Author Topic: Lex's Journal  (Read 644915 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

xylothrill

  • Guest
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #175 on: August 21, 2008, 09:26:28 pm »
Craig, I thought you are trying to loose weight; does this work on your high fat diet?

Nicola

I lost about 25 pounds and then stopped. I'm at 210 but would like to get down to 180.

Craig

Offline Erasmus

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #176 on: August 22, 2008, 02:47:37 am »
I had an interesting experience day before yesterday.  I took my wife out to eat and ordered two 16 oz ribeye steaks as rare as they would make them.  I ordered them without any seasoning.  My wife was unable to finish all of her steak so I ate about another 8 oz of medium rare steak for a total of 2 1/2 lbs.  I felt rather thirsty for several hours after the meal, which we ate a bit earlier than usual at around 2pm, even though the steaks were not salted or seasoned in any way.

I checked BG in the early evening and before going to bed and it had risen about 30 points well into the 100's.  When I got up in the morning I did my usual weigh-in and was up about 1 3/4 lbs.

The USDA website says the average ribeye steak is about 20% fat and 17.25% protein.   2.5 lbs of steak would then be about 225 grams of fat and 195 grams protein.  If 58% of the protein were converted to glucose this would work out to about 113 grams of glucose.  I've read where each gram of glucose causes the body to store an additional 6 grams of water.  Therefore 113 grams of glucose would cause the body to hold and additional 678 grams of water (113 x 6) for a total weight increase of 791 grams (113 glucose + 678 water).  791 divided by 453 to convert back to pounds equals 1.75 lbs which exactly matches my increase in weight.

Since I lowered my food intake to 500g per day my normal protein intake is about 70 - 75 grams .  As you can see, eating those steaks gave me almost 3 times my normal protein for one day and I believe it clearly created a significant increase in glucose based both on the weight gain and the rise in BG.

I also found that I had no trouble eating the 2.5 lbs (1.15Kg) and I assume that this is because of the difference in the ratio of fat.  My normal food is over 30% fat so it takes much less for me to feel satisfied with the significantly higher fat level of my normal food.  In fact, there is no way that I could eat 2.5 lbs of my regular high fat food.  Doing so would make me nauseous.

I thought the observation and the math were interesting.

Lex



Interesting.  Remembering that this is a single data point with a multitude of potential confounding factors and highly imprecise measurements (both the restaurant's version of "16oz" and your own scale)....

It would seem that 58% is an upper limit of of conversion as your meal was well past the point of having intake being a limiting factor.

As a side note, were I thinner, you and I are about the same size.  I *can* eat that much, but boy howdy would I be uncomfortable for quite some time.  If I could do that consistently, I would spend my time at the local all-you-can-eat Brazillian BBQ rather than the steakhouse.  :)  But then I prefer my food cooked, rare, but cooked.  And I like salt.

As a side side note to the forum, I don't see anything wrong with raw.  In fact I suspect it is better for you.  I'm just not there yet.

-E

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #177 on: August 22, 2008, 01:17:12 pm »
It would seem that 58% is an upper limit of of conversion as your meal was well past the point of having intake being a limiting factor.

I really have no clue about the upper limit or even if 58% is a reasonable conversion factor.  I do know that I've observed that the more protein I eat at a meal the higher my BG rises and the longer it stays elevated.  I used 58% as this seems to be the accepted number and it is the number used on the Saturated Fat Forum as well.

I’m also guessing that only certain amino acids can be converted into glucose and this is what sets conversion factor and/or the limit.

I *can* eat that much, but boy howdy would I be uncomfortable for quite some time.  If I could do that consistently, I would spend my time at the local all-you-can-eat Brazilian BBQ rather than the steakhouse.  :)  But then I prefer my food cooked, rare, but cooked.  And I like salt.

When I was eating 68% Fat/32% Protein I consistently ate 2 lbs and often 3 lbs of food every day.  Now that I've I upped the fat from 68% into the 80+% range, I find that I desire much less food - even 1.5 lbs is often a struggle to get down in one meal.  In fact, I recently cut my meals from 600-650 gram range down to the 500 gram range.  I thought that this would probably cause me to be very hungry during the 24 hours after jogging (I now only jog every other day but double the distance) but this hasn't been the case. 

Lex
« Last Edit: August 22, 2008, 01:22:38 pm by lex_rooker »

Offline Erasmus

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #178 on: August 23, 2008, 12:11:23 am »
I really have no clue about the upper limit or even if 58% is a reasonable conversion factor.  I do know that I've observed that the more protein I eat at a meal the higher my BG rises and the longer it stays elevated.  I used 58% as this seems to be the accepted number and it is the number used on the Saturated Fat Forum as well.

I’m also guessing that only certain amino acids can be converted into glucose and this is what sets conversion factor and/or the limit.

