Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Good Calories, Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 346 of 451 (629395)
08-17-2011 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 343 by molbiogirl
08-17-2011 11:53 AM


Re: Taubes: All carbs are bad
You need to reread the prologue of the book. He makes it clear what carbs are the issue. Refined and starchy.
We understood that, why don't you. Good grief!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 343 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 11:53 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 350 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 12:34 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied
 Message 357 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 1:47 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 361 of 451 (629421)
08-17-2011 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by molbiogirl
08-17-2011 1:47 PM


Low Carb, not No Carb
You're being obtuse. Maybe skinny people just can't read fat books.
Taubes is not the one saying that all carbs are bad, that's your wording.
He's arguing that the low fat - high carb diets, and the restriction diets are not lowering the obesity epidemic.
He's shown that people in the past intent on gaining weight used certain types of carbs to fatten up. They chose the carbs that will fatten the easiest.
IOW, it makes more sense to take a closer look at carbs and the impact they have on our bodies. That isn't saying they are all bad.
Realistically, I'm not going to be pigging out on green beans enough to tell my body to store fat, but I can do it easily with fruit juice.
It's a shame you can't understand what he wrote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 1:47 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 363 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 4:14 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied
 Message 369 by molbiogirl, posted 08-18-2011 7:28 AM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 371 of 451 (629503)
08-18-2011 8:42 AM
Reply to: Message 362 by molbiogirl
08-17-2011 4:12 PM


One Size Doesn't Fit All
The problem is that you keep giving me the punch line and not the joke.
I'll try this one more time.
1. Please provide the page of the book with the argument impacted by not mentioning leptin, then explain how not mentioning leptin changes the point he was making.
2. Again, page number. Who's diet was primarily milk? Taubes makes a lot of little points through out the book. What point was he making and how does not mentiong the 81% impact his point?
3. Again, page number. The section I read on the Pima dealt with the issue of abundance. Prosperity is also blamed for the increase in obesity. He was showing that the Pima were not obese during their prosperity, but during their poverty.
Taubes is addressing many different issues concerning obesity. That's why I keep asking you to provide the quotes from Taubes that are impacted by the concerns you present.
People who are genetically geared to store fat are concerned about why they are storing excess fat. For many, the low fat way of eating didn't keep them lean. For many, exercise didn't keep them lean.
As I said before, there may not be one absolute answer that fits all people. Even within one family there can be one lean and one fat even though they are sitting down to the same food. Just the anecdotes on this thread shows that we each have a ratio that works for us.
One size doesn't fit all.
From your link:GCBC Reference Check ~ Part I of ? ~ Metabolic Adaptability & Energy Balance
To the metabolically literate, it is obvious that some foods contain more energy than others in the same bulk; like energy stores in the body, fat-rich foods are more energy-rich, whereas carbohydrate-rich foods contain less energy for the amount of bulk -- especially hydrated bulk, which is what they will be by the time they reach the stomach. Therefore, the metabolically literate eater consumes a diet relatively high in carbohydrate foods and low in fat-rich foods. By this means, he or she can actually have a very full stomach and yet not ingest excessive amounts of energy, especially if the carbohydrate is largely in unrefined forms (fruit, vegetables, cereals rather than sugar). The trick may be to be aware of which foods contain fat: pastry, biscuits, potato chips and red meat are examples of foods which may be thought of as carbohydrate- or protein-rich, but which actually contain a lot of fat. This is not just a theoretical argument; a number of studies have shown that body weight is related to the habitual fat content of the diet, with those on lower-fat diets aving, on average, lower body weights.
The article doesn't get into what type of fat they were using, but the low fat, high carb doesn't work for everyone. This article doesn't address the differences between grass fed meats and grain fed meats, homemade pastries and biscuits and commercially made with preservatives, etc.
Even that article quoted Frayn: So the nature of the diet rather than the amount has to be changed.
This part that Taubes quoted from Frayn should make great sense to anyone who believes in evolution.
...fight against mechanisms which have evolved over many millions of years...
I don't want to buck the mechanism. I'm trying to understand the mechanism. Why do I want to swim upstream? Why should I?
So when we look at the feast or famine issue for those people who are geared to store fat; the idea that eating more less-energy-rich foods may tell our bodies famine. Eating more more-energy-rich foods may tell our bodies feast.
It is important to me that any change in my diet has to make a difference without added "exercise". So when I change the nature of my diet and the fat recedes (not muscle), that is a diet worth managing.
We try to find the balance that doesn't tell our bodies to store fat.
Again, mileage may vary.
I do like this part though.
As food in take drops, the level of thyroid hormone fals and metabolic rate is lowered.
This brings up other issues my family is dealing with and gives me another avenue to investigate.
I may or may not agree with everything that Taubes says, but he brings up issues that cause me to research what might work for me and mine. I'm not worried about anyone else.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 362 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 4:12 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 374 by molbiogirl, posted 08-18-2011 9:40 AM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 372 of 451 (629509)
08-18-2011 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 369 by molbiogirl
08-18-2011 7:28 AM


