|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Good Calories, Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes | |||||||||||||||||||||||
purpledawn Member (Idle past 3488 days) Posts: 4453 From: Indiana Joined: |
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!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
Hi Molbiogirl,
What part of "respond to things I've said instead of demanding I defend the positions you've assigned to me" didn't you understand? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
Since you insist, in his own words. GCBC p. 454. Numbers 9 & 10.
Carbs --> insulin --> fat --> hunger. Care to discuss the underlying science he uses to establish these "facts"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
...that insulin increases appetite doesn't ring any bells as something Taubes claim... We agree with Taubes that it is increased intake of refined carbohydrates rather than fat that is responsible for problems with obesity. Now would you like to discuss it?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
He does not use the word refined in the prologue. Starchy, yes. Refined, no. There's a difference.
Starchy does not mean refined. And refined does not mean starchy.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
molbiogirl writes: We agree with Taubes that it is increased intake of refined carbohydrates rather than fat that is responsible for problems with obesity. Now would you like to discuss it? Well, yes, actually, I would like to discuss it, so if you were really interested in discussion then I think that'd be great, but I've seen no indication of that so far. You seem like you're itching for a fight, and the more people express reluctance at getting down into the mud with you the more obnoxious you're getting. PD is going through the same thing I did several years ago and discovering that you just post one misinterpretation or misrepresentation or out-of-context quote after another, and when called on it you just ignore it and move on to the next. You're a lot like Mazzy, Gish galloping through science you don't understand and impossible to discuss with while berating your opponents all the way. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
molbiogirl writes: He does not use the word refined in the prologue. Starchy, yes. Refined, no. There's a difference. Really? Check page xx. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
Great. Let's start with Taubes' assertion that insulin increases hunger.
I've posted 4 quotes from Taubes' work that makes this claim.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
My bad.
I stand corrected.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
molbiogirl writes: Great. Let's start with Taubes' assertion that insulin increases hunger. I've posted 4 quotes from Taubes' work that makes this claim. I repeat, what part of "respond to things I've said instead of demanding I defend the positions you've assigned to me" didn't you understand? --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
We agree with Taubes that it is increased intake of refined carbohydrates rather than fat that is responsible for problems with obesity. Let's start here then. P. 454 Would you agree these 10 points are a fair summary of his hypothesis re: carbs and obesity?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
For what it's worth, here's Guyenet's e mail response to the refined v. unrefined question:
Hi [name redacted], There are many places in the book where he refers to carbohydrate as fattening without any qualifiers. For example, "the carbohydrate hypothesis" rather than "the refined carbohydrate hypothesis". If he only meant refined carbohydrates, and not unrefined carbohydrates, he did not make that clear at all in his books. There is nowhere in his books where he states that unrefined carbohydrates are not fattening; he never draws a clear distinction between refined and unrefined. What he does is suggest that refined carbohydrate is more fattening than unrefined carbohydrate. Another example is where he discussed the Massas tribe. He states that they fatten by adding carbohydrate to a low-carb diet (which was incorrect), and this caused them to gain fat. But the carbohydrate they added was unrefined red sorghum. Why would he use that example if he thought unrefined carbohydrate was not fattening?Cheers, Stephan I agree. ABE: Found one:
2. The problem is the carbohydrates in the diet, their effect on insulin secretion, and thus the hormonal regulation of homeostasisthe entire harmonic ensemble of the human body. The more easily digestible and refined the carbohydrates, the greater the effect on our health, weight, and well-being. Notice he's talking about all carbs. Edited by molbiogirl, : No reason given. Edited by molbiogirl, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
Hi Molbiogirl,
You quote something I say, then ignore it and cite page 454 from GCBC and ask me to respond to your question about it. I repeat, what part of "respond to things I've said instead of demanding I defend the positions you've assigned to me" didn't you understand? I'm not here to defend every detail of Taubes' book, but I think he describes a reasonable hypothesis. It makes a lot of sense to me. If you want to raise a specific question, or even a few questions, and will stick with them and focus on them for a bit so some mutual agreement or at least understanding can emerge then that might be enlightening and fun. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2672 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
I'm not here to defend every detail of Taubes' book, but I think he describes a reasonable hypothesis. P. 454 is a summary of his hypothesis. Numbers 5-10 deal specifically with carbs & obesity which is why I mentioned them in my previous post. For the benefit of those who don't have the book:
1. Dietary fat, whether saturated or not, is not a cause of obesity, heart disease, or any other chronic disease of civilization. 2. The problem is the carbohydrates in the diet, their effect on insulin secretion, and thus the hormonal regulation of homeostasisthe entire harmonic ensemble of the human body. The more easily digestible and refined the carbohydrates, the greater the effect on our health, weight, and well-being. 3. Sugarssucrose and high-fructose corn syrup specificallyare particularly harmful, probably because the combination of fructose and glucose simultaneously elevates insulin levels while overloading the liver with carbohydrates. 4. Through their direct effect on insulin and blood sugar, refined carbohydrates, starches and sugars are the dietary cause of coronary heart disease and diabetes. They are the most likely dietary causes of cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, and the other chronic diseases of civilization. 5. Obesity is a disorder of excess fat accumulation, not overeating, and not sedentary behavior. 6. Consuming excess calories does not cause us to grow fatter, any more than it causes a child to grow taller. Expending more energy than we consume does not lead to long term weight loss; it leads to hunger. 7. Fattening and obesity are caused by an imbalancea disequilibriumin the hormonal regulation of adipose tissue and fat metabolism. Fat synthesis and storage exceed the mobilization of fat from the adipose tissue and its subsequent oxidation. We become leaner when the hormonal regulation of the fat tissue reverses this balance. 8. Insulin is the primary regulator of fat storage. When insulin levels are elevatedeither chronically or after a mealwe accumulate fat in our fat tissue. When insulin levels fall, we release fat from our fat tissue and use it for fuel. 9. By stimulating insulin secretion, carbohydrates make us fat and ultimately cause obesity. The fewer carbohydrates we consume, the leaner we will be. 10. By driving fat accumulation, carbohydrates also increase hunger and decrease the amount of energy we expend in metabolism and physical activity. Is this a fair summary of what you find compelling about his hypothesis? If not, can you summarize his hypothesis for me?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22506 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.4 |
Hi Molbiogirl,
I think what I've been saying all along is that it seems a reasonable hypothesis that carbohydrates, not fat, are responsible for the diseases of western civilization: heart disease, obesity, diabetes. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024