Well it seems your anecdotal evidence seems to support the 58% number.   I suppose it could be a maximum conversion factor OR it could be simply that the AA content of YOUR diet lends itself to a 58% conversion. 

I suppose that both options would be easy to test, if you were inclined, when you are finished with this experiment, after you get all of those other experiments out of the way.  You know, in a decade or two.   ;D

-E

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #179 on: August 23, 2008, 06:18:12 am »
E,
One of the interesting corollaries to my idea that specific amino acids are converted to glucose and others are not, is that I would expect the amino acid profile of meats to be similar and therefore have roughly the same conversion rate.  However, the amino acid profile of plant proteins vary all over the place and the conversion factors would vary significantly depending on the source.  Very difficult to test as I know of no vegetable protein source that doesn't come with a carbohydrate load far exceeding the protein content.

Lex

Offline Erasmus

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #180 on: August 23, 2008, 07:33:55 am »
E,
One of the interesting corollaries to my idea that specific amino acids are converted to glucose and others are not, is that I would expect the amino acid profile of meats to be similar and therefore have roughly the same conversion rate.  However, the amino acid profile of plant proteins vary all over the place and the conversion factors would vary significantly depending on the source.  Very difficult to test as I know of no vegetable protein source that doesn't come with a carbohydrate load far exceeding the protein content.

Lex

Not that I'm suggesting it for now, but should the time come, you could do your BG tests after a "meal" of one of the various protein isolate powders out there.  You could even keep these "meals" isocaloric by adjusting the fat content by making them with cream.  (It'd probably pretty tasty too)  You could try a soy as well as a casein based powder.  This is assuming that they do in fact have worthwhile differences in their AA profiles.  This I don't know off the top of my head.  Also, even if the AA profile is different, switching out an AA with another AA that is equally glucogenic would confound the test.  Problems problems...  ;)

-E

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #181 on: August 23, 2008, 10:21:27 am »
Not that I'm suggesting it for now, but should the time come, you could do your BG tests after a "meal" of one of the various protein isolate powders out there.  You could even keep these "meals" isocaloric by adjusting the fat content by making them with cream.  (It'd probably pretty tasty too)  You could try a soy as well as a casein based powder.  This is assuming that they do in fact have worthwhile differences in their AA profiles.  This I don't know off the top of my head.  Also, even if the AA profile is different, switching out an AA with another AA that is equally glucogenic would confound the test.  Problems problems...  ;)

I hadn't thought of using the isolate powders that body builders use.  I guess that's because I tried them several years ago and I just didn't feel very good after ingesting them.  I used the pure protein powders, not the flavored ones with all the sugar and/or sweeteners added, and made my own concoctions with various combinations of milk, cream, fruit, and veggie juices - sometimes with raw eggs added.  I can say that it wasn't the best experience I've ever had.  I tried several of the top rated powders, all of which were very expensive at $100+ for a 3 or 4 lb tub.  I tried soy, casein, and egg based as well as "balanced" blends and all made me light headed and a bit queasy feeling after taking them.  I did try just taking the juice/milk/egg mixtures without the protein powder added and these did not cause the negative effects, so as far as I'm concerned it was the protein isolates that caused the problems.  Needless to say, I'm not wild about repeating that experience - even in the name of science...

Lex

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #182 on: August 23, 2008, 11:18:20 pm »
Here is the 12th week update on my fat ratio experiment.

                     68%F/32%P  80%F/20%P  80%F/20%P   80%F/20%P   80%F/20%P
                         Baseline          21 Days       42 Days       70 Days          84 Days

BG Daily Avg           106              94              92                 87                 88
BG Hi/Low Range   90/120         92/103        80/100           71/98          72/109
BG rise after meal      25              10               6                 12                 25
Urine Ketones       0-Trace      SM/Lg        Trace/Mod         Large+       Large/Large+
Resting Heart Rt        58             63              60                 59                  59
Weight                   162            159            165               160                 155
BMI                         21.4          21.0           21.8              21.1                20.4
BP                       110/70        105/67        98/63            103/65           106/67
%Body Fat(calipers)   11.0         12.3           13.9               10.8                9.5
Caliper A/C/T      10/6/11       12/8/11       14/9/13          8/6/12            7/5/10

It has been 12 weeks since I made my initial dietary change from 68% fat/32% Protein to 80+% Fat/20% or less protein.

About 6 weeks ago I increased my activity by slow jogging about 2 miles per day which I modified a couple of weeks ago to jogging 4 miles every other day with a day of rest in between.  This kept total mileage the same but to allowed my knees a day of rest.  The idea behind increasing activity was to see if body adaptations would be accelerated.

