Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9078 total)
111 online now:
JonF, Michael MD, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Percy (Admin), Tangle (6 members, 105 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,159 Year: 6,271/6,534 Month: 464/650 Week: 2/232 Day: 2/28 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Good Calories, Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes
purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 274 of 451 (510372)
05-30-2009 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Percy
05-29-2009 5:20 PM


Food Battle
Hey Percy,
I haven't read Taubes' book, but I have read many along the same lines. I have battled weight for years. Like you, I can gain weight on a 1200 calorie diet. My hubby and I followed the low fat diet for over 20 years. I don't do organize exercise and he is a chronic exerciser. The exercise didn't cause him to lose weight and he was hungry a lot. We even visited a dietitian who said our diet was fine, if that's what we were really eating. She suggested we increase our calories. Didn't help.

About 5 years ago I finally called it quits on the low fat diet the doctors prescribed. My weight was going up and I refused to gain any more, but I wasn't going to starve. I wanted a diet that was realistic to a daily routine that I can live with, not suffer through.

So it has been a process to get where we are today. I gave up foods with preservatives and high fructose corn syrup to start with. I also gave up low fat foods. My weight dropped. I still ate plenty of protein (my beef is home grown grassfed) and fruits and veggies. I was a high protein and low carb diet. My husband discovered Atkins and strickly followed his advice. I wasn't in a rush to lose and didn't want to get that extreme. But my husband's weight started to drop. I finally got to see some of those muscles from all his exercising. He now does triathelons. He doesn't have six pack abs. There is still some fat belly fat he wants to get rid of, but he didn't have to suffer through hunger pains. The sugar cravings went away. We also didn't have a problem with having a piece of cake at a Birthday party and the next day find that we gained 5 pounds. So we can have a "bad" day but it didn't impact our weight the same as on the low fat diet. We went back to our diet, which is now our norm. Flour and sugar (variations of the two) are the carbs we don't eat. We've even experimented with whole grains and such, but too much and the weight climbs.

I read up on metabolic typing because there are people who can eat a higher amount of carbs and not have a weight problem. I'm not a purebred anything. My ancestry covers the Netherlands, Germany, Ireland, England, and Native American. When I think of evolution and people evolving in specific areas and the foods available in those area, I wonder how that affects their metabolism or how their bodies react to food. As a hybrid, what does that do to me?

When I don't eat any sugar or breads, my cholesterol goes down. The doctors wouldn't believe it. I even experimented with natural sugars. The cholesterol still went up.

So we have been able to maintain our way of eating for over 3 years. By insurance charts we are still considered obese, but I'll take a size 14 over a 20 any day.

There is a research study here at the University looking for people who are overweight, 50-75, and don't exercise. I'm starting the process to be a part of the study. The advertisement said the study will attempt to determine if weight loss with exercise is more beneficial than exercise alone.

Then the email responding to my inquiry said:

We are examining differences/similarities in exercise with and without fat loss. Participants in the study are randomized into one of two groups: 1) 3 days per week, for 12 weeks, of exercise training; or 2) a combination group that receives menus for
weight loss and participates in the exercise training.

I went to fill out the consent forms, medical info, and questions about activity.

The consent form said under purpose:

You (the potential research subject) have been invited to participate in a research study that will allow us to examine the effect of fat loss and/or weight training on cells involved in immune function. Specifically, we (the researchers) want to determine whether exercise training with/without fat loss influences cells of the immune system that contribute to inflammation.

Now in the letter I have to give to my doctor for permission it says:

Your patient has volunteered to participate in a study that will examine the influence of physical activity level and weight loss on monocyte subtype and the capacity of these cells to produce inflammatory cytokines. As you know, inflammation has been linked to the pathogenesis of several diseses, among which are heart disease, diabetes, and arthritis.

Does this all sound like the same purpose?

When they showed me the diet for the exercise/diet group, it is a high carb, low protein diet. I showed the lady my current diet, which she ignored. If I'm in the diet and exercise group and don't lose more than 8 pounds; I'm removed from the study. If I'm in the exercise only group (resistance training) and lose more than 3 pounds, I'm removed from the study.