quote:
He can't indicte refined carbohydrates and only refined carbohydrates because his hypothesis rests on insulin. Both refined and unrefined carbs raise insulin levels to a similar degree.
I don't feel his overall hypothesis rests on insulin. Wasn't my take away from the book.
We had already dumped the low fat diet for 3 years before I read the book. Just confirmed some of my thoughts and no, insulin wasn't an issue.
It's great that you are skinny and don't have to worry about what you eat.
His point is that there seems to be something metabolically different in those who store fat than those who don't. Whether it is due to evolution or a glitch, we don't necessarily know. IMO, everyone is still guessing.
If you have a need to debate how insulin and leptin work in the body, start a science thread. I won't be in it, but I don't think you're going to get what you want in this thread.
Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 369 by molbiogirl, posted 08-18-2011 7:28 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 375 by molbiogirl, posted 08-18-2011 9:42 AM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 378 of 451 (629532)
08-18-2011 11:10 AM
Reply to: Message 374 by molbiogirl
08-18-2011 9:40 AM


Re: Discussing science, not opinion
quote:
Look. I keep asking you for cites. You give me the cites that Taubes uses to support the quotes you post and I'll give you page numbers for the mangled research. Fair enough?
I haven't made a claim that requires a cite. You've made a claim that he mangled research.
Like I said, you just keep giving me the punchline.
quote:
If you're interested in discussing the science, so am I. I would like to begin a discussion of the role insulin plays in Taubes' hypothesis. (His hypothesis is nothing without insulin.) I would also like to finish the mangled research thing. Tho, I have to say, you've got the book, PD. You can't flip to the index and look up "Pima"? Or "leptin"? You can't use books.google to find quotes?
I'm not going to discuss insulin in case you haven't got that hint. I don't have an issue with it.
As for the mangled research, you haven't provided evidence. I did look up Pima and made my comments concerning that. I see no issue. You haven't explained why it is an issue yet. You haven't explained why any of the three are an issue yet.
It isn't my job to hunt and guess what comments cause you problems.
quote:
And did you miss this Frayn quote in that post?
No I didn't and I agree with the statement, but it isn't a long term solution. Just because we can doesn't mean it is sustainable.
They would need to restrict calories and increase activity. Unfortunately, once they stop doing one or the other the odds are that they will regain fat. I think Taubes noted that in one of the books. They usually gained more fat back than they had before.
Then we have to look at long term. Can this behavior be sustained over a lifetime? It's not something I could sustain over a lifetime.
Adjusting a ratio of protein/fats to carbs I can sustain, whether I exercise or not.
You don't like anecdotes, but the difference is that I don't gain 5 pounds because I ate a piece of cake at the birthday party. That was the annoying part about restricting calories.
You may be totally right about the science of the insulin issue, but that doesn't change anything for me. I don't care about insulin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 374 by molbiogirl, posted 08-18-2011 9:40 AM molbiogirl has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 399 of 451 (631778)
09-03-2011 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 398 by Percy
09-02-2011 9:05 PM