About the time I upped the mileage and lowered the frequency of my exercise I also lowered my food intake by an average of 100 grams (3 ½ oz) per day.  Down from 600 g/day to 500 g/day.  This dropped overall calories from a little over 2,000 per day to about 1,700.  I expected to be ravenously hungry during the 24 hour period after jogging on these reduced rations, however, this was not the case.  I wasn’t anymore hungry than normal between meals (one meal per day eaten in the late afternoon) than usual and on occasion would forget to eat if I was busy and interested in something else.

As you can see the drop in calories did cause me to lose some weight, so it is clear that calories do have some effect - at least it shows that there are a minimum number of calories necessary to support a specific weight level, however, others have demonstrated that beyond the minimum, once weight is stabilized, eating more calories -especially from fat, does not seem to cause any significant or permanent weight gain.  Weight has dropped from 160 to 155 for a total decrease of 5 lbs over about 2 -3 weeks.  Weight loss has definitely slowed, but I cannot yet confirm that it has completely stopped and stabilized.  We’ll see over the next few weeks.

Percent body fat has dropped a bit more.  Caliper measurements this morning were Abdomen 7mm, Chest 5mm, Thigh 10mm.  This correlates to a body fat level of 9.5% and with a weight of 155, BMI is 20.4.  This drop in body mass is clearly related to my reduced food intake.

One thing of interest is that right after dropping food intake and during the initial period of most rapid weight loss my BG dropped into the mid to high 70s for much of the day.  As weight loss slowed and weight became more stable at a lower level, BG began to rise again into the high 80s low 90s.  Going back over my records, it is clear that each time I’ve gone into a period of losing weight BG has dropped and once weight has stabilized BG has risen again.  Current BG average is at 88 –  just one point above what it was 2 weeks ago.

I also find that with the lower food intake BG usually peaks in the high 90’s, seldom going over 100.  This appears to be consistent with the total protein content of the meal.  Protein has dropped from 95 g/meal to 70 g/meal.  I also observed that when eating out and consuming about 2 to 3 lbs of ribeye steak which has a much lower fat content and hence a higher protein content (not to mention I’m eating almost 3 times the normal amount ) of my normal rations, BG peaks well into the 100s and stays there for several hours.  I also appear to store additional water as my weight increases significantly (almost 2 lbs) for the 24 to 48 hour period after eating a meal like this.  I brought this up in an early post a few days ago and the weight gain seems to track with the theoretical amount of additional glucose created from the excess protein.  Whether this is actually true is mere speculation as I really have no way to prove it but the math does seem to support the idea.

Ketones have been more variable during this period.  In the past they exceeded the maximum amount that could be measured by Ketostix.  Erasmus suggested I dilute my urine and then measure.  I did this and found that most of the time Ketones were in the 320 to 640 range (the max Ketostix can measure is 160).  Over the last week Ketones have dropped into the normal measurable range and now seem to be running in the 80 to 160 range (Level 3/Level 4).  Whether this is due to the reduced food and associated weight loss, I’m not sure.  We should be able to confirm this over the next couple of weeks.  As weight becomes more stable it will be interesting to see if Ketones rise, fall, or stay at this new lower level.  Also, since weight is dropping at the same time activity has increased, it may be difficult to determine if ketone levels are being influenced more by the reduce food intake, or body changes brought about by the increased activity.

The adventure continues,

Lex

Offline Elli

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #183 on: August 24, 2008, 12:29:36 am »


Extremly interesting, as always.

I think your new exercise regime of giving a rest every other day is a good way to go.
I have read some writings about how we are not exactly designed to do long jogging
very frequently; it uses up and wastes muscles away. I'm not against runner's physique,
in fact I prefer leaner body as supposed to bulkier one. However, the problem is that
those who engage in excessive long running almost everyday is in danger of wasting
away muscles of internal organs such as the heart. I don't know how valid this theory
really is, but at least it's good to give the knees some break every other day :)

How are you feeling overall? Many associate lower protein with less vigor, but it doesn't
seem to be the case for you at least! And your numbers are improving so I would say
your experiments is rather a successful one so far. All that expenses spent on BG strips
and ketostix were worth it ;D

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #184 on: August 24, 2008, 01:30:46 am »
Hi Elli,

Thanks for the encouragement.  Yes, I feel great almost all the time.  I did have a rough week when forced to eat cafeteria food, but when able to eat my normal food I do wonderfully. 

I'm not so sure that distance runners waste away, their body's just reconfigure to support their specific activity.  Since there is little upper body participation in long distance running, I expect that this area does "waste away" to some degree, however, legs and lower body, though lean would still be muscular - at least this was my experience during my 20s and 30s when I was running 10 miles every other day at a 6:30 pace (boy those days are gone, darn it).