The diet had breads and grains every day in some way. I told her I'd probably gain on their diet. She said anyone who stays true to the diet would lose at least 2 pounds a week. (I've never lost 2 pounds a week on any diet.) If I end up in the diet and exercise category, this could be an interesting experiment just for my own knowledge of my diet.

They are also going to test my current fitness level and if I'm too fit, I'm out even though I don't do organized exercise. It'll make my day if I'm not pathetic enough for the study. :laugh:

Needless to say, I agree that the low fat doesn't work for me. Sorry if this post is disjointed. Grandson is here, enough said.


"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Percy, posted 05-29-2009 5:20 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by Percy, posted 05-30-2009 2:19 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 280 of 451 (518903)
08-09-2009 12:45 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Percy
07-27-2009 8:59 AM


Book and Video
Hey Percy,
I did watch the video and although he could get into specifics, genetics one area I've thought about concerning my own weight. The United States is such a melting pot, I don't see how any scientist can make a one size fits all decision.

I just bought the book and am at page 138. The connection between sugar and cholesterol is one of my issues. I discovered that on my path to losing weight and dealing with cholesterol numbers.

I had lost 15 pounds by cutting anything with preservatives in it and white flour, which cut out a lot of refined carbs. My weight went down, but my cholesterol went up. I had not stopped eating candy. I had also not decreased my intake of eggs. I eat about 2 eggs a day. I was actually eating more calories than before I lost the weight. No, I don't do organized exercise. My activity stayed the same.

When I stopped all sugar of any kind (even HFCS) my cholesterol went down to just under 200 from 290. My egg, protein, and fat intake stayed the same.

When I eat sugar or refined carbs, my cholesterol goes up.

My Mom is diabetic (2). When I can get her to stop the sugar and refined carbs, her sugar level is fine.

Once I get off the sugar and refined carbs, I don't have cravings.

The biggest problem with the way I eat is when interacting with others for holidays, cookouts, etc. We just took a trip to Holiday World in southern Indiana with my husband's family. Although my husband does, his family doesn't tend to have weight problems; but they are finding they have some of those health issues even though they don't have weight issues. High Cholesterol, high blood pressure, etc.

Since we rented an RV we were able to take our own food. We have sprouted grain buns with no sugar, hotdogs with no nitrites, grassfed beef, etc. So the rest of the family ate their standard fare and we stuck to our usual food. We did indulge in a somemore or two. There's just no way to substitute for a marshmallow.

We don't have a will power issue and we've been eating this way for over 5 years. We aren't hungry. I average about 1400 calories a day.

Since I started that research program, my weight went up a bit. I'm in the exercise only bunch. It is 30 minutes of resistance training. They don't expect us to lose weight with exercise only. The diet bunch has their caloric intake decreased by 750 calories.

I'm sure they'll lose weight, but I don't feel they can stay there. That type of diet would take will power. They give them a low fat, high carb, low protein diet.

I'm anxious to get through the book and see what other research has been done and goes along with what I've discovered through my own situation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Percy, posted 07-27-2009 8:59 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 281 of 451 (518905)
08-09-2009 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 278 by Phat
07-27-2009 5:13 PM


Re: Leptin and Insulin Resistance
quote:
He is against Atkins primarily because the protein levels are too high and because Atkins does not differentiate between good and bad fats.
I think many aren't separating good carbs from bad carbs and good fats from bad fats.

I eat a lot of beef, but it isn't grain fed beef. I eat grass fed beef. The fat is different since cattle aren't set up to eat the grain they are given. They fatten up faster on corn than grass. I grew up on grassfed beef and had no weight problems until I hit High School and fast foods. I don't eat vegetable oils either. I stick to olive oil.

I still think it goes back to where our ancestors evolved. Humans would have evolved around the food available. Given time, humans may adjust to the chemicals they call food and be able to survive. How long does evolution take?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Phat, posted 07-27-2009 5:13 PM Phat has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 285 of 451 (534036)
11-04-2009 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by RAZD
11-04-2009 12:49 PM


Re: weight or girth, body density factors
Hey RAZD,

Sorry to hear your cancer came back. Lost my father to cancer, I understand the problems.

I finished the research study at Purdue. I was in the exercise only group. Now this was only resistance training, no aerobics. I lost inches and a few pounds, but no significant weight loss.