Interpreting Studies
quote:
Because you're exhibiting the same pattern as a couple years ago of citing papers that disagree with you I'm not going to look at the other papers you cited because I think I'll just find more of the same.
It seems reading studies is like reading statistics (or the Bible ). One can seem to make a case either way.
When it comes to health studies, I wish I could see more details concerning the subjects. Unlike cars we aren't exact duplicates off an assembly line. There is something different in those of us who store fat than those who don't. Whether it is a malfunction or a survival function, I don't think they really know yet. IMO, Taubes is trying to point out that scientists need to look deeper into what that difference is rather than blaming calories-in-calories-out or lack of willpower.
I feel he has shown that the studies used to support the edict to eat low fat, low cholesterol, etc.
So the public is still left in the cold because the majority of people do not have access to studies and simply go by what someone has written. Same with doctors. They aren't really looking at the studies, nor do they have time.
The internet makes it easier, but then we have to deal with individual understanding.
Bottom line, the individual has to do what works for them and most of us who have had to deal with storing fat, have tried many things over the years that didn't work or weren't sustainable.
For me, staying away from sugars and refined carbs as a norm works and is sustainable. I'm not afraid to eat a piece of cake at a birthday party and gain 5 pounds. (That was so annoying) I haven't seen a down side to staying away from starch and sugar.
Taubes alludes to the idea that storing fat may be an endocrine malfunction. Since reading his book I've read a book by Dr. Broda Barnes on Hypothyroidism. I know we would like to be able to point to one thing that actually causes the problem, but I still see the body as a very complicated machine and we are still trying to figure out how parts interact with other parts. Since the thyroid deals with metabolism, a malfunctioning thyroid may be what contributes to our reaction to refined carbs.
Just another piece in my puzzle at least. I am very glad you brought Taubes' book to my attention. It has helped my family a lot. Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 398 by Percy, posted 09-02-2011 9:05 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 400 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 6:13 AM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 401 of 451 (631786)
09-03-2011 7:57 AM
Reply to: Message 400 by Percy
09-03-2011 6:13 AM


Re: Interpreting Studies
quote:
My own personal experience regarding obesity is that fat by itself is not bad, that refined carbohydrates in the form of refined grass-derived products and sugar are bad, and that refined carbohydrates combined with fat are very bad. I've been following a low carb diet for over a couple years now, and my recent annual blood tests yield better results for HDL/LDL and triglycerides than I have ever had in my life.
My husband and I have been doing basically low carb since 2003. We had come to the conclusion on our own after years of low fat eating, but still gaining weight. Our starting point was getting rid of things with preservatives, hidden sugar, and HFC. It has been a process.
Oddly enough when my weight went down, my cholesterol went up. Fix one thing and another breaks.
I have a place where I can get my own blood tests done without going through a doctor, so I did my own experiment. I went without any manmade sugar whatsoever of any kind, not even artificial, for three months. When I tested again, the cholesterol was lower. Another three months and it was under 200. Then I allowed items with sugar once in a while for the next three months. The cholesterol started to go back up. I haven't worried about cholesterol and refuse to go on statins. Right now I'm on T3 for the thyroid and that makes my cholesterol go down. The odd thing is that on paper, my thyroid looks fine. So a new battle begins because I don't think T3 is a sustainable solution. Another piece to the puzzle.
I just wish the puzzle had come with a manual and wasn't so hard to put together.
quote:
But more relevant to this topic is a segment about a Latino family of four in poor financial shape struggling to get by where the father is a type II diabetic whose medicine is a significant expense for them. Because they have little money they are forced to consume the cheapest calories available, and those calories are high in refined carbohydrates. One scene shows them in a supermarket looking at healthy foods and their prices and showing how much more expensive it would be for them to create healthy meals instead of just going to McDonald's, whose fast food is the worst stuff for a diabetic. The entire family is overweight.
My husband and I had discussed that observation one day. If we look at the early pioneers, the "rich" were the ones who could afford the refined flours, sugars, etc. The farmers had the grass fed beef, brown flour, etc. Today it is the "wealthy" who are able to buy the "healthy food".
What used to be a sign of wealth is now bad for our health. We noticed the difference in our grocery bill when we changed the way we ate. At least we are able to buy a whole beef, which is cheaper than buying it by the piece in the store. I guess either the grocery bill goes up or the doctor bills go up. It's messed up.
We are at the mercy of the people who "make" our food. Everyone can't have a little hobby farm to grow their own food. It takes a lot of time and effort to do that. When both adults work, it is difficult.
Whenever my mother wants to cut expenses she wants to cut back on the healthy food. I told her to cut back on the useless crap she buys, not the food. She's diabetic. As long as she stays away from starch and sugar her numbers stay good and she stays off the meds.
If they mess up our food, we're in trouble. Evolution takes it course. Only those who can survive on the carbs with make it through. As Granny Magda says: Mutate and survive.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 400 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 6:13 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 402 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 8:28 AM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 403 of 451 (631793)
09-03-2011 10:11 AM
Reply to: Message 402 by Percy
09-03-2011 8:28 AM