Satya has suggested that I vary my routine and do some distance as well as some higher intensity interval work - and probably need to focus on upper body development as well.  The problem is that I'm very busy and I need to find a way to work all this in without taking a large amount of time.  My experience is that anytime I do exercise it consumes at least one hour and usually more.  This includes the time to get ready, the exercise itself, cool down period, shower, etc.   As it is I spend about 1 1/2 hours every other day with my jogging routine.  I'm now working on incorporating the greater variety of exercise, keeping the total activity level about the same, but not committing any more additional time.  It's quite a challenge.

Lex 

Offline Elli

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #185 on: August 24, 2008, 04:20:50 am »


In GCBC, Taubes talks about how exercise and obesity doesn't necessarily go together.
He suggested that obese person may be more sedantary or have no energy/motivation
to move around due to insulin floating around their body all the time. That doesn't help
with circulation of free fatty acids throughout the cells, and the person is less likely to
have energy to move around.

Maybe because of your higher fat plan, even less insulin is being generated by your body
and that you're motivation to add more variety of exercise to your routine :) I know you
didn't start running just because you were full of energy all of a sudden, but to faciliate the
transition. But the fact that you're enjoying your new physical activities and even planing
on adding more variety into it seems to be a good sign. Not that I want you to overdrive
yourself though.

I know that I should be more active, but knowing it and wanting to be more active is little
different, isn't it ::)?

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #186 on: August 24, 2008, 04:50:15 am »
Elli,
I wish I could say that I enjoy my increased activity level.  The fact is, I'd much rather be doing something else.  I intensely dislike jogging, lifting weights, or any other contrived physical activity.  I do, however, find the end result useful, and I'm willing (at this point in time anyway) to endure the annoyance and discomfort.  Unfortunately, there really is little or no motivation for me to add variety to my exercise routine or I would have already done it.  When I say I'm working on a way to incorporate a wider variety of exercises into my routine, what I'm really saying is I'm looking for a solution to the problem of finding a way to make myself do it.  Everything else is just my battery of excuses to justify not doing something I don't want to do in the first place.

I made a commitment to increase my level of activity through jogging to see what effect it has on the various metabolic functions I'm able to measure during this experiment, and I will keep that commitment or die trying.  Whether I expand my exercise routine remains to be seen.  To be sure, I'll have to have some expectation of significant benefit beyond what I'm currently receiving from what I'm doing now.

Sorry to be so blunt, but to pretend that all is glorious would be a disservice to those who are following this journal.  What I do, I do for a specific purpose, and I often must make choices and commitments that I don't enjoy fullfilling to achieve my end goal.

Lex

Offline Elli

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #187 on: August 24, 2008, 09:02:29 am »


I absolutely understand and can even relate to you.

I don't know if it's due to high insulin level or I'm just plain old lazy, but I don't
really enjoy intensive exercise too. When the weather is nice, I like taking some
walk or even ride a bike, however, never liked jogging or any competitive sports
in that matter. To make the things slightly worse, I don't even enjoy weight
training despite all that benefits it claims to give. But I have decided that all
that stress that I'm going to be giving to myself by forcing to do activities I don't
like to do will counteract the benefits, so I'm happy for now. I won't look like the
front cover model of a fitness magazine, but I that doesn't really matter, does it :)?

I'm always impressed by how organized and goal-oriented you are. The way you are
living your life is actually motivating me not only in diet area but in many other senses.
Good luck with upcoming days!

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #188 on: August 24, 2008, 02:47:01 pm »
Thanks Elli, It's always nice to hear that others are gaining benefit by following along.  At this point in my life I've pretty much done whatever it is I'm going to accomplish.  The best I can hope to do now is help others find their way without having to repeat the errors I've made.  My hope is to inspire you and others to emulate my process of thinking things through and solving problems rather than just blindly copying my protocols.  Learning how to create your own experiments and solve your own problems is where the power really lies.  In fact, it is the key to success in every aspect of your life.

lex

Offline wodgina

  • Global Moderator
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,304
  • Opportunistic Carnivore
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #189 on: August 24, 2008, 03:37:38 pm »
Hey Lex

I'm guessing you don't get a runner's high? Did you get get a runners high in the past?
One of my main motivations for exercise is the high I get afterward.
“Integrity has no need of rules.”

Albert Camus

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #190 on: August 24, 2008, 11:54:01 pm »
I'm guessing you don't get a runner's high? Did you get get a runners high in the past?
One of my main motivations for exercise is the high I get afterward.

Back in my 20s and early 30s I used to get runner's high, but only if I ran long enough - say 5 miles or more - and then it had to be at a good pace, about 7 min/mile or better.  Just slow jogging like I'm doing now would never do it for me, and today I couldn't keep a 7 min/mile pace long enough.  I find it's now a real challenge to manage a 9 or 10 min/mile pace for any significant distance.

Compared to the average person I'm not out of shape by any means, however, as I've gotten older, things that I used to take for granted I often can't do at all anymore.

