Author Topic: Matt Stone HED - Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??  (Read 76417 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #75 on: July 19, 2010, 08:49:37 am »
uh, phil nice to see you blow your spout over nothing, I never accused anyone of being orthorexic. I said one of the ONLY things I agreed about with Stone is that he would be there for the orthorexic and failed dogmatic believers. If you aim is to not be dogmatic or take things personally, you certainly failed in this last post. Not all topics are 100% about what the sub-forum definitions are about. If anything this topic was not well placed as it is not about ZC at all but LC and other metabolic issues. Of course in every case I was talking about contemporary people and their choices, so it matter little that HGs don't obsess over their diet. I happen to believe wild foods and soil quality are of high importance, but in terms of what I am speaking about - accounting for present issues - those nutrients arn't necessarily of greatest importance to other things. Before your try to gestapo what that means which should be obvious: I mean even given the exact kinds of food transplanted through time, it wouldn't make those diets 100% workable as a healing mechanism for contemporary people, even though people time and time again will make that argument. Although the converse: lack of such quality lack-of does make those options even less enticing even if they can be proved 'scientifically' or in WAP fashion as sustainable. To me that is the error. I don't think that is negligible, or only effects 'extremes'. If people want to disagree with that, that is fine. it certainly isn't a criticism of ZC or LC.

I don't know how else I could interpret 'you got it right the second try' when my first point was 'we need a contemporary strategy' and you responded with labeling extremes as 'contemporary strategies' like I was promoting a similar mindset. Obviously I meant the idea of adapting principals directly from other cultures as cure-alls, not the the cultures themselves were necessarily flawed (although I believe they were and were 'fortunate' for lack of a better term). I'd rather not name names, but I can think of a tremendous amount of people who think exactly what you asked re: this issue. if anything the WAPF does. Many go as far to be critical of raw in-particular specifically based on these issues. so its not exactly like finding a needle in a haystack.

I'd like to respond to some of the other stuff, but I'll let the respective posters have a go.

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #76 on: July 19, 2010, 10:57:48 am »
uh, phil nice to see you blow your spout over nothing, I never accused anyone of being orthorexic. I said one of the ONLY things I agreed about with Stone is that he would be there for the orthorexic and failed dogmatic believers.
That's what I was talking about--I don't think orthorexia is a constructive term ever--I didn't mean that you had literally accused someone here of being orthorexic. Sorry I wasn't more clear about that and I hope you didn't take anything personally. I wasn't "blowing a spout" when I wrote it, I was actually chillin' O0 and enjoying some good food. I just think it is a term that we should try to nip in the bud and avoid using here, even when applied vaguely to unknown people, and especially when there is no hard evidence or self-admittance, but it's probably unstoppable. Your mention of it was an opportunity to post something I probably should have said months ago about it, but that unfortunately seems to have confused you into thinking I was talking specifically and only about you, and I can see how you would have gotten that impression.

Quote
If you aim is to not be dogmatic or take things personally, you certainly failed in this last post.
I didn't take anything personally and I don't see how what I wrote was dogmatic. I'm just trying to encourage folks not to use the label orthorexia in this forum, as I think it will only lead to bad things, but my guess is that it's unstoppable and it will be particularly unstoppable if someone can get it made into a clinical diagnosis and make money off of selling drugs to treat it. I don't intend to censure it, if that's what you're concerned about.

Quote
  Not all topics are 100% about what the sub-forum definitions are about. If anything this topic was not well placed as it is not about ZC at all but LC and other metabolic issues.
I don't have a problem with it being here--and I'm not saying that just because I'm not a ZCer; I wouldn't have a problem with a critique of VLC or carnivore in this forum either. Critiques can be useful for putting one's ideas to the test and getting new information. Plus, Tyler decided that it's OK for criticisms of dietary approaches to be posted within the sections dedicated to them, after he initially opposed that. That being said, I do try to encourage substance and specifics and don't want to see flaming in this forum I've been assigned to moderate.

Quote
Of course in every case I was talking about contemporary people and their choices, so it matter little that HGs don't obsess over their diet.
By "contemporary people", are you talking here about the Swiss that WAP observed? I'm not sure what the HG comment is about.

Quote
I happen to believe wild foods and soil quality are of high importance, but in terms of what I am speaking about - accounting for present issues - those nutrients arn't necessarily of greatest importance to other things. Before your try to gestapo what that means which should be obvious: I mean even given the exact kinds of food transplanted through time, it wouldn't make those diets 100% workable as a healing mechanism for contemporary people, even though people time and time again will make that argument. A
Gestapo? And you said I was spouting over nothing and taking things personally? Since trying RPD and posting here I've been accused of a lot of things, but never Gestapo tactics. Don't you think that's just a wee bit overboard?

