Re: insulin resistance and sat fat

[Guest guest]

>1. Optimal Nutrition (Homo Optimus by Jan Kwasniewski)

>2. Atkins

>3. The Schwarzbein Principle II (let's say TSP)

>4. Ron Rosedale's recs (metabolic medicine doc whose transcribed talk on

> " Insulin and its Metabolic Effects " is on Mercola's site)

>

>All are in the same ballpark as far as recognizing the need for healthy

>fats including saturated fats, and all recommend relatively low-carbs. The

>discrepancy I'm trying to tease out and explore is the issue of how much

>sat fat, for whom, and when.

OK, at the risk of offending some folks I will say that I just

started reading " The Warrior Diet " and I think you SHOULD add

it to your list. Based on 1/4 of the book. It is not as " scientific "

as the ones you list, but a number of athletic type guys are on

it, and they really do care about insulin use and fat storage,

and even Udo Erasmus likes it.

The WD take is that you should retrain your appetite and

taste buds so YOU decide on your macronutrient levels.

Everyone agrees that in theory the human body SHOULD know

what it needs, and how much, and that if you are overweight

and eating the wrong things, your appetite is out of whack.

Ori's writing style might be more right-brain than left-brain,

and as far as history he may fudge a bit (a lot of warriors

in the past were anything but " free spirits " -- the Spartans

in particular were what some would call today " rigid right-wing

religious conservatives " ) -- but the concept seems to

WORK on a number of levels, both for a healthy body

and clearer thinking and higher energy levels.

Anyway, for what it is worth, since I've been on it I've

been craving more fresh vegies (salads esp.) and less

fats (which makes sense to me, because I already

have plenty to use). Someone else might crave different

things, according to what their body needs, and Ori

himself (rock hard athlete, according to the interviews)

scarfs down a HUGE meal at the end of the day which

includes everything.

I like that concept. Let your body decide!

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Heidi,

It sounds intriguing enough that I will read it. But for me and for

now, I can't possibly go even a few hours without eating. I'm in a

very nutritionally depleted state, long story, and blood sugar is

very low due to low food intake (again, long story, highly unusual

appetite problem).

Probably the tiny amounts I eat normally would qualify already as

being on that part of the WD, but then I have no appetite to eat a

large meal in the evening. Appetite just doesn't come up as it

normally should. My body seems to be too confused to make proper

decisions.

Maybe he has some interesting angle that I haven't heard yet, and I

will read it for sure! I'm basically more a right-brainer anyway.

-

>

> >1. Optimal Nutrition (Homo Optimus by Jan Kwasniewski)

> >2. Atkins

> >3. The Schwarzbein Principle II (let's say TSP)

> >4. Ron Rosedale's recs (metabolic medicine doc whose transcribed

talk on

> > " Insulin and its Metabolic Effects " is on Mercola's site)

> >

> >All are in the same ballpark as far as recognizing the need for

healthy

> >fats including saturated fats, and all recommend relatively low-

carbs. The

> >discrepancy I'm trying to tease out and explore is the issue of

how much

> >sat fat, for whom, and when.

>

> OK, at the risk of offending some folks I will say that I just

> started reading " The Warrior Diet " and I think you SHOULD add

> it to your list. Based on 1/4 of the book. It is not as " scientific "

> as the ones you list, but a number of athletic type guys are on

> it, and they really do care about insulin use and fat storage,

> and even Udo Erasmus likes it.

>

> The WD take is that you should retrain your appetite and

> taste buds so YOU decide on your macronutrient levels.

> Everyone agrees that in theory the human body SHOULD know

> what it needs, and how much, and that if you are overweight

> and eating the wrong things, your appetite is out of whack.

>

> Ori's writing style might be more right-brain than left-brain,

> and as far as history he may fudge a bit (a lot of warriors

> in the past were anything but " free spirits " -- the Spartans

> in particular were what some would call today " rigid right-wing

> religious conservatives " ) -- but the concept seems to

> WORK on a number of levels, both for a healthy body

> and clearer thinking and higher energy levels.

>

> Anyway, for what it is worth, since I've been on it I've

> been craving more fresh vegies (salads esp.) and less

> fats (which makes sense to me, because I already

> have plenty to use). Someone else might crave different

> things, according to what their body needs, and Ori

> himself (rock hard athlete, according to the interviews)

> scarfs down a HUGE meal at the end of the day which

> includes everything.

>

> I like that concept. Let your body decide!

>

> -- Heidi

[Guest guest]

>It sounds intriguing enough that I will read it. But for me and for

>now, I can't possibly go even a few hours without eating. I'm in a

>very nutritionally depleted state, long story, and blood sugar is

>very low due to low food intake (again, long story, highly unusual

>appetite problem).

:

I can't speak for " lack of appetite " (This certainly has never been

MY issue! Rather the opposite) but the " low blood sugar " part

really does seem to change on this diet. I've always been a

6-meal-a-day gal with a good picnic lunch packed for emergencies

on the road. I'm not saying it will for everyone, obviously,

esp. if there are major metabolism problems, but for me

part of the problem was that I DID always snack so never

could access my " fat stores " . That's exactly the kind of

thing he is trying to address.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Hi

Thanks for explaining why TSP recommends low sat fat -

I didn't really get this from her book, and so never

took it seriously. She does make some sweeping

comments and recommendations without anything to back

them up.

My boyfriend follows Atkins - he has lost 140lbs. He

still has around 100lbs to lose, but has stalled for

20 months now. We have tried everything EXCEPT

lowering saturated fat to restart the weight loss. I

found it difficult to convince him this is something

worth trying because I'm not convinced of it myself.

(I'm heavily influenced by Dr Atkins and Dr Barry

Groves author of Eat Fat Get Thin who isa big

proponenet of a diet of 70% fat mostly saturated and a

good friend of Jan Kwasniewski)

If a high intake of saturated fat can prevent weight

loss, then why did he lose 140lbs (a very significant

amount of weight!) while eating a high sat fat diet?

I look forward to reading the discussion on this

topic.

Jo

--- <karenr@...> wrote: >

Here's a question I'm looking at via a comparison of

> the following diets:

>

> 1. Optimal Nutrition (Homo Optimus by Jan

> Kwasniewski)

> 2. Atkins

> 3. The Schwarzbein Principle II (let's say TSP)

> 4. Ron Rosedale's recs (metabolic medicine doc whose

> transcribed talk on

> " Insulin and its Metabolic Effects " is on Mercola's

> site)

________________________________________________________________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

Hi Jo,

I'm glad you mentioned Dr. Kwasniewski. My mother has been on the ON diet

for a month now, and instead of losing a few pounds she is gaining. We were

trying to figure out how she should adjust her macronutrient proportions

according to ON, but she really can't reduce carbs any more than she

already has, and hasn't even been able to get up to the high end of the

scale on fat intake (according to the 1 : 2.5-3 : 0.5-0.8 proportions)

ON has a " rebuilding " period but the book didn't explain all the possible

changes you might go through during this period and what you could expect

as a normal part of the transition.

So when I read more about that in TSP, it made a lot of sense, that a lot

of rebuilding needs to take place before the mechanisms for fat-burning are

all in place. And her suggestion to reduce sat fats during that time didn't

seem out in left field to me, because I remembered Ron Rosedale's same

conclusion. My mother had been using heavy cream, butter, cheese, fatty

meats, etc., ad libitum, so this was a new idea that I now think is worth

trying.

She can stand having a few extra pounds for the time being; we're not

worried about the inherent strain of that extra weight, but maybe for

someone who's morbidly obese, getting the weight off to begin with might be

a higher priority. I just don't know, from what TSP says, whether losing

any significant weight while still in glucose-burning mode is ever safe,

since weight loss at that point can also be muscle and maybe even bone loss.

Maybe for each person you weigh the risks of carrying the extra weight

longer, vs. the risks of losing some structural tissue which could be

rebuilt later. I don't know. I'm just muddling through this stuff right

now. And who knows, maybe since my mother doesn't have the severe blood

sugar issues that I do, she might do well on a WD! with a ;-) to Heidi

>>If a high intake of saturated fat can prevent weight

loss, then why did he lose 140lbs (a very significant

amount of weight!) while eating a high sat fat diet? <<

The only thing I can think of is maybe he wasn't very insulin resistant to

begin with, and his transition time was shorter than it would be for

someone whose metabolism is more damaged. Then the sat fat might have

delayed some weight loss in the beginning, but if he got through the

transition quickly, it's a moot point. Just my guess.

>>Hi

Thanks for explaining why TSP recommends low sat fat -

I didn't really get this from her book, and so never

took it seriously. She does make some sweeping

comments and recommendations without anything to back

them up.

My boyfriend follows Atkins - he has lost 140lbs. He

still has around 100lbs to lose, but has stalled for

20 months now. We have tried everything EXCEPT

lowering saturated fat to restart the weight loss. I

found it difficult to convince him this is something

worth trying because I'm not convinced of it myself.

(I'm heavily influenced by Dr Atkins and Dr Barry

Groves author of Eat Fat Get Thin who isa big

proponenet of a diet of 70% fat mostly saturated and a

good friend of Jan Kwasniewski)

If a high intake of saturated fat can prevent weight

loss, then why did he lose 140lbs (a very significant

amount of weight!) while eating a high sat fat diet?

I look forward to reading the discussion on this

topic.

Jo

[Guest guest]

,

Interesting point. Do you know of a good source of info on this?

If he's incorrectly singling out sat fat intake as the cause of sat fat

deposit in the presence of insulin resistance, then the question is whether

to keep fats of all types at a moderate level during that transition

period, not just saturated ones.

-

>>I can't speak to his conclusions, but Rosedale's arguments are bogus. He

claims that only saturated fat is produced from carbohydrates. This is

false--a mixture of saturated and monounsaturated fat is produced. He

also claims that if you eat saturated fat, it will necessarily be stored

as saturated fat if it is not burned. This is also false--the body can

and will saturate monounsaturated fat or desaturate saturated fat in

order to maintain the proper balance in the tissues. As far as I know,

the concentration of saturated fat in your body is not significantly

affected by diet

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/1/03 6:51:51 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

slethnobotanist@... writes:

> As for his warrior as free spirits, no gov't employed soldier is ever a

> free spirit, left wing, right wing, or otherwise. The military is

> inherently a socialistic institution (i.e. command control institution)

> and as such cannot nor will not tolerate " free " spirits.

Hmm... I haven't read the book. In the interview he said that modern

soldiers aren't really warriors, that you don't have to be at " war " to be a

" warrior, " and that he was using the word primarily to appeal to the *ancient*

warrior.

Military institutions are brand new in the grand scheme of human

development, and nothing like remotely like them existed in the vast majority of

human

history.

Chris

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 30 Aug 2003 09:38:34 -0700

Heidi Schuppenhauer <heidis@...> wrote:

>

> >1. Optimal Nutrition (Homo Optimus by Jan Kwasniewski)

> >2. Atkins

> >3. The Schwarzbein Principle II (let's say TSP)

> >4. Ron Rosedale's recs (metabolic medicine doc whose transcribed talk on

> > " Insulin and its Metabolic Effects " is on Mercola's site)

> >

> >All are in the same ballpark as far as recognizing the need for healthy

> >fats including saturated fats, and all recommend relatively low-carbs. The

> >discrepancy I'm trying to tease out and explore is the issue of how much

> >sat fat, for whom, and when.

>

> OK, at the risk of offending some folks I will say that I just

> started reading " The Warrior Diet " and I think you SHOULD add

> it to your list. Based on 1/4 of the book. It is not as " scientific "

> as the ones you list, but a number of athletic type guys are on

> it, and they really do care about insulin use and fat storage,

> and even Udo Erasmus likes it.

I'm not offended...hehehe.

It does speak well of the diet, IMO, that regular athletes have adopted

it and are using it. I know in my competition days I would have used

*anything* if it gave me an edge and just as quickly discarded it if it

didn't.

And no the WD is not scientifically written. There are no footnotes or

endnotes. I don't like the binding and it probably could have been

written in less pages. Having said that, it is a good read, even if I

chuckle at some points when he gets into history. It also definitely

needs to be adapted to NT, particularly in relation to fats.

The thing that the WD may do is help us see here in the west once again

the value of fasting, and also the traditional wisdom of the one big

meal. When is the last time you read a diet book that had some

legitimate basis in traditional wisdom? Not to often.

>

> The WD take is that you should retrain your appetite and

> taste buds so YOU decide on your macronutrient levels.

> Everyone agrees that in theory the human body SHOULD know

> what it needs, and how much, and that if you are overweight

> and eating the wrong things, your appetite is out of whack.

>

> Ori's writing style might be more right-brain than left-brain,

> and as far as history he may fudge a bit (a lot of warriors

> in the past were anything but " free spirits " -- the Spartans

> in particular were what some would call today " rigid right-wing

> religious conservatives " ) -- but the concept seems to

> WORK on a number of levels, both for a healthy body

> and clearer thinking and higher energy levels.

Oh it most definitely seems to work and I think it goes a long way

toward restoring both feasting and fasting (not starvation) to their

appropriate places as legitimate tools in a healthy lifestyle.

As for his warrior as free spirits, no gov't employed soldier is ever a

free spirit, left wing, right wing, or otherwise. The military is

inherently a socialistic institution (i.e. command control institution)

and as such cannot nor will not tolerate " free " spirits.

I like his metaphor, he is just applying it to the wrong group of people.

>

> Anyway, for what it is worth, since I've been on it I've

> been craving more fresh vegies (salads esp.) and less

> fats (which makes sense to me, because I already

> have plenty to use). Someone else might crave different

> things, according to what their body needs, and Ori

> himself (rock hard athlete, according to the interviews)

> scarfs down a HUGE meal at the end of the day which

> includes everything.

>

> I like that concept. Let your body decide!

I like that too. Since embarking on the WD I have definitely been eating

more carbs and not saving them for the weekend. I don't know if craving

would be the right word but now I just eat them without a second thought.

[Guest guest]

On Sun, 31 Aug 2003 11:07:06 +0100 (BST)

Joanne Pollack <jopollack2001@...> wrote:

>

> My boyfriend follows Atkins - he has lost 140lbs. He

> still has around 100lbs to lose, but has stalled for

> 20 months now. We have tried everything EXCEPT

> lowering saturated fat to restart the weight loss. I

> found it difficult to convince him this is something

> worth trying because I'm not convinced of it myself.

>

>

> If a high intake of saturated fat can prevent weight

> loss, then why did he lose 140lbs (a very significant

> amount of weight!) while eating a high sat fat diet?

Why don't you try Atkins Fat Flush? I did it once for 3 days just for

the heck of it and whoa, it definitely knocked some serious fat off. It

might be a way to get the weight train moving again.

[Guest guest]

>Oh it most definitely seems to work and I think it goes a long way

>toward restoring both feasting and fasting (not starvation) to their

>appropriate places as legitimate tools in a healthy lifestyle.

Yes, I like the " cycling " . The idea of the " intensity " of a meal

makes sense too ... your body doesn't keep a " per day " calorie

counter but it probably does keep track of the fact that you were

able to eat all you wanted. If food was abundant but you were the

lowest rank and not allowed to eat, it would have to conserve

calories. Same as if you need to lift REALLY HEAVY weights

than it needs to build more muscle, but lifting light weights

all day long, it doesn't need to.

>As for his warrior as free spirits, no gov't employed soldier is ever a

>free spirit, left wing, right wing, or otherwise. The military is

>inherently a socialistic institution (i.e. command control institution)

>and as such cannot nor will not tolerate " free " spirits.

You say that better than I did. I just saw a special on the Spartans,

and they were very, very conservative. In the special they compared

them with the modern day Marines, who mimicked a lot of their

ideals. Soldiering is inherently " rule based " -- it has to be --

and you can't be a " free spirit " . Small tribes or bands of guys

(the Fellowship of the Ring) have more freedom.

>I like his metaphor, he is just applying it to the wrong group of people.

Ditto. I get what he means by " warrior spirit " and we ARE missing

that ... we were watching Lord of the Rings after I read the

first few chapters and I was practically in tears ... that's the first

time I actually GOT what the books were about. Next day my

daughter was complaining she was afraid of some trivial

thing and I told her to buck up and face it anyway -- where

is your COURAGE! Is my daughter a WIMP ??? (in a nicer

way than that, of course).

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

--- slethnobotanist@... wrote: >

> > Why don't you try Atkins Fat Flush? I did it once

> for 3 days just for

> the heck of it and whoa, it definitely knocked some

> serious fat off. It

> might be a way to get the weight train moving again.

>

Been there, done that, lost weight, gained it back on

ordinary induction level carbs.

:-(

Jo

________________________________________________________________________

Want to chat instantly with your online friends? Get the FREE

Messenger http://uk.messenger./

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 2 Sep 2003 20:48:55 +0100 (BST)

Joanne Pollack <jopollack2001@...> wrote:

> --- slethnobotanist@... wrote: >

> > > Why don't you try Atkins Fat Flush? I did it once

> > for 3 days just for

> > the heck of it and whoa, it definitely knocked some

> > serious fat off. It

> > might be a way to get the weight train moving again.

> >

>

> Been there, done that, lost weight, gained it back on

> ordinary induction level carbs.

>

> :-(

>

Uh-oh. Sounds like your boyfriend would be a candidate....drum

roll......everyone in place?........the Warrior Diet! LOL!!!!

Seriously, Atkins mentions that if you reach a plateau in your progress,

switch to something else, even if it is totally opposite of the Atkins

plan, to keep the ball (and interest) going.

Food for thought,