Adding carbohydrate to a high-fat meal

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">It sounds like you're saying that if people are left to their own devices, i.e. without government or some form of leadership, they're going to choose the destructive path.</div> I think many tend to do that regardless.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">I could make the argument that only when they introduced an arbitrary form of leadership did things start to go bad. By leadership, I mean leadership of their everyday actions. Things like eating, sleeping, and just living.</div> Good point, but consider jail. Hard to get fat when your meals are planned and limited.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The primary regulator of food intake is hunger. </div> Not in the case of the obese. They're ALWAYS pointing to psychological issues.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Is it possible that the food itself causes us to overeat? If it does, what property does that food have that makes us eat more than our share?</div> One thing I think of is my wife: a slow increase in sugars got her to using unbelievable amounts of sweeteners - a pleasure addiction to be sure. Add quantity and BAM, you're fat.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The obesity epidemic is growing worse. By all measures, this means the national dietary advice is a failure. People are not stupid</div> Willfully ignorant I think. Intelligence isn't the problem.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Could it be that the food that these people eat somehow makes them eat more of it? It's a reasonable question.</div> It is. There is a suspicion out there about addictive agents in fast foods, for instance. I can't say wether or not it's true, but as in the case of simple sugars, addiction seems to incur naturally.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Aaron_F posted one graph that showed the effect carbohydrate has on total energy intake. Shouldn't we look at that in more detail? It sure looks to me like if there's anything that would cause people to choose the destructive path in this case, then it must be the carbohydrate.</div> That opens up the causation issue again: not proven here yet. I could as easily say that carbs and FAT are the destructive path; the choice of our repugnant champions.
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">By the way, activity level has not decreased. If anything, it has increased if the number of people going to the gym is any indication. So that can't be the cause of the worsening obesity epidemic. </div> Ummm...yes and no. Gym membership is up, but so is population density. Per capita would be the indicator, and that seems to be regional. For instance, New Orleans La. is our &quot;fattest&quot; city, with a party mentality and greasy, fattening foods, hedonism running rampant. Seattle Wa. is our &quot;leanest&quot; city, with a large push on health, salad bars, bicycling, running and the like. It would appear that once again, it is mass mentality at work here, the sheep following the pack, as I said before.
I don't know what shape you're in or if you look like you work out, but for most of us, we notice that when people get around us, they like to talk about health, working out, la la la ...but when I was a drinking man, all they wanted to talk about was partying. Sheep.
 
<div>
(Martin Levac @ May 02 2008,2:37)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Aaron_F posted one graph that showed the effect carbohydrate has on total energy intake. Shouldn't we look at that in more detail? It sure looks to me like if there's anything that would cause people to choose the destructive path in this case, then it must be the carbohydrate.</div>
Bueller?... Bueller?... Bueller?

What happens when we lower the fat martin?

oh, right, it must be the fat.
 
<div>
(quadancer @ May 01 2008,9:29)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">...
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">The primary regulator of food intake is hunger. </div> Not in the case of the obese. They're ALWAYS pointing to psychological issues.
...</div>
I would agree with you on that. But where I would disagree is on the cause/effect relationship. Which one is the cause and which one is the effect? Is a psychological problem the cause and overeating the effect? Is overeating the cause and obesity the effect?

Or, is obesity, overeating and psychological problems all effects of the same cause? If so, what's the cause?
 
<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE"> Is a psychological problem the cause and overeating the effect? </div> Maybe and yes? <div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Is overeating the cause and obesity the effect?</div> Eventually?

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Or, is obesity, overeating and psychological problems all effects of the same cause? If so, what's the cause? </div> Could be. I mentioned social and psychological as well.
Point is, as I see it, there isn't any defined answer to work with as to cause, or else they would have eliminated obesity outright. Every televised documentary you see on this usually only leads to more questions, like yours here.
People who have decided to rebuild their bodies and do something about the problem are our only concern here; cause and effect of what we physically ingest is something we can actually effectively (or not) discuss. The population at large won't get thinner because scientists and bodybuilders have found a Holy Grail to follow, even if it works; their reasons are too diverse where there are reasons at all. Hedonism itself knows no reason.
We get fat because we bulk for muscle. You say we can bulk without getting fat. I'm still seeking evidence of this, under the parameters of an equal time period. Outside of Taubes.
 
<div>
(Martin Levac @ May 01 2008,8:49)</div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Don't eat carbohydrates and see what happens.</div>
Been there done that

<div></div><div id="QUOTEHEAD">QUOTE</div><div id="QUOTE">Find the research that does just that and let's discuss the results.</div>

First off why should I find the data it is you who are stuck hard and fast on this nonsense not me. I have never said that hyperinsulinemia is not implicated but is it hyperinsulinemia in and of itself or is it hyperinsulinemia in conjuntion with ingesting excess energy? This is the problem when it comes to discussing this topic as many tend not to seperate these events.

This is my last post on this matter of insulin=bad mojo because you are boring me and obviously not willing to research the subject yourself.

The question isn't whether or not low or no carb diets can induce changes in lipid profiles, the question is can lo or no carb diets where required total energy intake for weight maintenance is sustained be any more beneficial or detrimental.

So to evaluate this one must only look for studies where body weight is maintained and blood lipids are measured over a longtitudal study.

To date there are very few of these studies as most tend to emphasize or analyze what occurs in conjuntion with restricted energy. This confounds the outcome when looking at health risks associated.

There are two studies by Volek and Sharman's group, in which they have shown favorable lipid response while maintaining energy requirements for weight maintenance but their studies are very short and any long term consequence can not be evaluated.

In contrast one 6 month study by Kwiterovich, on children with seizure disorder, saw non favorable lipid responses when a ketogenic diet is employed for this duration. Follow up at 1 year and 2 years still saw signs of unfavorable lipid although it was reduced by this time.

I assume you can find these yourself so there is no need for me to post full references.

Lastly and yes it will be lastly, even if you wish to discuss what occurs during energy restriction and a lo/no carb diet I would recommend you pull up the myriad of meta-analysis that show one common theme. Along with carbohydrate restriction comes energy restriction. Also look up the research that clearly shows how exercise can and does change many of the morbidity factors associated, including MS, IR, and obesity.

I'm done.
 
Here is another Eucaloric (weight maintenance) Ketogenic diet.

The human metabolic response to chronic ketosis without caloric restriction: physical and biochemical adaptation.

Phinney SD, Bistrian BR, Wolfe RR, Blackburn GL
Metabolism 1983 Aug;32(8):757-768

To study the metabolic effects of ketosis without weight loss, nine lean men were fed a eucaloric balanced diet (EBD) for one week providing 35-50 kcal/kg/d, 1.75 g of protein per kilogram per day and the remaining kilocalories as two-thirds carbohydrate (CHO) and one-third fat. This was followed by four weeks of a eucaloric ketogenic diet (EKD)--isocaloric and isonitrogenous with the EBD but providing less than 20 g CHO daily. Both diets were appropriately supplemented with minerals and vitamins. Weight and whole-body potassium estimated by potassium-40 counting (40K) did not vary significantly during the five-week study. Nitrogen balance (N-Bal) was regained after one week of the EKD. The fasting blood glucose remained lower during the EKD than during the control diet (4.4 mmol/L at EBD, 4.1 mmol/L at EKD-4, P less than 0.01). The fasting whole-body glucose oxidation rate determined by a 13C-glucose primed constant infusion technique fell from 0.71 mg/kg/min during the control diet to 0.50 mg/kg/min (P less than 0.01) during the fourth week of the EKD. The mean serum cholesterol level rose (from 159 to 208 mg/dL) during the EKD, while triglycerides fell from 107 to 79 mg/dL. No disturbance of hepatic or renal function was noted at EKD-4. These findings indicate that the ketotic state induced by the EKD was well tolerated in lean subjects; nitrogen balance was regained after brief adaptation, serum lipids were not pathologically elevated, and blood glucose oxidation at rest was measurably reduced while the subjects remained euglycemic.

Although Lyle has pointed out, from this study
&quot;During 4 weeks of adaptation to a ketogenic diet,
cholesterol levels did increase from 139 to 200.&quot;
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top