I guess I need your point simplified further, because I'm not sure I'm fully understanding exactly what it is that you see as obvious. Can you give me a specific example and are you saying that no past diet beyond a certain number of years ago would work for anyone today? In other words, what do you see as the specific problems with contemporary people trying all or part of the past diets? Aren't we all doing it to some extent if we're doing raw Paleo diets? Is the problem you're trying to describe more one of ignoring some original contexts and taking things to extremes than of any learning from past diets? Do you see any of the past diets as being workable in the past and has something changed since then to make them unworkable for anyone today? I'm not trying to suggest any position or criticism on this, just seeking to understand.

Quote
I mean even given the exact kinds of food transplanted through time, it wouldn't make those diets 100% workable as a healing mechanism for contemporary people, even though people time and time again will make that argument.
Can you give an example of where someone has made that argument? That might help explain what you mean.

Quote
Although the converse: lack of such quality lack-of does make those options even less enticing even if they can be proved 'scientifically' or in WAP fashion as sustainable. To me that is the error. I don't think that is negligible, or only effects 'extremes'.
I'm sorry, but I'm not understanding you here. I'm trying to understand--maybe it would help if you told me what you think is workable and sustainable?

Quote
I don't know how else I could interpret 'you got it right the second try' when my first point was 'we need a contemporary strategy' and you responded with labeling extremes as 'contemporary strategies' like I was promoting a similar mindset.
What I meant was, I believe you got it right when you said, "Yet those peoples [Inuits and Kitavans] never would practice such extreme approaches," whereas your earlier wording about "we are not Inuits, we are not Kitavans" after talking about all-pemmican and all-fruit diets wasn't as good, because it didn't seem particularly relevant and could give the impression that you were suggesting that these diets somehow derive from those people, when in reality they are modern innovations, as I think you agree (but please do correct me if I misunderstood).

Quote
Obviously I meant the idea of adapting principals directly from other cultures as cure-alls, not the the cultures themselves were necessarily flawed ....
OK, thanks for clarifying that.

Quote
(although I believe they were and were 'fortunate' for lack of a better term)
Could you be a little more specific, please?

Quote
I'd rather not name names, but I can think of a tremendous amount of people who think exactly what you asked re: this issue. if anything the WAPF does. Many go as far to be critical of raw in-particular specifically based on these issues. so its not exactly like finding a needle in a haystack. ....
So do you mean here that some leaders (or maybe followers here) of the WAPF are critical of eating certain foods raw? If so, which foods? My experience with WAPF leaders and devoted followers is that they tend to get angry when anyone says anything negative about raw dairy products, but I didn't know that they had a major problem with some other aspect of raw eating.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #77 on: July 19, 2010, 11:01:35 am »
I'll break this trend here and admit it's safe to say everyone here believes in Raw food eating, whether RPD or Primal, they are raw foods. Low carb, high carb, low fat, high fat should be the individuals business. Low carb happens to work great for me but it wont always favor in others. Some fare well on higher carb diets. Until anyone has enough sufficient information (facts) to prove that a certain macro nutrient ratio is universally applicable to all people, I think this has reached a stalemate. I have always respected the fact that in general, there is not a one size fits all macro ratio per say. Do what works for you and Im not saying anyone does, but dont judge others for what works for them because it didnt work for you or it doesnt correspond with your theories. The main thing I like about this forum is the people here generally hate conventional nutritional and medical practices and theories as do I. We should be exposing these crooks more and work together.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #78 on: July 19, 2010, 11:12:14 am »
Paleo phil, I respect the fact that you try to clarify people's points and come to a resolution. With what I've seen, it seems you are very much interested in this RPD as am I. You should write a book or do something productive with all your knowledge.

I myself am writing a nutrition philosophy book as I am continuously learning every day. The way I see it, we write a lot on this forum every day so what makes writing a book so much harder? Im on page 50 of mine and it didnt take too long. Of course it is a long process and you do have to find all the facts and sources but it doesnt have to be a stressful process. I only write on days my thoughts are together. I digress, however I think many RPDers can agree that there is too much unused knowledge and wisdom from some of the smart people on this forum as yourself and many others. Spread the word and help others.
« Last Edit: July 19, 2010, 03:49:42 pm by PaleoPhil »
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline KD

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,930
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #79 on: July 19, 2010, 11:52:23 am »
The gestapo thing, that was a joke in reference to the endless questions and remarks that I should be as clear as possible as to not get more, not necessarily being 'evil'.  -X

It is totally possible that a healthy diet from the past would allow someone today to be completely healthy. The only thing I'm pointing out is it might not for many. The reason wouldn't necessarily be poor nutrient quality or any other food based factors but be due mostly to contemporary internal and external environment. Many people do in fact rely on manufacturing a diet that they feel is the most conducive (based on HG's or anthropology) for all mankind without acknowledging methods and other WOE's that might be right - right now for them to actually get healthy. That is why I give some credence to Matt despite the other flaws I see with his specifics, and for being guilty of the same overall tradition=health mindset. I cannot make that any more clear. It is usually not a matter of accepting things but dismissing tools because they seem unnatural or have no precedent in people that obviously didn't need them.