Re: Interpreting Studies
quote:
Do you mean your overall cholesterol level actaully went up? Or that your HDL/LDL ratio worsened? If the latter then that *is* odd. If the former then it doesn't seem much worth worrying over.
Everything went up except the HDL. Of course at first I concentrated more on preservatives and HFC, not so much on reducing regular sugar or sugar alcohols. I was still eating candy. I love Treasures. The Doctors wanted to blame the eggs, but my egg intake had not increased from the last blood test. That's when I did the sugar experiment. It was the one thing I hadn't dealt with. Hey, I figured if I was losing weight and could still eat my candy, I was happy.
When staying off the sugar the Tri's dropped and my HDL went up, but even when my total was below 200 the LDL was still in the high range although not as high as it was. I thought that was odd, but at least the Tri's and the HDL were much better.
Now when I eat sugar the Tri's go up, but my HDL has remained in good shape. On my last one this year (I cut out sugar again), my total is 300, but my Triglycerides were 80 and the HDL was 54. The calculated LDL remains high. My LDL has remained in the high zone (although sometimes higher than others) since 99 when I started keeping my records.
My next cholesterol test is going to be the VAP that measures actual LDL and the sizes.
quote:
When you say your thyroid looks fine on paper, do you mean that blood tests for TSH and T4/Free come out normal? If so, then why are you on T3? And are you really on T3, or is it really T4 of which some percentage the body transforms into T3?
Also, for you is the T3 supposed to help with things like blood levels and long term health, or does it have an impact on the way you feel, things like energy level, endurance and alertness?
Yes, my blood test numbers for TSH and T4 fall into the normal range. I am on actual T3 (slow release, not synthetic) because my Free T3 is low. Bottom of the normal range. Most people go because of fatigue, but I don't notice fatigue in me.
The biggest reason is that I have symptoms of Hypothyroidism even though the numbers are normal. The two biggies are high cholesterol and Myxedema on the arms. There's also the low basal temperature. I don't notice fatigue in me. So I'm trying to deal with the symptoms I can measure more so than feeling more energetic. (I guess if I jump on a treadmill and want to exercise, my husband will know the "root is kicking in".)(Sorry movie reference)
The studies done by Dr. Broda Barnes showed that removal of the thyroid from rabbits caused them to develop hardening of the arteries. Giving them thyroid hormone replacement (T4 and T3) caused the hardening of the arteries to stop. I don't remember if it reversed or not. Don't have the book in front of me right now.
I do have a thyroid thread if you want to get into this more, but looking at my family history (grandmother and mother) and the path they followed, I'm choosing to use thyroid hormones to deal with the symptoms and not the numbers.
Some of what Dr. Barnes addresses is the same thing we are dealing with here. How one interprets the studies. A study done to show how accurate the TSH readings were had some problems in Dr. Barnes' opinion. Apparently the "normal" group had some of the same hypothyroid symptoms as those whose numbers were outside the normal. So they supposedly excluded all the similar symptoms, if I"m wording that right, so the TSH seemed accurate.
My maternal grandmother, mother, and sister all took the T4 only and their TSH numbers were border line outside normal. They all continued the symptoms of hypo. My grandmother has since passed. She went from high cholesterol (after change), statins, stints, blood pressure meds for heart, diabetes, double bypass, and demtia. This is over a period of 20 or so years. My mother is following that same path. She just had double by pass this last Feb and is going towards dementia. (Had her tested for the demtia) I'm working to have her doctors (See Desiccated Thyroid vs Synthetic T4 Treatments) add T3 to her synthetic T4.