That said, once I was done with the study, I stopped eating all sugars, grains, and fruit juices (except for my birthday of course ) Then my weight started to go down. My weight had been stuck for several years and was starting to creep back up, so now it is creeping back down and I've finally gone below my stuck point.

Fruit juices were my weakness. I haven't had sodas for over 20 years. I don't eat low fat foods, but I do eat grassfed beef, free range chickens and eggs, fish and some pork. I don't drink milk either. I always figured it really isn't necessary for people to drink mil once they are weaned, just like it isn't necessary for cats or other animals once they are weaned.

I'm just getting to the point in the book where he is looking at the research done on high protein and high fat diets. It looks like people could still get all the nutrition they need. In the studies he mentioned people couldn't get fat on meat and fats alone. They needed to add carbs. I think the carbs in these studies were fruits and veggies.

I wonder how much of how we process carbs deals with where our ancestors evolved. The all meat and fat diet of the Eskimos vs a group from the climates that are warm year round. I don't recall any of the test subjects being from the warmer areas. That may be approached later in the book. Makes me wonder if they call a malfunction was designed winter survival.

Chemo definitely doesn't help. One of the issues I had with my father's treatment is that they didn't address his nutrition. They just told him to eat what he felt like eating. Well he didn't feel like eating much of anything most times and when he did it was the sweets and processed carbs that he preferred. I think he had difficulty tasting also.

Chemo depletes nutrients from the body and you probably can't eat enough to restore those nutrients even if you had an appetite. Here is an unexpected twist discovered in a study done by Eli Lilly.
Vitamins to relieve chemotherapy side effects

The book is a fascinating read.

Take care
PD


This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by RAZD, posted 11-04-2009 12:49 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by RAZD, posted 11-04-2009 8:36 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 291 of 451 (603588)
02-05-2011 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 289 by Percy
08-11-2010 8:48 PM


Re: The Tide may be Turning
quote:
Hey, good news. Bet it feels good!

My willpower is fighting a loosing battle with a desire for certain foods, but still, I'm not doing too bad. The problem with a low carb diet is boredom due to lack of variety.

--Percy


Yes, variety is a problem. Fortunately for me I have rather boring taste buds.

The February 2011 Reader's Digest has an article about Taubes in it. He was interviewed concerning his new book Why We Get Fat--and What to Do About It. It's pretty much a condensed version of the Good Carbs Bad Carbs book.

I recommended it to my family since they didn't want to take the time to read the big book. I haven't checked out the new book yet. I figured it's just repackaging parts of the Good Carbs Bad Carbs book. Looks like it is at least 250 pages.

Nice option for family members who don't want to read much.
Easier for quick reference.

Edited by purpledawn, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Percy, posted 08-11-2010 8:48 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 292 by Asgara, posted 02-05-2011 3:15 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 293 of 451 (603598)
02-05-2011 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 292 by Asgara
02-05-2011 3:15 PM


Re: The Tide may be Turning
quote:
The new book seems to be geared more towards a layman audience without the heavier science references.
That's good.

I watched the video. I found the part with the insulin resistance interesting. My mother has that problem and when I get her to go lower on carbs her blood sugar improves. Unfortunately then she listens to her dietitian or doctor and they want her on a low fat, high carb; her blood sugar goes up. Then they up her meds. Scary.

She has more trouble with her weight on the high carb diet.

It would be nice not to have to think so much about our food.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Asgara, posted 02-05-2011 3:15 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 294 by RAZD, posted 02-07-2011 5:39 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 295 of 451 (603813)
02-07-2011 7:39 PM
Reply to: Message 294 by RAZD
02-07-2011 5:39 PM


Re: The Tide may be Turning
quote:
I seem to do better with weight control with low carbs, but I need to get back on board (I've slipped into some breads and -horrors- cookies). I seem to be maintaining my waist, but I feel like I am gaining weight (don't have a scale).
Yep, the holidays got me. Weight started creeping up. My clothes still fit, but for how long.

We are starting to work with quinoa. High in protein and good on fiber. Since I'm not much for salads, I don't get enough fiber. Hopefully this will help and not add fat to my body. We shall see in a week or two.