As an example in terms of logic only that we can all see fault in: raw vegans who are not pro modern fruit, believe at one time we could get all our nutrients and energy needs from plants, but those plant sources became depleted and therefore they need to supplement with concentrated sources. So for them, the failure is not in the diet, but in the physical effects of the planet on their food sources. In the case of RPD, There is more realism towards our needs I believe. There might be other various issues that don't discount the diet per se, and some may be due to deficiencies in practice (lack of fresh meat, blood etc...), quality (poor contemporary game, or pastured animals) but some might very well be due to the way the particular diet itself is constructed. It may not still with tweaking even be the best diet for an individual as Jared mentioned, even if we had a window to the past and it proved people thrived on the same methods. I guess Paleo Diet generally might be in the same category if someone took the typical hygiene stance that given the proper materials, it can basically heal all problems. I unfortunately don't have any surefire non-diet related healing methods to share (although I have my theories), but I do believe diets themselves can be altered to give various results. As I said these might not line up with what is the "best" (as in purist) paleo or ZC or LC diet on paper.

as for Inuits and Kitavans, I wasn't referring just to the extreme 'offshoots'. I think even if Kitavans didn't exist there would still be fruit eaters today and if the Inuits didn't exist there would still be people eating only ground beef. This is my best guess, either way we did not grow up eating 100% healthy food (whatever that is) in a clean environment to clean parents of endless prior generations and those are extremely important as factors so we are not them. HGs were fortunate with their inheritance and environment, and therefore, could eat a wider variety of macronutrients or natural toxins via cooking without the same symptoms as us. One major factor in particular in re: to the topic of sugar would be pre-existing fungus.

as for WAPF being critical of raw, that isn't what I meant but it was a separate idea after mentioning that WAPF believe traditional diets will bring health. On top of that many other health proponents (and I'd agree to a large extent WAPF based on the few clashes with Aajonus I am aware of - To my knowledge they are in the very least bacteria and parasite phobic.) see no point in raw because traditional people lived healthfully cooking there food. To me this is a clear cut way of how this logic of past works poorly.

As for orthorexia, I'll have to agree that its an amorphous term that applies to a wide variety of 'symptoms' and generalizations, but I do think it is very real. If someone is 100% secure in their health choices, I don't see why claims of orthorexia would bother them. And since raw foodists concern is usually increased health (sometimes at all costs) and not a lowered body weight, it is probably the most present eating disorder. Generally eating healthy and being discerning about diet is one type of orthorexia by default which is fairly meaningless, but there are other types that can be totally crippling for the individual and their success on a particular WOE in a cyclical fashion.

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #80 on: July 19, 2010, 12:31:48 pm »
for now paleo phil, I am thinking just an e book, however one never knows whether something could come out of it. It actually is not going to be much about paleo, but rather exposing dietary and medical myths and their false philosophies. I read a few philosophy books in the past year and they changed my life. I learned to never just accept the norm and always challenge certain beliefs.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline JaredBond

  • Egg Thief
  • **
  • Posts: 33
  • Gender: Male
  • Crap, my real email is blueyoshi55@hotmail.com.
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #81 on: July 19, 2010, 07:59:49 pm »
Jared, you speak as though you know much about the Inuit.

   No, I don't, I'm broadly speculating and taking for granted what people have said who've actually read the texts.  (On that note, I'll keep in mind that Tyler Durden said Stefansson may not be that credible).

Don't you think that setting yourself up as the "voice of dissent to the low carb theory" is a tad presumptuous, especially given that you have admitted that you "didn't investigate too thoroughly"?

   Well, that's why I pointed people to Matt Stone, he's a bit more motivated to investigate than I am.

   I thought I explained myself pretty well.  I see that there are a lot of differing views on this forum as a whole, but when someone like me comes along who is completely sold on the Eades/Taubes insulin theory, and are just trying to get better, we tend to only read more about what fits in our current beliefs.  I browsed this specific sub-forum to see if I could find any dissenting threads, and I didn't see any, so that's why I've posted.  A thread headline like mine would have really caught my attention, as it was the core belief of why I was forcing myself to eat low-carb.

Isn't that part of why you're here too, because such information shared in forums like this one might be useful to you too? Or is none of the information here of any use to you?