Lex


Offline Erasmus

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #191 on: August 26, 2008, 08:12:40 am »
I hadn't thought of using the isolate powders that body builders use.  I guess that's because I tried them several years ago and I just didn't feel very good after ingesting them.  I used the pure protein powders, not the flavored ones with all the sugar and/or sweeteners added, and made my own concoctions with various combinations of milk, cream, fruit, and veggie juices - sometimes with raw eggs added.  I can say that it wasn't the best experience I've ever had.  I tried several of the top rated powders, all of which were very expensive at $100+ for a 3 or 4 lb tub.  I tried soy, casein, and egg based as well as "balanced" blends and all made me light headed and a bit queasy feeling after taking them.  I did try just taking the juice/milk/egg mixtures without the protein powder added and these did not cause the negative effects, so as far as I'm concerned it was the protein isolates that caused the problems.  Needless to say, I'm not wild about repeating that experience - even in the name of science...

Lex


LOL  I suppose you could always  have the fish.   ;D

-E

PS.  On a more serious note...  An AA composition test would be rather pointless.  However testing the lower limits of this 58% thing would be easy and somewhat revealing.  I see two possibilities, one there is no lower limit and two there IS one.  Assuming there is a lower limit, I would think that it would be showing the test subject's (you)  ACTUAL protein requirements, for that point in time anyway.  This could be further tested by going sedentary for a day or two and ramping it up by extra hard bodybuilding type workouts for a day or two.  I would think that meaningful data would next to instantaneous on the meters so any form of long range experiment would be unnecessary, a day or two at most with a return to baseline for few days between tests.

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #192 on: August 27, 2008, 07:34:38 am »
PS.  On a more serious note...  An AA composition test would be rather pointless.  However testing the lower limits of this 58% thing would be easy and somewhat revealing.  I see two possibilities, one there is no lower limit and two there IS one.  Assuming there is a lower limit, I would think that it would be showing the test subject's (you)  ACTUAL protein requirements, for that point in time anyway.  This could be further tested by going sedentary for a day or two and ramping it up by extra hard bodybuilding type workouts for a day or two.  I would think that meaningful data would next to instantaneous on the meters so any form of long range experiment would be unnecessary, a day or two at most with a return to baseline for few days between tests.

Erasmus,
Not sure exactly what you mean by this, nor am I sure that anything conclusive related to the body's use of protein could really be measured effectively by the simple tools I have available.

First, I believe that the protein I eat is digested, broken down into amino acids, and then circulated throughout the body via the blood stream.  As the amino acids flow around and through the various tissues, any specific amino acids needed at the cellular level will be pulled out of the bloodstream and used by the cells for repairs, cellular division, or whatever cells may do with the various amino acids.  I would expect the amount of amino acids used directly by tissues to be relatively small and even if it doubled (due to damage caused by exercise or whatever means) I doubt that it would be enough to measure via the tests I have at my disposal.

Any amino acids not used by the various body tissues will ultimately be circulated through the liver where some portion (and here I suspect that it is only certain specific amino acids) is converted to glucose.

Part of my reasoning here is that damaged tissue is broken down by the body and the protein is recycled.  Also, the body can easily sacrifice its own lean muscle mass that is not seen as important (read seldom used) to help provide the necessary building blocks to repair and build tissues that are seen as more important.  In my case, jogging uses lower body muscles more than upper body muscles so the upper body of runners tend to atrophy and waste away as the lower body muscles become more toned - hence runner's physique.

There are swings in BG that I occasionally encounter that can't be explained by my food intake and/or activity patterns, and BG is something that I can directly measure.  How could I possibly draw any useful conclusions about protein utilization when I have no way to directly measure it, and must infer any conclusions from BG readings which are heavily influenced by the breakdown of body fat, absolute grams of protein consumed (and probably type of protein consumed), absolute grams of fat consumed, amount of activity, muscle uptake of glucose vs fatty acids vs ketones, and a host of complex biochemical reactions that I know nothing about nor can I measure?   As an example, sometimes after jogging my BG rises 8 points and sometimes it falls 10 points ( I take 3 readings to make sure that the reading aren't just a bad test strip etc).  Since I eat the same food everyday, the same amount everyday, at the same time of day everyday, and jog at the same time of day, I've been unable to come up with any useful explanation to account for this relatively simple observation.  I've also tried to vary the number of days off between jogging from 1 to 3 days and unfortunately the rise and/or fall of BG from a jogging session seems to have no correlation to the rest period between periods of activity.   

At this point the only thing I can tell you for sure is that after a meal, BG does seem to consistently rise over about a 3 hour period, and the amount of the rise seems to be consistent with the general amount of protein I consume - more protein in the meal the higher BG rises.  But be aware, I notice this effect when the amount of protein is significantly different from the norm.  In other words, it became noticeable when I consumed about 3 times the normal amount of protein, (200+g vs 70g).  A change of 20-30g does not produce a consistent measurable change in BG.