I haven't found anything yet that says I can have sugar and not have to exercise.

I keep looking though.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by RAZD, posted 02-07-2011 5:39 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by RAZD, posted 02-07-2011 8:40 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 303 of 451 (629086)
08-15-2011 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 301 by molbiogirl
08-15-2011 12:01 PM


Triggers for Fat Storage or Use
From a lay viewpoint, the overall idea I get from Gary's books are that an over abundance of carbs in some people tells the body to store fat. The energy burned may not be from the same fat being stored.

Unfortunately for scientist, we are not machines that are made exactly alike. The theory of thermodynamics doesn't seem to work for biology.

Increased exercise alone doesn't necessarily cause a person to lose a significant amount of weight.

When a theory doesn't ring true for an individual, that individual has to go with what works whether it is a scientific truth or not.

As Taubes pointed out, the more we exercise the more we want to eat and the less we eat the less energy we have to exercise. So there is something else at work and IIRC, he attributed to survival needs.

There may not be a scientific truth that fits everyone concerning weight.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 301 by molbiogirl, posted 08-15-2011 12:01 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 304 by molbiogirl, posted 08-15-2011 4:36 PM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 305 of 451 (629103)
08-15-2011 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 304 by molbiogirl
08-15-2011 4:36 PM


Re: Triggers for Fat Storage or Use
quote:
PD, I would suggest you take a look at the link I posted above. Guyenet specifically addresses thermo:
I did and I disagree with your quote.

Guyenet writes:

That is, Taubes is not disagreeing with the first law of thermodynamics: he understands that fat accumulation depends on how much energy is entering the body vs. leaving it.

That is not the way I read what Taubes wrote. It was very much about what type of energy enters the body. All calories are not equal.

Guyenet writes:

Weight stable obese people have a higher energy flux out of fat cells, and a higher metabolic rate, but it is not enough to overcome the higher calorie intake that is also observed (26, 27). That has been repeatedly confirmed and it is simply a fact at this point.

And from the abstract #26

The accumulating data from the application of the DLW method suggest a need to place greater emphasis on mechanisms that lead to a mismatch between energy intake and expenditure rather than a continuing emphasis on energy intake or energy expenditure alone.

Which is what Taubes is looking at, in my understanding. It isn't a simple case of calorie in, calorie out.

Did you read the book, Good Calories, Bad Calories? If not, you really can't say whether Guyenet is right or not.

quote:
There's more where that came from. Sticking your fingers in your ears and chanting la-la-la doesn't make it go away.
No it doesn't.

Show me how Taubes mangled the papers.

quote:
I-don't-like-the-sound-of-that-theory-so-I'm-going-with-my-gut-feeling?
Nope. Has nothing to do with sound, it has to do with what works for the individual. One size doesn't fit all. Some people do better with more carbs and some do better with more protein.

Resorting to creo rudeness doesn't make your point either.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 304 by molbiogirl, posted 08-15-2011 4:36 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 306 by molbiogirl, posted 08-15-2011 11:21 PM purpledawn has replied
 Message 308 by Phat, posted 08-16-2011 9:04 AM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 307 of 451 (629165)
08-16-2011 8:22 AM
Reply to: Message 306 by molbiogirl
08-15-2011 11:21 PM


Re: Triggers for Fat Storage or Use
quote:
You're disagreeing with a "B.S. in biochemistry from the University of Virginia ... and a Ph.D. in neurobiology from the University of Washington ... [who professionally studies] the neurobiology of body fat regulation" and siding with a journalist. Huh.
Why yes, yes I am. I read the same book he did and I disagree with his statement of what Taubes said. No science involved in that. Just plain reading. If you feel my understanding of what Taubes wrote concerning thermodynamics is wrong, then provide a quote from the book that agrees with Guyenet's statement.

quote:
That's fine. Care to support that bare assertion?
The title of the book is a big giveaway, but here are two of the conclusions that Taubes felt were inescapable to him based on the existing knowledge.

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.