   Well, I did come pretty sure about my position, and my goal was to help people get out of low-carb, who might not really be feeling all that great about it.  But I was curious to see what information people might bring up.  I figured the subject is at least relevant to this sub-forum.

Nothing of what you've written seriously challenges what I have found to work for me...

   Sure, one of the main things I'm urging people to do is to trust their feelings more.  I did notice your signature quotes.  If you're feeling good, continue doing what you're doing.  In my case though, low carb did not feel good, but I kept on with it because the evidence seemed unshakable.  A lot of people here are desperate too, if they are willing to depart from modern conventions so much.  It's not unreasonable to think that people may be going against their feelings out of desperation.

   As short-sighted as I may have been, I did not believe there was an alternative to low carb.  I know that's not the opinion of this board in general, but I was led on by the aforementioned authors.  As Micheal Eades said in an interview, "I can't imagine a person who I wouldn't recommend a low-carb diet to."  I don't mean to eradicate low-carb or carnivorous for everyone, but I'm at least challenging the idea that it should be for everyone.

Did you read any of my posts on giant pandas?

   I did click a link you gave and found that it had already gone drastically off topic   -\


I think that actually Matt Stones' current recommendations are pretty mainstream: high carb, low fat, about 1g of protein per kg of bodyweight, maximize omega-3 vs. omega-6. Carbs mostly starches, but fruit are allowed, as are desserts in moderation. In what he differs is advocating (temporary!) overfeeding and abstaining from exercise, and his strong stance against calorie restriction.

   Yes, "going down the rabbit hole", as he says.  (That is.... after we've already been down the "first" rabbit hole.)  Probably the most drastic difference from mainstream recommendations is the vegetable oil issue.  Coming out of low-carb, it's hard to see that the woes of the world could be due to anything less than monumental, but really these oils do permeate the SAD.  Also as he says, the mainstream does promote under-eating, over-exercising, over-working, abundant caffeine (and alcohol) usage, tons of sugar (which I don't think is too terrible in moderation), and RDAs that are far too low.

   Also what Matt doesn't go into is all the toxins in our world, which I think play a huge part in the diseases of civilization.  Even in the days of WAP-- could it be that the metals leaching into canned goods could have been part of the degeneration?  Maybe cookware too?  I used to be afraid of the "small" stuff.  Then I got into macronutrients, and I thought it was the "big" stuff.  Now, it's the "small" stuff again with me.  For example, I just found out from a cheap test that there are some heavy metals in my water.  I have yet to find out exactly which ones.  Also, pretty much anything from a store has been manufactured in stainless steel vats.  Some stainless steel alloys leach nickel, which is very toxic, according to Ray Peat.  I would think that acidic things will leach the most.  Ray Peat says that if the stainless steel is magnetic, then it's the type that doesn't have nickel in it.


But "cavemen" wouldn't have had an unlimited supply of food, be able to choose when they feel like they're finished with eating, and when they want to have their next meal.

   Ah, I thought I had posted something about this in this thread, but it turns out it was in another thread.  (http://www.rawpaleoforum.com/raw-weston-price/fixing-narrow-palates-and-cranial-deformities/msg39218/#msg39218)

"The thing is, it's entirely plausible that prehistoric humans/hominins were smarter than we're making them out to be, in terms of processing and storing food.  Hunger is a feeling that we work to avoid, and they probably did too.  I take it even farther-- I think that agriculture was not out of their means as well.  The concept is pretty self evident, if you want more of a plant that feeds you.  Grains are questionable because they are so small and inedible-- I think our first attention to grains started with beer actually.  It's also not a leap to think that hominins might have messed around with leaving things in water, and found that mashed-up seeds did something.  As they've hypothesized with the Egyptians, bread came soon after, originally intended as a storage device to harbor the beer-making yeast in the raw center.

I even wonder why humans have such a sweet tooth, when apparently, at least in most places in the world, there is such a short supply of fructose.  Well, with all of those graphs of how low sugar and honey consumption was pre-1850, I think one source they probably are not accounting for is jams and jellies.  This is actually where I think people have been getting their fructose throughout history.  It was probably a good way to store and concentrate the calories from large yields of fruit.  Trade is certainly plausible too, just like Lewis and Clark found networks trading sea-salt (pretty sure).  And wasn't it the Native Americans that showed the Europeans how to make maple syrup?  What should we trust more: the numbers or our senses?"


I'll break this trend here and admit it's safe to say everyone here believes in Raw food eating... 

Well, I didn't want to start a thread refuting everything, but I did intend Matt Stone's site to change some minds about all types of restrictive eating, and includes the all raw thing.  You really can't eat a lot of calories without cooking (well, except for the banana-lady).  And I believe, despite what the experts say, that cooking has probably been with us since pre-human days.