Unless you can think of a protocol that will account for all the metabolic interactions that can influence BG so as to be able to extract and isolate the amount of BG contributed by gluconeogenesis, trying to equate BG readings to anything more specific than general observations seems a hopless task to me. 

Lex

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #193 on: August 27, 2008, 11:17:48 pm »
I'm embarrassed to find in post in another thread that I have offended at least one member of this forum, and if one person is offended and willing to state so, I'm sure that others have been offended also.  This is one of the best forums I've ever had the pleasrue to be be a member of, and I certainly don't want to do or say anything that would reflect poorly on it.

I tend to be very analytical and state my point of view rather bluntly, but also try to support my ideas with facts and direct observations.  I do this for two reasons: 1) to get feed back from people who feel that the facts that I've presented don't support the conclusions I've drawn, and 2) to try to help people understand that they should test their own ideas and think things through for themselves rather than just repeat what others say or believe.  This is why you will constantly see me challenge people with requests for any direct evidence to support their claims.

I welcome debate, and other's ideas, however, if I feel that there is a flaw in their logic, I'm going to point it out and present my evidence.  On the other hand, I'm also willing to accept what I dish out.  I don't take offence at sharp comments directed towards me or my ideas.  I just consider them as part of the give and take of the discussion, and dissenting comments often drive me to review my own logic and thought processes.

I apologize to everyone who feels that I treated them poorly or with disrespect.  This certainly was not my intent.  I would take it as a personal favor that anytime anyone feels that I've gotten out of line, please let me know, either by private e-mail, or as a direct reply to the offending post.  I can get a bit over the top at times and I need honest feed back to bring me back down to earth.

Lex

Satya

  • Guest
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #194 on: August 28, 2008, 12:06:43 am »
I tend to be very analytical and state my point of view rather bluntly, but also try to support my ideas with facts and direct observations.  I do this for two reasons: 1) to get feed back from people who feel that the facts that I've presented don't support the conclusions I've drawn, and 2) to try to help people understand that they should test their own ideas and think things through for themselves rather than just repeat what others say or believe.  This is why you will constantly see me challenge people with requests for any direct evidence to support their claims.

I welcome debate, and other's ideas, however, if I feel that there is a flaw in their logic, I'm going to point it out and present my evidence.  On the other hand, I'm also willing to accept what I dish out.  I don't take offence at sharp comments directed towards me or my ideas.  I just consider them as part of the give and take of the discussion, and dissenting comments often drive me to review my own logic and thought processes.

I have seen no personal attacks or hostility towards anyone in any of your remarks, Lex.  Debating ideas is the most worthwhile course of action we can take, imho.  If we continue to assume, then we rob ourselves of the chance to LEARN.  Keep doing what you are doing.  I feel that we have a very intelligent group here, and hopefully strong words in support of ideas are not going to result in hurt feelings.

Offline Ronbo

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #195 on: August 28, 2008, 12:35:03 am »
I appreciate your candor and your comments are always rooted in your personal experience. We are all searching for the best health, and your dedication to documenting in minute detail is a tribute to your unselfish desire for the truth.
Insecure people are always offended by the truth.
And let's face it, the internet is packed with people eager to give their opinion on subjects on which they know absolutely nothing.

OK...I did want to ask you about your recent reduction in portion size. I am getting ready to take the plunge and give this is a shot [Metaphor Alert]. So would you mind reviewing your new formula of stew meat/pet blend/suet. What quantities of each, etc. (I don't want to piss Slankers off by being unsure of how much of each I need)
Also, would you suggest starting at 80/20 or ramping up to 80/20 by starting at a higher protien amount.

In my case, even though I have been zero or extremely low carb for about 2 weeks now, my BG is still very high. I am thinking that I am getting too much protein and it's converting against me.

P.S. Do you get a discount on test strips? If only we could wash them off and use them again!

Offline lex_rooker

  • Trailblazer
  • Mammoth Hunter
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,231
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #196 on: August 28, 2008, 02:21:52 am »
I appreciate your candor and your comments are always rooted in your personal experience. We are all searching for the best health, and your dedication to documenting in minute detail is a tribute to your unselfish desire for the truth.
Insecure people are always offended by the truth.
And let's face it, the internet is packed with people eager to give their opinion on subjects on which they know absolutely nothing.

I appreciate your support as well as Satya's (the previous post to yours).  Unfortunately, some of my writing can be a bit short and curt, and I must take ownership of that.

OK...I did want to ask you about your recent reduction in portion size. I am getting ready to take the plunge and give this is a shot [Metaphor Alert]. So would you mind reviewing your new formula of stew meat/pet blend/suet. What quantities of each, etc. (I don't want to piss Slankers off by being unsure of how much of each I need)
Also, would you suggest starting at 80/20 or ramping up to 80/20 by starting at a higher protein amount.

