very low carbs, you like it or not. this is the only way for people who do not exercise enough. Nobody needs more carbs than what is found in food that not mainly carbs.

 

 

 

Nothing wrong with this post just your belief that carbs are bad. Its been discredited its about the amount of calories once you get that in your head you will understand.

 

Otherwise the guy on twinkie diet could not have lost weight. Case closed.

 

Now I wont say that eating huge amounts of processed carbs are not bad, but in the end its about quantaty.

 

Its time for you to understand that not everyone has a problem with carbs. There are people who indeed react good to low carb, others don't that been proven too in scientific tests. Maybe you should get out of your bias and start reading other websites too.

[robblok]

2 hours ago, bangkokairportlink said:

It's funny how the carbs "experts" here cannot understand that carbs can work for them BECAUSE THEY DO NOT OVER EAT,

but carbs do not works for people like me who cannot eat 100g carbs/day, I need MANY plates, so the only solution was to quit definitively.

But stop saying that carbs are not the cause for MOST OLD MEN to be fat, this is and there is no other reason.

If all old foreigners would quit carbs, they would not be fat and sick anymore.

Then do what you want if you are not able to understand anything correctly...

Yes its about overeating.. now you got it. 

 

So its overeating not carbs. 

 

Yes some people overeat on carbs others dont people are different stat to accept it.

[WaveHunter]

2 hours ago, bangkokairportlink said:

so wrong to post this when most people are not able to understand correctly.

The simple solution for me and ANYBODY ELSE is no carbs or very low carbs, you like it or not. this is the only way for people who do not exercise enough. Nobody needs more carbs than what is found in food that not mainly carbs.

 

 

 

It's not so much that carbs per se are bad for you.  It really is more a matter of what type of carbs you consume.  "Natural" carbs in moderation do not make you fat or disrupt metabolic mechanisms (which is the real issue, since getting fat is only a symptom of a dysfunctional metabolism).

 

The type of carbs that cause problems are man-made, heavily processed ones, like foods that contain high-fructose corn syrup, or refined sugar for example. 

 

Look at labels on foods you buy in the grocery store, and you may be shocked to see that almost all processed foods contain High fructose corn syrup and refined sugar, even ones where you wouldn't expect it like in salad dressings or unsweetened breakfast cereals...and almost any food that is labelled as "non-fat"

 

"Non-Fat" processed food items are the biggest scam in the manufactured food industry!  In order for processed "non-fat" foot products to have any flavor at all, lots of refined sugar and /or high fructose corn syrup must be used.  Don't take my word for it, just look at the labels.

 

Cut those out of your diet entirely, and your body will take care of itself as far as reducing excess fat.

 

Many well-respected scientists firmly believe that refined sugars can actually be more addictive than heroin, and when you look at the underlying science that supports this view, it is both compelling and shocking.

 

So really, the problem is that when you eat these kind of foods, you quickly become addicted to them, and THAT is where you get in trouble. 

 

An occasional indulgence is one thing, but when you become addicted to them, your satiety sensors are dulled and you will overeat them on a massive scale without even being aware of the damage they really doing to you.

 

Again, getting fat from eating this way is not the real issue.  The real issue is what it does to your metabolic health, and the very real damage it does to every single cell in your body. 

 

Getting fat is only a symptom, and any form of caloric reduction is not going to solve the problem unless you address the real issue of consuming processed foods.

[WaveHunter]

So....big picture wise, you really have to decide are you just a vain person who cares only about your looks as far as shedding excess fat, or are you someone who truly cares about your metabolic health.

 

If you are the latter, you should be more concerned about WHAT you are eating, not how many calories you are eating.  Excessive carbohydrates in the form of processed food laden with high fructose corn syrup and refined sugars is what's doing you in, not excessive calories.

 

Forget about counting calories!  That kind of dieting is just a big waste of time!

[TacoKhun]

On 6/17/2022 at 10:19 AM, robblok said:

Ok lets stick to the topic then even though carbs are not necessary they are certainly not harmful or and you wont get fat from them either unless you consume too much. Calories that is, otherwise the guy on the twinkie diet would never have lost his weight.

 

No need to go low carb or keto to get to your goals. Low cab people need to learn that there is not one way to lose weight but many. That people respond differently (as research has shown). Some do amazing on low carb others amazing on higher carbs. On average meta-analysis shows no advantage of low carb (meta-analysis makes sure you cant cherry pick studies).

 

However there are people who respond great to low carb, same as to higher carb. Food selection is far more important then the difference between carbs fat and protein. 

 

So constantly bringing up carbs is not helpful in the least.

Do we need carbs (no)

Do you need to go low carb to lose weight (no)

Is it a good idea to cut processed foods (yes)

Is it ultimately about food intake (yes after cutting out processed foods)

 

 

 

 

Carbs trigger insulin release, insulin is fat storing hormone. If you young, active and healthy, it probably does not concern you much, otherwise carbs should be avoided. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/c/drekberg/videos

[robblok]

6 hours ago, TacoKhun said:

Carbs trigger insulin release, insulin is fat storing hormone. If you young, active and healthy, it probably does not concern you much, otherwise carbs should be avoided. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/c/drekberg/videos

You obviously have no clue you can't store fat if you don't overeat. Also insulin release is not all day long even if you eat carbs. You body can burn fat in the time your not high on insulin. Proof is in the fact the twinkie diet (100% carbs and surgar) made a guy lose weight.  Should not be possible accoridng to you.

[robblok]

13 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

So....big picture wise, you really have to decide are you just a vain person who cares only about your looks as far as shedding excess fat, or are you someone who truly cares about your metabolic health.

 

If you are the latter, you should be more concerned about WHAT you are eating, not how many calories you are eating.  Excessive carbohydrates in the form of processed food laden with high fructose corn syrup and refined sugars is what's doing you in, not excessive calories.

 

Forget about counting calories!  That kind of dieting is just a big waste of time!

Counting calories works, its just not practical for most. The rest I fully agree. Though its still about excessive calories. Can't beat science there. I dont get it why people dont understand it probably brainwashed.

 

There is a reason ALL studies use calories as a yardstick. If they did not do you in or matter then calories would not be used as a measure in scientific experiments. Could you explain to me why all scientist use them to measure diets and their results if they are not the driving factor ?

 

I do agree about the excessive carbs in form of processed food and high fructose corn syrup.  Though ultimately its still about amounts. 

[bangkokairportlink]

On 6/28/2022 at 1:27 PM, robblok said:

Yes its about overeating.. now you got it. 

 

So its overeating not carbs. 

 

Yes some people overeat on carbs others dont people are different stat to accept it.

not some people, MOST people overeat carbs and then eat to much calories daily.

I am bot sure if you are really not able to understand or if you play dumb, but it's so obvious or anybody that the easiest thing to cut to lose weight or stop getting more are CARBS, but if you still believe in your "different" ideas, keep doing...

 

 

[bangkokairportlink]

17 hours ago, TacoKhun said:

Carbs trigger insulin release, insulin is fat storing hormone. If you young, active and healthy, it probably does not concern you much, otherwise carbs should be avoided. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/c/drekberg/videos

the only truth even when some people keep arguing stupidly...

 

 

[robblok]

13 hours ago, bangkokairportlink said:

the only truth even when some people keep arguing stupidly...

 

 

Again you cant store fat if your not in a caloric deficit. That is the only truth. I am seriously thinking that low carbs limits brain function. You said it yourself it because of overeating and now your going back to that idioticy.

If that is the case how could the twinkie diet work ? pure carbs but weight loss.

Now i am not saying its healthy because its not but it blows your argument out of the water.

https://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html