Type of calorie:

That the nutrient composition of the diet effects our energy expenditure would be the explanation, as Pennington noted, for why obese individuals might lose weight on high-calorie, carbohydrate-restricted diets of 3,000 calories or more. The point is that their total energy expenditure is inhibited on diets that are carbohydrate-rich because significant amounts of energy are being lost into their fat tissue. And so the diets they've been eating all along, the ones that made them fat, also suppress their expenditure of energy. They semistarve their lean tissue and organs and this, in turn, leads to a reduction in energy expenditure and an impulse to remain sedentary.

quote:
Fat people expend more energy because they have to haul around more weight. They also consume more energy than they expend.
So what is your point concerning the conclusions of the book. Taubes doesn't deny this issue.

Taubes writes:

A scientific point that I now believe I emphasized insufficiently is that the nutrient composition of our diets must play a fundamental role in our energy expenditure--whether we are, in fact, physically active or relatively sedentary.

quote:
You want to dust off your copy of GCBC and refute that with a couple of quotes?
You didn't show me how Taubes mangled the papers. IOW, show me what Taubes said concerning the papers and how it mangled it.

quote:
And you failed to address Guyenet's main point. Taubes' hypothesis is, at its core, dead wrong.
Mainly because you haven't made an argument. You just quoted Guyenet and Guyenet didn't provide any quotes from the book to match his comments. I don't intend to debate Guyenet.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 306 by molbiogirl, posted 08-15-2011 11:21 PM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 309 by molbiogirl, posted 08-16-2011 9:14 AM purpledawn has replied
 Message 314 by molbiogirl, posted 08-16-2011 11:15 AM purpledawn has replied
 Message 315 by molbiogirl, posted 08-16-2011 12:40 PM purpledawn has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 324 of 451 (629258)
08-16-2011 5:31 PM
Reply to: Message 309 by molbiogirl
08-16-2011 9:14 AM


Re: Triggers for Fat Storage or Use
quote:
1. He neglected to mention leptin.
Neglecting to mention something isn't mangling a paper. What paper did he mangle concerning leptin?

quote:
2. He neglected to mention 81% carbohydrate intake.
How did he mangle a paper?

quote:
3. He neglected to mention the Pima were lean on a carb diet.
Again you've made no point of what paper he mangled.

Taubes writes:

For perhaps two millennia, the Pima had lived as both hunter-gatherers and agriculturalists. Game was abundant in the region, as were fish and clams in the Gila River. When the Jesuit missionary Eusebio Kino arrived among the Pima in 1787, the tribe was already raising corn and beans on fields irrigated with Gila River water. In the decades that followed, they took to raising cattle, poultry, wheat, melons, and figs. They also ate mesquite beans, the fruit of saguaro cactus, and a mush of what Russell later called "unidentified worms." In 1846, when a U.S. Army battalion passed through Pima lands, the battalion's surgeon John Griffin described the Pima as "sprightly" and in "fine health." He also noted that the Pima had "the greatest abundance of food, and take care of it well, as we saw many of their storehouses full of pumpkins, melons, corn etc."

I see carbs listed (although I don't see processed carbs and sugar mentioned) and that they were considered in good health. What is your issue? The points he is looking at now is the idea that abundance causes obesity or sedentary lifestyle causes obesity.

quote:
You just restate Taubes' erroneous claims. To wit:
In Message 305, I stated: That is not the way I read what Taubes wrote. It was very much about what type of energy enters the body. All calories are not equal.

You quoted my first sentence and said: That's fine. Care to support that bare assertion?

So I quoted from the book where I felt Taubes covered the idea where all calories are not equal and what supported my understanding of what Taubes wrote.

quote:
Either refute the evidence or concede the point.
What point?
Evidence for what?
What do you think I'm arguing? Message 303

What do you think Taubes' central thesis is?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 309 by molbiogirl, posted 08-16-2011 9:14 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 330 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 9:01 AM purpledawn has replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 325 of 451 (629262)
08-16-2011 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 314 by molbiogirl
08-16-2011 11:15 AM


Re: Amylin & insulin decrease appetite
quote:
There are literally dozens of papers. Care to comment?
Comment on what?

I haven't claimed anything concerning insulin.

As I said before, neither you nor Guyenet have provided any quotes (other than that one paragraph) from the book for anyone to follow what your issue is with what Taubes printed in the book.

From what I can tell you and Guyenet are upset because Taubes didn't get specific on a cellular level.

He makes it clear in the book that he is speaking in a more general manner for ease. He didn't write a scientific report. He wrote a book for the public.

When he talks about insulin, I understood that he knew the process was more involved, but he was putting forth the basic idea.

That idea is that processed carbs and sugar cause some people to store too much fat.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 314 by molbiogirl, posted 08-16-2011 11:15 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 331 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 9:09 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 328 of 451 (629358)
08-17-2011 6:26 AM
Reply to: Message 322 by Aware Wolf
08-16-2011 4:20 PM


Re: Internal starvation
quote:
And I already wondered about people like Asians, and also my wife, who seem to eat a high percentage of carbs and stay slim anyways.

But on the other hand, the low carb thing seems to "work" for me...


Sumo wrestlers work at getting fat.

One thought in my mind concerning the differences between breeds of people is about where groups evolved. Wouldn't they evolve to deal with the food in their environment. Processed carbs haven't been around that long.

Then we look at the US melting pot. Most of us are hybrids. What does that do to our system?

Just more thoughts rumbling around. I'm also looking at the thyroid now. So many pieces to the puzzle.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 322 by Aware Wolf, posted 08-16-2011 4:20 PM Aware Wolf has not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 341 of 451 (629389)
08-17-2011 11:37 AM
Reply to: Message 330 by molbiogirl
08-17-2011 9:01 AM


Re: Triggers for Fat Storage or Use
quote:
I don't intend to debate Tuabes. I intend to discuss the science underlying his hypiothesis.

Please provide cites to support your argument. Not Taubes' quotes. Cites.


Unfortunately for you this is the Book Nook forum and the discussion is about the book.

I didn't bring up any science, I disagreed with the statement that your article made, which had nothing to do with science. If you wanted to debate science then you shouldn't have responded to my post.

quote:
I've already posted it twice. I've even supplied the original quote from GCBC.
The quote you pulled from the article, IMO, is not the central thesis of the book. The paragraph is from Chapter 21 on "The Carbohydrate Hypothesis, I: Fat Metabolism", page 359. He's talking about an alternative hypothesis of obesity that vanished in the 1980's. It isn't his hypothesis. Only the first proposition in the paragraph is what he has said.

quote:
I suggest you look at his discussion of Wilhelm Falta's work. Chapter 22. Page 379. Taubes noted that injecting insulin increased the appetite specifically for carbs. Message 333
On that page, Tabues does not say that insulin increases appetite or that injecting insulin increased the appetite specifically for carbs. He's presenting what others have said.

After the discovery of insulin, Falta reported that giving it to patients would increase their appetite for carbohydrates specifically, and the carbohydrates in turn would stimulate the patient's own insulin production.

Do you disagree with what Falta reported before 1930 or do you feel that Taubes did not summarize the report correctly?

Looking on the internet, I don't see any disagreement that insulin therapy can cause people to gain weight.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 9:01 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 342 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 11:41 AM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied

purpledawn
Member (Idle past 2775 days)
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 344 of 451 (629393)
08-17-2011 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 337 by molbiogirl
08-17-2011 11:16 AM


Re: Taubes: All carbs are bad
quote:
Taubes' position is perfectly clear. Please see 335.

You do realize that page 335 presents a low carb diet as successful don't you?
he whole point of the book is to support the idea of a diet lower in carbs than proteins and fat.

quote:
Taubes even has a GCBC chapter called The Carbohydrate Hypothesis II: Insulin!

From the first page of that chapter:

The fact that insulin increase the formation of fat has been obvious …

That isn't a statement by Taubes either. It is part of a quote from Reginald Haist and Charles Best, The Physiological Basis of Medical Practice, 1966.

The fact that insulin increases the formation of fat has been obvious ever since the first emaciated dog or diabetic patient demonstrated a fine pad of adipose tissue, made as a result of treatment with the hormone.

What is your point?

If you disagree with something that Taubes actually said or a conclusion he actually made, why don't you write a clear argument stating your position. You aren't really presenting anything to discuss.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 337 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 11:16 AM molbiogirl has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 345 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 12:10 PM purpledawn has seen this message but not replied
 Message 348 by molbiogirl, posted 08-17-2011 12:27 PM purpledawn has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022