The main thing I like about this forum is the people here generally hate conventional nutritional and medical practices and theories as do I. We should be exposing these crooks more and work together.

Same here.  I like your signature quote btw.  One of my favorites: “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.”  -Thomas Jefferson

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #82 on: July 19, 2010, 10:05:20 pm »
thats a great quote too. I made this quote up "Health does not come from a capsule, a pill, or any drug for that matter. Health comes from within, it comes from habitual change, and above all else, it comes from the desire to live free."
- Steven F Smith

It could be made better though.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline rawlion

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 305
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #83 on: July 19, 2010, 10:46:15 pm »
   
   Well, I did come pretty sure about my position, and my goal was to help people get out of low-carb, who might not really be feeling all that great about it.  But I was curious to see what information people might bring up.  I figured the subject is at least relevant to this sub-forum.

   Sure, one of the main things I'm urging people to do is to trust their feelings more.  I did notice your signature quotes.  If you're feeling good, continue doing what you're doing.  In my case though, low carb did not feel good, but I kept on with it because the evidence seemed unshakable.  A lot of people here are desperate too, if they are willing to depart from modern conventions so much.  It's not unreasonable to think that people may be going against their feelings out of desperation.

   As short-sighted as I may have been, I did not believe there was an alternative to low carb.  I know that's not the opinion of this board in general, but I was led on by the aforementioned authors.  As Micheal Eades said in an interview, "I can't imagine a person who I wouldn't recommend a low-carb diet to."  I don't mean to eradicate low-carb or carnivorous for everyone, but I'm at least challenging the idea that it should be for everyone.

I second that!
It’s time to Eat Like An Animal!

Offline Hans89

  • Elder
  • ****
  • Posts: 324
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #84 on: July 20, 2010, 01:44:43 am »
And I believe, despite what the experts say, that cooking has probably been with us since pre-human days.

Can you elaborate on that?

Offline klowcarb

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #85 on: July 20, 2010, 04:59:53 am »
I second that!

If low carb is not for everyone, we'd be born with an essential carbohydrate requirement. Guess what? We aren't.

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #86 on: July 20, 2010, 05:53:09 am »
klowcarb, I somewhat agree with you. The times when I am ketogenic I feel the best, but it doesnt mean everyone will get results like mine or yours. My friend tried low carb and was always fatigued. But who knows he only tried it for a month, maybe if he had given it more of a chance it wouldve worked for him. I dont know if we were made to be low carb beings or not but we certainly can survive healthfully without them. I dont actually think it is a big deal consuming dietary carbs as gluconeogenesis ensures you always have carbohydrates in your body, its just that carbs from protein seems to make people's blood sugar more balanced in general.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline dsohei

  • Buffalo Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #87 on: July 20, 2010, 07:08:01 am »
my initial results when going very low carb have been fatigue, and in some instances extreme anger and seriousness. i consider this to be from all the stimulatory proteins, without benefit of relaxing proteins.
now,i know this isnt exact or scientific, but when i eat some carbs/sugar/etc to balance out the protein/fat diet, i enjoy being alive much more.
dont get me wrong, i really dislike carbing out, and protein foods are my favorite.
but the hormonal system, is so damn complex, i dont think people will comply with a "logically healthy" diet if they are feeling like shit.

Offline klowcarb

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #88 on: July 20, 2010, 09:10:51 am »
dsoshei, what was your fat percentage? I know people who have taken longer to adapt to low carb (not nec. ZC, but VLC) and felt better on more fat. Too much protein = fatigue.

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #89 on: July 20, 2010, 09:11:59 am »
yeah, I mean we all crave sugar so for some thats a subconscious excuse to eat it, but if it makes you feel better than by all means do it. My initial low carb(ketogenic) diet was fatigue but after a good 2 weeks I felt more energy than ever. I think it is the way your body has to get used to using ketones and fat for energy. It is commonly called the ketone energy shift.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #90 on: July 20, 2010, 09:14:57 am »
klowcarb, what you think about 30-35%protein and 65-70% fat? This is what I have found is the best for myself. I am a very physical being though and do much exercise so sometimes I up protein to 40%, but I love how all the fat is perfect fuel for my hormones. People neglect the fact that fat and cholesterol make testosterone, something I desperately need high for my lifestyle.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

Offline miles

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 1,904
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #91 on: July 20, 2010, 09:16:59 am »
Too much fat seems to decrease circulation, Klowcarb.. It is confusing when people just talk about 'high fat', 'lots of fat', 'more fat', because the people who are saying 'you need to eat loads of fat', are people who see not that much fat as being loads, so some people actually do eat loads of fat(following this advice), and then get problems like bloating, decreased circulation etc...