I think that portion size as a lot to do with age, level of activity and percentage of fat in the food.  I ate much more in my 20s & 30s than I do now in my late 50s though I find it easy to eat 2 lbs of food when fat content is 70% of calories or below but have trouble eating 1.5 lbs when fat content is 80% of calories or more.  I'd start off with about 2 lbs, maybe eaten in two meals 6 - 8 hours apart and go from there.  I only eat one meal but that is just my preference and on occasion I will eat a second meal, especially when I've been working hard and get hungry again.

My experiments have shown that you will gain and/or lose weight as calories vary, however, the base weight you will achieve at any caloric intake when eating mostly meat and fat will be far lower than when eating the same number of calories in carbs.  There also seems to be a max weight that you will achieve on meat and fat that won't be exceeded no matter how many calories you consume, and again, this is far lower than when eating carbs.

I eat Slankers Dog & Cat food mixed with Slankers course ground Chili Beef with added suet or beef fat.  There is a difference between suet and beef fat.  Suet is the flaky fat that forms around the internal organs like liver, kidney, and spleen to cushion them.  Beef fat is the fat that forms around and separates the muscle tissues and it tends to be more dense and usually has more connective tissue associated with it as well.  I like both and just tell Slankers to fill my order with whatever they have the most of at the moment.

The Dog & Cat food is not USDA inspected or approved so you eat this at your own risk.  It is made from the leftover organs and meats from their normal animals but also includes meat from animals that are to old to sell as top quality meat and so they don't pay to have them inspected.  All the processing is done at USDA inspected processing plants, using the same equipment as that used for the meat they sell for human consumption.  I'm not bothered by this at all but it may be an issue for others.

A package of Dog & Cat weighs about 1.5 lbs and tests at about 18% fat, and the Chili beef I purchase weighs a little over 2 lbs and the fat content varies anywhere from 14% to 20%.  If you just mix the two together without adding additional fat then the resulting mix is usually between 65% and 70% calories from fat and 30% to 35% protein.  If eating 1 kg (about 2 lbs) you will get an average of about 170g fat and 180g protein for a total of about 2300 calories.

If you mix in 300g additional fat (about 3/4 lb or 12 oz) to 1.5 lbs D&C plus 2 lbs regular ground beef (or the course ground chili beef) then the fat content is raised to about 28% to 30% and protein drops to between 14% and 16%.  Eating 1 kg of this mixture will provide about 300g fat and 140g protein and about 3400 calories.  This is the mix I'm currently eating and I just can't consume a full 1 kg - it's just too much food for my normal activity level.  Somewhere between 500g and 600g seems about right for me at my age and activity level.

I do add a bit of sea salt to the mix (about 1 rounded teaspoon (5-7ml)) to the whole amount which isn't enough to really even taste.  I had some leg cramps and they seemed to be helped by this small addition of salt.

In my case, even though I have been zero or extremely low carb for about 2 weeks now, my BG is still very high. I am thinking that I am getting too much protein and it's converting against me.

As you probably noted from a recent post I found that when I ate a large amount of protein in the form of ribeye steaks my BG increased dramatically.  There is a definite link between BG and protein.

P.S. Do you get a discount on test strips? If only we could wash them off and use them again!

No, I pay retail like everyone else.  I use a OneTouch Ultra 2 and pay about $1 each for test strips which I purchase 100 at a time. 100 strips lasts between 1 and 2 weeks depending on frequency of testing.  I test more often directly after making any sort of change.  I test less frequently as things stabilize just to assure that I'm still on track and nothing has changed dramatically.

As a final note, I don't obsess over any of this.  I do what seems to work.  Some question my use of salt.  Well, I'd prefer to eat a bit of salt rather than endure leg cramps in the middle of the nigh.  I used to drink distilled water, but was was convinced by arguments from others that this would have been unnatural and we most likely got a good bit of our minerals from lake and/or river water so I now drink tap water.  I encourage you to use what I'm doing as a starting point, but make your own observations and tests, and if you need to make a change then by all means do so - and report your findings so others can take advantage of what you've learned.

I've had to come to terms with my own mortality over the past several years as family members and dear friends have passed away.  I took care of the wife of a friend who lived to be 90, but was bed ridden and suffered severe dementia during her last 10 years.  Today I go for quality over quantity.  It's OK if I die tomorrow because today I feel great and have the ability to do whatever I want.  Life is short and though I'd much prefer to eat ice cream and pizza, I find my quality of life is far better and I can do much more eating the way that I do now. 

If I missed something or you need more detail, don't hesitate to ask,

Lex

Offline Erasmus

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 18
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #197 on: August 28, 2008, 06:32:30 am »
Erasmus,
Not sure exactly what you mean by this, nor am I sure that anything conclusive related to the body's use of protein could really be measured effectively by the simple tools I have available.

First, I believe that the protein I eat is digested, broken down into amino acids, and then circulated throughout the body via the blood stream.  As the amino acids flow around and through the various tissues, any specific amino acids needed at the cellular level will be pulled out of the bloodstream and used by the cells for repairs, cellular division, or whatever cells may do with the various amino acids.  I would expect the amount of amino acids used directly by tissues to be relatively small and even if it doubled (due to damage caused by exercise or whatever means) I doubt that it would be enough to measure via the tests I have at my disposal.

Any amino acids not used by the various body tissues will ultimately be circulated through the liver where some portion (and here I suspect that it is only certain specific amino acids) is converted to glucose.

Part of my reasoning here is that damaged tissue is broken down by the body and the protein is recycled.  Also, the body can easily sacrifice its own lean muscle mass that is not seen as important (read seldom used) to help provide the necessary building blocks to repair and build tissues that are seen as more important.  In my case, jogging uses lower body muscles more than upper body muscles so the upper body of runners tend to atrophy and waste away as the lower body muscles become more toned - hence runner's physique.

There are swings in BG that I occasionally encounter that can't be explained by my food intake and/or activity patterns, and BG is something that I can directly measure.  How could I possibly draw any useful conclusions about protein utilization when I have no way to directly measure it, and must infer any conclusions from BG readings which are heavily influenced by the breakdown of body fat, absolute grams of protein consumed (and probably type of protein consumed), absolute grams of fat consumed, amount of activity, muscle uptake of glucose vs fatty acids vs ketones, and a host of complex biochemical reactions that I know nothing about nor can I measure?   As an example, sometimes after jogging my BG rises 8 points and sometimes it falls 10 points ( I take 3 readings to make sure that the reading aren't just a bad test strip etc).  Since I eat the same food everyday, the same amount everyday, at the same time of day everyday, and jog at the same time of day, I've been unable to come up with any useful explanation to account for this relatively simple observation.  I've also tried to vary the number of days off between jogging from 1 to 3 days and unfortunately the rise and/or fall of BG from a jogging session seems to have no correlation to the rest period between periods of activity.   

At this point the only thing I can tell you for sure is that after a meal, BG does seem to consistently rise over about a 3 hour period, and the amount of the rise seems to be consistent with the general amount of protein I consume - more protein in the meal the higher BG rises.  But be aware, I notice this effect when the amount of protein is significantly different from the norm.  In other words, it became noticeable when I consumed about 3 times the normal amount of protein, (200+g vs 70g).  A change of 20-30g does not produce a consistent measurable change in BG.

Unless you can think of a protocol that will account for all the metabolic interactions that can influence BG so as to be able to extract and isolate the amount of BG contributed by gluconeogenesis, trying to equate BG readings to anything more specific than general observations seems a hopless task to me. 

Lex

A day at 40g, 30g, or even 20g would show either the same rise in BG (or a proportional rise) and thus that protein is burned at or near the 58% regardless of the body's need to rebuild itself - OR - it would not show a rise in BG at some point thus showing the body's TRUE protein requirement.

But you bring up an interesting point.  Namely, what happens to all of those AAs that are freed up when protein reconstruction happens?  I mean, the protein may be damaged or no longer needed, but those AAs are quite sturdy and fully reusable.  In a steady state the only NEW protein requirement we should have is to replace what we shed.  I have a hard time thinking we flake off at a rate of 42% of 0.8g/Kg optimal weight.  That's assuming the common protein requirement number of 0.8g/Kg and the 58% GNG rate as written about and experienced by you.  Anyway in my case, my protein replacement need would be 25g/day.  That would be about 2 tablespoons of me casually being scattered about during the day.  Seems like a bit much.  Maybe not. We do lose quite a bit.  It really makes tracking with my dogs easy. :)

It's all a rather esoteric question.  Just musing on my part really. 

OTOH, if you did do such a test AND found that you could drop your postprandial BG rise, you could be in position to nearly guarantee that you would be shifted over to fat burning metabolism rather than a glucose one.  Unless your hormones are such that you start stripping your lean mass to keep you on the glucose path.  Who knows?

-E

Offline Ronbo

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile

Offline Daryl

  • Forager
  • *
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Lex's Journal
« Reply #199 on: August 28, 2008, 10:01:12 am »
I have seen no personal attacks or hostility towards anyone in any of your remarks, Lex.  Debating ideas is the most worthwhile course of action we can take, imho.  If we continue to assume, then we rob ourselves of the chance to LEARN.  Keep doing what you are doing.  I feel that we have a very intelligent group here, and hopefully strong words in support of ideas are not going to result in hurt feelings.
I agree with Satya on this, Lex.  :)

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk