Any caloric excess can be turned into fat whether it's fat, protein, or carbohydrates. If you eat an excess of 1000 calories per day of pure protein you'll still put on fat.
"The gluconeogenesis pathway is highly endergonic until it is coupled to the hydrolysis of ATP or GTP, effectively making the process exergonic. For example, the pathway leading from pyruvate to glucose-6-phosphate requires 4 molecules of ATP and 2 molecules of GTP to proceed spontaneously. These ATPs are supplied from fatty acid catabolism via beta oxidation"
Again Pharaohs were the wealthy who could eat whatever they wanted and were not required to do manual labor. Dietary illnesses of the wealthy are not uncommon throughout history.
I have never claimed people should eat grains to excess. I do however believe manual laborers benefit from carbohydrates in their diet. Even if they eat them at dinner, go to bed, store it as body fat, and then burn it the next day while working. Dietary fats can’t really help you replace body fat that you’ve lost through work. Because the body can’t turn fat into body fat. Only carbs or deconstructed protein can do that.
Grains store better than most any other food. People overlook the value of that in a world of modern food preservation means. But intact grains can store for 20 years if kept dry and free of pests. Meat, vegetables, and dairy have to be chilled, frozen, smoked, canned, fermented, ect. Although eating grains alone is a poor diet, grains are the foundation for society because they provide caloric security in times of famine.
I get what you're saying and truth be told I'm on an almost no-sugar diet myself. But the fact that all this, our civilization what we have here. It's only because we grew grains of various kinds and used that for our main nutrition. For a couple thousand years. That's not horseshit like the new science which discovers new genders you know.
Oh I'm sure. It's just you're the one arguing against orthodoxy, so you don't have the luxury of marching though. You will face opposition. If your diet works for you that's great.
I'm aware people oppose it. They also think racism is bad. Just because a large number of people believe something doesn't make it so. The past 5 years alone, and the sketchy "science" presented as fact should give people pause to consider what conventional "wisdom" is absolute horseshit. Pray God grant you discernment, or if you're neo-pagan, then the trees or something.
It's like when our people went from hunter gatherers to a grain based species. And I do agree it was disastrous. Hunter-gatherers way back when were taller and smarter than our average people are now.
But man, that's how the cookie crumbled and we did evolve to be grain based. Wheat, rice, you know. That's how civilization started.
Hmmm I thought only glucose could be turned into body fat. Carbs and protein can be digested into glucose, but fats can’t. Am I wrong? That’s an honest question, not me being snarky.
Calories in > calories out = fat gain Likewise the inverse is true as well. Your body will use a certain amount of protein and then piss some of it out if you go beyond what your body can use. The rest will be turned into fat. That is, unless, you lift weights and your muscles can use it to grow stronger.
Low carbohydrate diets like keto help you lose weight because it forces your body to tap into fat stores via ketones to feed the mitochondria. However, beyond a certain point you'll begin burning through muscle because that energy has to come from somewhere. It just so happens that burning muscle for energy is costly. It depends on your genetics. Your brain utilizes sugars for most of its function because they are readily available and easy to metabolize. People spend so much time trying to find the right supplements and balances of micro and macro nutrients just to lose or gain weight. You don't need that. Just control your caloric intake. God is not the author of confusion.
@CatLord@d0c40r0@Escoffier@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty Yes. Receptors tells body to make insulin to use the available energy or store it. Some of them become desensitized after too much regular use (we know this with dopamine for example). One of the receptors will trigger more easily from fructose than glucose (GLUT-# I think?), and too much abuse on it will screw up your signals telling your body to take in sugar and make fat or send out fat to make sugar. Eventually it stops reacting properly and you don't really respond when given sugar (prediabetes). When people start losing weight like crazy in full diabetes mode, their body is unaware of its own glucose level and is dumping fat and making sugar with bad signals. This sounds like it should be good, but what happens is you start damaging your organs and risk stroke and other stuff when concentration of blood glucose is too high.
Brother you don’t just shit or piss out the calories if your body doesn’t want them, they stay in your body because that’s what it’s designed to do — your body stores every excess it can and releases surplus when it needs so that it can survive as long as possible
My nigga in Christ It’s quite simple, if you lost weight your numbers were probably wrong in some way — everyone’s body takes different amounts of energy to burn different types of food and absorbs different amounts of energy from it but it’s still calories in versus calories out
So when you consume processed carbs of any kind (sugar, wheat, or starch) they cause your body to produce insulin (which is the fat storage hormone) and the consumed carbs are turned into triglycerides which it attempts to put into muscles or fat storage.
Now where this gets fun is if your insulin level remains high it makes it so your body cannot access the stored fat which doctors wold refer to as "energy."
Meat, fat, high fiber veggies and fruits will not make you fat as both fiber and fat keep your blood sugar lower.
Gary Taubes book Why We Get Fat is probably the best book to get a grasp on the science.
CICO (calories in calories out) which is what you're advocating has very much been debunked in fact i ate about a 1/3 more calories while I was losing all the weight.
I can tell you that had i not abandoned modern medicine entirely and fundamentally did the opposite i would be dead today. I think diet and nutrition are arguably the least science based endeavor in medicine today.
People love keto mostly because they see fast results (and because media told them to), but the initial weight loss is mostly water and not due to lipid breakdown.
While metabolism is a wonderful and complex system, the underlying principles are very simple:
@Francisco@CatLord@matty@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc I'm sorry but this is not correct. I wish this were true but its very much not. As a person that had to lose 300 pounds to die the reason i went with a ketogenic diet was precisely because it was the only one that actually made sense on the science.
I lost 70 pounds in 4 months by cutting my caloric intake to 500 calories per day. I'm glad that worked for you but the placebo effect is a hell of a drug itself. What worked for you may not work for others. A diabetic cannot do keto as they would risk suffering from diabetic ketoacidosis. Like any other "fad" diet, it works for some and not others, but what will work is putting less food into your body. You cannot bypass human biology.
Carbohydrate dense foods are generally calorie dense, so cutting sweets and soda out of your diet and replacing them with "healthier" foods does not mean you're doing ketosis. Your argument doesn't make sense. >they lower their calorie counts so they're actually doing keto which debunks CICO
@matty@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc Brother i lost 300 pounds doing keto. I did because it made the most sense and the science added up. I ate more calories as i lost the weight and have kept off more than 200 twenty years later.
@matty@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc Brother i've been doing keto/carnivore for over twenty years. If true why hasn't this happened to me? I've also never gotten scurvy or had nutritional deficiencies and I mostly just eat carnivore out of laziness.
>Infectious disease consultation for an uncomplicated UTI >Endocrinology consult for a basic insulin regimen on a newly diagnosed diabetic >General surgery consult for 'abdominal pain' (do not do this) >Orthopedic/neurosurgery consult for acute lower back pain with no imaging (especially do not do this)
afaik that's when the energy in -> energy out thing breaks, because the body can not store fats when running on fats for some physiological reason. So essentially it's an exploit.
I mean conservation laws are literally the best true scientific insights that exist. Conservation of momentum, energy, charge, angular momentum even. They all come with a symmetry too.
But yeah there are reasons why the body can not metabolize some energy in. That's where you're 100% right there is bad science. I can't gulp a cuppa guzzoleene or eat a candle and expect to get energy from it.
Man I know that ketosis exists. Atkins happened in like the 70s it's old news. Yes it works but I just think true discipline is a superior guide to an exploit in the system.
@Escoffier@Volkish_Observer@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@feralphilosophernc@matty It's not a dumb idea, but it might be wrong. The only reason to set the food on fire was to get a reasonable estimate of latent chemical energy. Stuff is catabolized by the body and energy is released along the way. We know the number of ATP molecules a single glucose molecule can recharge. We know how many are in a gram. We can work backwards for nutrition for that, but it flat out doesn't factor in the internal processes that contribute to rate or absorption and how quickly it's accessible (glycemic index) or micronutrients along for the ride. The calorie is a convenience tool that's reasonably accurate.
@Omega_Variant@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty@Escoffier It's worked for me before too. But I've also increased calories while losing fat from changing up diet. I look at it like physics where there's simple equations that are close enough (v=v0+at) vs more accurate ones. We can ignore those variables and see if it works, and if it doesn't we should look at them. Metabolic syndrome is real.
@BowsacNoodle@Volkish_Observer@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@feralphilosophernc@matty I'm a pretty bright guy who needed to lose 300 lbs so i read my ass off and tried to understand the science of weight loss and gain. I can only say i'm skeptical about every single claim made by the authorities related to weight loss and weight gain. Not kidding.
Put a different way even if true it just doesn't matter. Absent carbs the body doesn't know how to gain weight so even if true who cares?
The in out thing is still important and effective. Imagine a person who wants to lose weight. Scenario A : Consume 4 bread 4 meat 4 beer - constant (high) body weight. Scenario B : Consume 2 bread 2 meat 8 beer - lose weight!
It's like, if you eat less of course you will lose fuggen weight man.
@Escoffier@Omega_Variant@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty Theres more than one way to do it, there's probably an ideal way for different people based on metabolic conditions, sex, genetics, etc. but I happen to do well on carb restrictions. Most of the crappy processed food is carbs, so if I cut them out, I'm fine. Fat fills you up and is often bundled with protein, so eating more of those helps me out. I can go by feeling at this point (feels like I need to cut carbs for a few weeks rn since I'm getting a gut).
@BowsacNoodle@Omega_Variant@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty I did. I'm honestly amazed to still be alive. It was touch and go for about a year. And before i started keto i went to a doc who put me on a reduced calorie diet that didn't work, then a reduced fat diet where i gained weight and ultimately they wanted to do stomach stapling. The outcomes of which are not particularly good. That's when i said nothing but love but i'm gonna see if i can find something a little less stupid.
Stumbled on keto. did it and lost the weight in a year. The docs then told me i'd have to have the excess skin surgically removed, i just kept rocking keto and the skin was also gone in a year.
@BowsacNoodle@Omega_Variant@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty I don't care either and i don't gallop around yelling at people, but, while i agree different people may respond differently to different dietary interventions I would also note there is a lot of good science out there that most people don't know about because it is brutally supressed because the pharma-medico complex can't profit off of telling people to stop eating goyslop
Also younger people as a rule can lose weight doing CICO it tends to work mush less well as you age
The more I see fad diets come and go the more I realize that people like Gary, likely know relatively nothing about how our bodies work. A diet that works great for one person doesn't for another.
From my perspective it's all down to individual needs. Keto worked great for my parents but you also have health pros that will say it's bad for you especially long term.
Perfect example. One guy at work says IF is not how you lose weight you eat more smaller meals through the day. Another days IF is they way as it leads to lifestyle changes. I tend to agree with the latter as IF made me lose the most weight while feeling my best and it was long term. I got to the point where I loved feeling the hunger pangs. 22 hours with no food sometimes.
Pick your poison I guess, I've seen ketosis ruine someone's liver, I've seen it likely save someone's life.
@Omega_Variant@BuddyTex@Mustard88@Rose@Volkish_Observer@feralphilosophernc@matty@Escoffier Here's my hot take (cold rational logic): If you're currently obese, do whatever reasonable thing can get you to healthy weight, then fix your diet to one that helps you maintain that. When you're obese, your metabolism is likely screwed up and you need to reset things. Homeostasis is easier when things are in normal range.