The thyroid seems to impact a lot of things and it is hard to paint a good picture in a post.
This is how I understand it. The thyroid affects our bodies in many different ways and when it isn't working as our individual bodies need, it sends out cries for help. Unfortunately those messages manifest themselves in many different ways and we've created meds to stifle those messages.
IMO, it would be better to treat the thyroid optimally and see what messages it answers.
The wonderful Framingham study that Taubes mentions. Barnes also uses that study to predict many of his patients should have had heart attacks over x number of years. (Still working off the top of my head.) I think per the Framingham study 72 of his patients should have had heart attacks and only 4 actually did. His theory is that the thyroid is what causes the hardening of the arteries. IOW, if an individuals body isn't getting the amount of thyroid hormone that they need, there is damage to the body.
I say individual, because I truly believe that we aren't all exactly the same and what my body needs for optimum health may not be the same as any other woman's.
So I am curious if the T3 will lower my cholesterol. Although I don't consider T3 only to be a long term treatment. Yes, I'm having an argument with my doctor over that too. I think desiccated is the way to go.
Hypothyroidsim Type 2: The Epidemic by Mark Starr, M.D. and Hypothyroidism: The Unsuspected Illness by Broda O. Barnes, M.D. are good books to read.
My choices are based on looking at patterns in my info and my families. I did find a app on the ipad that enabled me to put in my test scores and see a graph. Before I started taking the T3 it showed my TSH going higher and my T4 lower. This all happened about the time menstrual cycle ended. The "change" is usually when women start feeling the affects of screaming thyroid.
Some interesting points that both doctors make is that there are symptoms of hypothyroid long before the numbers show it. Even in children. After reading a bit you start to feel like everything is caused by the thyroid, but the doctors do stress that there can be other causes for some symptoms. But what if treating the thyroid should be the first line of preventative care instead of the last? (my question, not theirs)
What if that is part of our difference? Like I said, another piece to the puzzle.
Native Americans and other minorities tend to have more thyroid issues. I have Native American in my ancestry.
With all the mixed genetics, how can we tell how things are supposed to behave in any one person.
quote:
Yes, exactly. A few messages back I described the view of some researchers that we have become better adapted to carbs over the past 10,000 years since the advent of agriculture.
So we didn't mutate enough. I do notice my daughter doesn't have as much problem with carbs I do. But she hasn't come to the change yet!!!!!
Apparently thyroid problems are passed through the mother. My daughter does have depression and did as a child, which could be because of thyroid. Needless to say there are many things in our family history that lead me to my decision and they probably fall into the TMI category.
I think you would find the books interesting. Maybe your library will have them. They aren't expensive books. I found a used one for the Barnes book. $4. I have no problem with a preread book. The Starr book is available on Nook I believe. $9.99. Mines a hard copy though. If you read them, let me know what you think.
Is it too late to mutate?????

This message is a reply to:
 Message 402 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 8:28 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 404 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 10:33 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 407 of 451 (631809)
09-03-2011 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 405 by Bolder-dash
09-03-2011 10:59 AM


Fruit Juice
quote:
Just for your information- As a professional athlete, and someone who knows a fair bit about exercise and nutrition, I can tell you that one of the worst things you can give your body is a big glass of grape or apple juice.
Two of my favorite. Yep, I had to give up the fruit juices also. I treat myself in the fall when the cider comes out though. That's just around the corner.
When my grandson was born, my daughter did her best to keep him away from fruit juices. It's difficult to keep grandparents (not me, I'm the good one) from doing what they please. She at least got them to water it down.
Better to eat the apple than drink the juice. Fortunately I like tomatoes and switched to tomato juice once in a while when fresh tomatoes aren't available. Even those I have to make sure they haven't added sugar. Sometimes I make my own. Always safest.
It's been over 25 years since I've had a soft drink. My problem is I'm more of a fruit eater than a vegetable eater. and the vegetables I do like are the starchy ones. I need to reboot my taste buds.
As I understand it, the body pulls calcium from the body to help metabolize or digest sugar. Hopefully I said that right. That's what I think about when I eat contraband on vacation or holidays.
quote:
The choices for the average consumer in America are not very good unfortunately. I believe this to be the single biggest cause of obesity in your country.
The choices are awful and eating the low carb way tends to make one stand out at group eating functions. Of course if people would worry more about their own plate and not mine, there wouldn't be a problem.
I also try to eat protein before I go somewhere where I know the food will not be the most optimum. My husband also found a protein drink he likes to use. Only has 2g of sugar and 51g of protein.
I know my mom gets annoyed about having to read labels. I figure once you find your standard lineup of "safer" foods, you don't have to read except every so often to make sure they don't change the ingredients.
I have to be careful, because I've noticed they've starting sticking coconut in some drinks and foods in health food stores. I'm allergic. Can't add that fat to my menu.
I think the idea that we who have issues with fat have been mislead in what to eat and still are. I have a time trying to keep my mother from changing her diet to fit the diet of the week in the women's magazines.
We have diverse cultures and diverse diets. One size doesn't fit all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 10:59 AM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 12:04 PM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 410 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 12:17 PM purpledawn has not replied
 Message 413 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 12:40 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 411 of 451 (631820)
09-03-2011 12:17 PM
Reply to: Message 409 by Bolder-dash
09-03-2011 12:04 PM


Re: Fruit Juice
Since we found grassfed beef, I figured I'll let the cattle eat the greens and I'll eat the beef.
At least I like green beans. Leafy greens only good with Catalina style dressing (I make my own without the sugar). Not much of a salad eater.
I do my best. It has been a process. Healthy so far and still working on the body shaping. I'm trying to revise my view of exercise. It was always drilled in as a means to weight loss, but that doesn't work for me. I need to look at exercise as a means to shape and maintain flexibility as I .... age.
Edited by purpledawn, : Wrong avatar
Edited by purpledawn, : Wrong avatar

This message is a reply to:
 Message 409 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 12:04 PM Bolder-dash has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by Bolder-dash, posted 09-03-2011 12:24 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 3458 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 419 of 451 (632573)
09-08-2011 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by Percy
09-03-2011 9:10 PM


Protein, Glucagon, and Insllin
I was thinking about the insulin issue with protein. Since we know from experience that when we lower the refined carbs our weight goes down, the question is what does protein do differently than the refined carbs?
If both can raise the insulin levels, what is different about protein in the body than the refined carbs?
Someone made the comment that protein also raises glucagon, which counters insulin, whereas carbs just raise insulin alone.
Some food for thought. More pieces to the puzzle.
Protein, Glucagon and Insulin
The problem comes when excess carbohydrates are consumed. Once the liver and muscles have stored as much glycogen as possible (about the amount of three candy bars), the body creates another storage form, fat. Insulin tells your body not only to store new fat, but also not to release any previously stored fat. Insulin is the storage hormone.
Protein stimulates the release of glucagon, which stimulates the liver to release stored carbohydrates from its glycogen stores and from fat. Glucagon also inhibits the release of insulin. By controlling your intake of protein and spreading it throughout the day, you can constantly produce adequate amounts of glucagon.
I don't know how any of that relates to the insulin score though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by Percy, posted 09-03-2011 9:10 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 425 by Percy, posted 09-09-2011 10:34 AM purpledawn has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024