The amount of fat(I believe) you consume, Klowcarb, I would have considered just a normal amount already, so before, hearing you say that I would have ended eating much more than you.

But I dunno shitaki mushrooms.
5-10% off your first purchase at http://www.iherb.com/ with dicount code: KIS978

Offline klowcarb

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 581
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #92 on: July 20, 2010, 09:24:47 am »
klowcarb, what you think about 30-35%protein and 65-70% fat? This is what I have found is the best for myself. I am a very physical being though and do much exercise so sometimes I up protein to 40%, but I love how all the fat is perfect fuel for my hormones. People neglect the fact that fat and cholesterol make testosterone, something I desperately need high for my lifestyle.

My fat ranges from 65-75% and the rest protein. I think that is perfect if you are active. I would advise higher fat for less active individuals who do not need as much protein.  I am also, as you know, very active. I strength train 3 x a week, do bodyweight exercises and fasted cardio.

Please call me Katelyn  :D

Offline dsohei

  • Buffalo Hunter
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #93 on: July 20, 2010, 10:32:04 am »
dsoshei, what was your fat percentage? I know people who have taken longer to adapt to low carb (not nec. ZC, but VLC) and felt better on more fat. Too much protein = fatigue.

i feel like i am gorging on fat - coconut oil/milk, fatty fish, EGGS, EVOO (have not bought suet or marrow yet). the fat also causes fatigue/sleepiness but subdues the extreme anger. i have been thinking lately that maybe i am eating too much protein, but i can never sense the cut off between enough and too much until way after the fact and the negative symptoms are in effect.

in the future when i attempt VLC/LC/ZC (raw or cooked) i am gonna be prepared and stock up on essentials from a clean, local source that i enjoy the taste of first.

 i have been reading matt stone and martin berkhin (leangains.com) and the idea of a set daily eating window (IF) and cyclical carb re-feeds seems to get some pretty amazing results for some people. although if this is only short term and is borrowing from peter to pay paul, i don't know.

but man, i just wish i had energy!
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 10:41:14 am by dsohei »

Offline PaleoPhil

  • Mammoth Hunter
  • ******
  • Posts: 6,198
  • Gender: Male
  • Mad scientist (not into blind Paleo re-enactment)
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #94 on: July 20, 2010, 11:43:09 am »
Jared, you speak as though you know much about the Inuit.
Quote from: Jared
No, I don't, I'm broadly speculating and taking for granted what people have said who've actually read the texts.
There's a lot of misinformation about Inuits and others out there, so if you're going to write about them then I recommend trying to get info as directly from the source as you can, rather than relying on what others have posted.

Quote
(On that note, I'll keep in mind that Tyler Durden said Stefansson may not be that credible).
Yes, I think Tyler does post a lot on the errors of people like Stefansson, WAP, Taubes and Wrangham. It looks like you agree with Tyler on some things, such as wanting to warn folks away from ZC, though Tyler disagrees with Matt Stone on several key issues.

Quote
Well, that's why I pointed people to Matt Stone, he's a bit more motivated to investigate than I am.
OK, then I guess we could say that Matt is the voice of dissent and he does fill the bill, because he disagrees with probably every other "expert" out there. I've been curious about cooked tubers and wondering about what their precursors were (perhaps wild African roots that are edible raw?), in large part because of the fact that every HG group that has access to tubers eats them. Interestingly, I learned that tubers can be made edible without cooking by drying and pulverizing them, which Wrangham conveniently doesn't appear to have mentioned in his book, if my search was thorough enough.

I think, however, that tubers probably became more important as the numbers of megafauna declined. What do you think hominids ate for starches before the advent of cooking? Was it sun-dried yams, wild roots, rhizomes, corms, ...?

Quote
I see that there are a lot of differing views on this forum as a whole,
Yup.

Quote
but when someone like me comes along who is completely sold on the Eades/Taubes insulin theory, and are just trying to get better, we tend to only read more about what fits in our current beliefs.
I can't speak for others, but that's not what I do.

Quote
I browsed this specific sub-forum to see if I could find any dissenting threads, and I didn't see any, so that's why I've posted.
Ah, that explains things. You'll find more dissents and trashing of ZC in the general discussion section.

Quote
A thread headline like mine would have really caught my attention, as it was the core belief of why I was forcing myself to eat low-carb.
This may be how you can provide the most value here--in sharing where you went wrong as a warning to others. I definitely don't think people should force themselves to continue a particular diet for an extended period if it isn't working for them and they continue to deteriorate. The only reason I do VLC is because nothing else has worked as well. If I could eat more carbs without any ill effects I would. I love fruits--especially berries and red grapes.

Quote
Well, I did come pretty sure about my position, and my goal was to help people get out of low-carb, who might not really be feeling all that great about it.  But I was curious to see what information people might bring up.
FYI: folks tend to get turned off by people who are too sure of their position and seem to come across as lecturing them, no matter how well intentioned.

Quote
Sure, one of the main things I'm urging people to do is to trust their feelings more.
I think maybe you mean trust their experience/results more, as feelings may not always coincide with real results? For example, sometimes the results are hidden and aren't detected until a blood test or x-ray reveals them.

Quote
In my case though, low carb did not feel good, but I kept on with it because the evidence seemed unshakable.
This kind of sharing makes for some of the best posts. I agree that it's important to pay more attention to what your body is telling you than what a selection of studies says, especially in the longer term. There are studies and "experts" supporting every major dietary viewpoint.

Quote
A lot of people here are desperate too, if they are willing to depart from modern conventions so much.
Correct, as Tyler's quote says in my signature: "no one would touch this type of diet unless they'd tried everything else and this diet alone worked". It would be more accurate to say "unless they'd tried lots of other diets...," but the gist is right.

Quote
As short-sighted as I may have been, I did not believe there was an alternative to low carb.
You mean you never encountered vegetarianism, veganism, raw veganism, fruitarianism, 80-10-10, the USDA food pyramid, Ornish, Oz, DurianRider and other higher-carb approaches and proponents?

Quote
I don't mean to eradicate low-carb or carnivorous for everyone, but I'm at least challenging the idea that it should be for everyone.
I agree with that--do what works for you and also be aware of what your body is telling you. I would add that people may want to consider getting bloodwork and urinalysis testing done at least once after they've been on a new diet for a while to make sure they aren't running into any problems they don't notice. This is how many vegans end up either changing their diet or adding supplements.

Did you read any of my posts on giant pandas?
Quote from: Jared
I did click a link you gave and found that it had already gone drastically off topic
OK, but did it start out with any relevant info? There are several. I don't mean any of my posts to be the final word, BTW. That's not the way I think (science is more about an endless series of questions, observations and hypotheses than achieving final answers) and there's a lot more I could learn about giant pandas and other animals.

Quote
Probably the most drastic difference from mainstream recommendations is the vegetable oil issue.  Coming out of low-carb, it's hard to see that the woes of the world could be due to anything less than monumental, but really these oils do permeate the SAD.  Also as he says, the mainstream does promote under-eating, over-exercising, over-working, abundant caffeine (and alcohol) usage, tons of sugar (which I don't think is too terrible in moderation), and RDAs that are far too low.
I think most LCers, including me, actually agree with him on all that. Did you get a different impression somewhere? As a matter of fact, I agree with him more than you on these issues, since you apparently partly disagree with him on sugar. Maybe I should be trying to convince you to listen to Mark? ;)

Quote
Also what Matt doesn't go into is all the toxins in our world, which I think play a huge part in the diseases of civilization.
While I think this is overemphasized by a small fringe, my general approach is to skeptically question everything new. Once I realized that our modern diet was screwed up and that some aspects of ancient diets were beneficial, I wondered what else modern civilization had gotten wrong. I started questioning a lot of my basic assumptions and learned that there was indeed a LOT that modern Mother Culture got wrong. I'm thinking that maybe my book should be an encyclopedia that tries to catalogue as much of it as I can.

Quote
Some stainless steel alloys leach nickel, which is very toxic, according to Ray Peat. I would think that acidic things will leach the most.  Ray Peat says that if the stainless steel is magnetic, then it's the type that doesn't have nickel in it.
FYI: Ray Peat and Matt Stone aren't particularly influential here, so if you want to persuade folks away from RZC, you're probably going to have to cite some other sources.

....

Quote
I even wonder why humans have such a sweet tooth, when apparently, at least in most places in the world, there is such a short supply of fructose.
I think that's why. Sweet foods were relatively scarce, so having a sweet tooth didn't cause major problems for our ancestors.

Quote
  Well, with all of those graphs of how low sugar and honey consumption was pre-1850, I think one source they probably are not accounting for is jams and jellies. This is actually where I think people have been getting their fructose throughout history.
I think you mean since the invention of jams/jellies, rather than all history. Honey and whole fruit consumption goes much further back--predating H. sapiens.

Quote
And wasn't it the Native Americans that showed the Europeans how to make maple syrup?  What should we trust more: the numbers or our senses?"
My senses tell me that jams/jellies, maple syrup and honey all effect me very negatively and are very addicting for me, for whatever reason. It stinks, because I really enjoy raw honey.

Quote
Well, I didn't want to start a thread refuting everything, but I did intend Matt Stone's site to change some minds about all types of restrictive eating,
Well, the least restrictive eating is the SAD. Don't you at least think we should be more restrictive than that? By now you should also realize that all of us here have tried less restrive eating in the past and it didn't work for us.

Quote
And I believe, despite what the experts say, that cooking has probably been with us since pre-human days.
No offense intended, but I don't particularly care what you or anyone else "believes". Opinions carry little weight with me. I'm more interested in your actual experiences and any other evidence you can provide. Opinions are just so much hot air to me, except as speculations upon which to build and test hypotheses. They are usually a waste of bandwidth. I'd prefer to read more about what you're trying, how it's working for you, and anything unusual you've learned about the natural world.

Too much fat seems to decrease circulation, Klowcarb..
In my case increasing animal fat intake increased my circulation, for what it's worth. It's amazing how differently various people respond to macronutrients.
>"When some one eats an Epi paleo Rx template and follows the rules of circadian biology they get plenty of starches when they are available three out of the four seasons." -Jack Kruse, MD
>"I recommend 20 percent of calories from carbs, depending on the size of the person" -Ron Rosedale, MD (in other words, NOT zero carbs) http://preview.tinyurl.com/6ogtan
>Finding a diet you can tolerate is not the same as fixing what's wrong. -Tim Steele
Beware of problems from chronic Very Low Carb

Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #95 on: July 20, 2010, 12:02:03 pm »
Yeah, I mean I do very very well on my high fat ratios. The cool thing about fat is its not as bad to eat as everyone thinks. Just a cup of grassfed fat from the whole foods butcher is roughly 2000kcal, not that calories even are an accurate way of measuring the energy of food though, but still all Im saying is that one doesnt need to eat lbs of fat a day to get enough. I never eat more than a lb of fat a day. I think a good way of measuring macros is weighing them. I also like using grams, to see how many grams of a macro there is in a food. I dont know how accurate calories are and no one really does. Way I see it, I eat when Im hungry, stop when Im full, and as long as the food is good (Raw) I dont have a problem. I have easily eaten over 7000 calories some days and not gained a lb of fat and put on much muscle. Maybe its my body type but I think that blows the calorie theory out the window. I have always been a hardgainer until this diet, not anymore :D
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

carnivore

  • Guest
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #96 on: July 20, 2010, 01:05:59 pm »
If low carb is not for everyone, we'd be born with an essential carbohydrate requirement. Guess what? We aren't.

This kind of misinformation should not exist on a forum like this one.
Glucose is simply the priority fuel used by the muscles for quick energy. Some tissues like the brain also prefer glucose.
It is why the body converts protein and fat into glucose on a lowcarb diet to fulfill its requirement.
So we are obviously born with an essential carbs requirement!
« Last Edit: July 20, 2010, 01:18:52 pm by carnivore »

Offline Savage

  • Trapper
  • **
  • Posts: 68
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #97 on: July 20, 2010, 03:10:24 pm »
This kind of misinformation should not exist on a forum like this one.
Glucose is simply the priority fuel used by the muscles for quick energy. Some tissues like the brain also prefer glucose.
It is why the body converts protein and fat into glucose on a lowcarb diet to fulfill its requirement.
So we are obviously born with an essential carbs requirement!



No, you're wrong, she's right.

The dietary requirement for carbohydrates is ZERO.

And if all you people like carbs so much, what are you doing in the Zero Carb forum? Are you lost?


Offline pioneer

  • Chief
  • *****
  • Posts: 612
  • Gender: Male
    • View Profile
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #98 on: July 20, 2010, 09:50:34 pm »

No, you're wrong, she's right.

The dietary requirement for carbohydrates is ZERO.

And if all you people like carbs so much, what are you doing in the Zero Carb forum? Are you lost?



Haha, yeah we are talking about the DIETARY requirement of carbohydrates not the internal requirement. The dietary requirement is zero. My friend has been ketogenic, and no carbs for 2 years, he is healthy as can be, I am considering switching over to keto as well, I have liked it in the past.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" - Edmund Burke

"There is a lot of pressure to be sexualized but not to actually be sexual."
- women's health member

carnivore

  • Guest
Re: Insulin spikes do NOT cause insulin resistance??
« Reply #99 on: July 20, 2010, 11:47:53 pm »

No, you're wrong, she's right.

The dietary requirement for carbohydrates is ZERO.

And if all you people like carbs so much, what are you doing in the Zero Carb forum? Are you lost?

I have nothing against zerocarb, especially when it works...
With this kind of reasoning, you can also pretend for example that saturated fatty acids are not required as the body can manufacture it...
« Last Edit: July 21, 2010, 12:08:01 am by carnivore »

 

SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk