Re: no carb questions (to Christie)

[Guest guest]

Christie:

Who was it who said " we have no dietary requirement for carbs at

all " ? As far as I know (or used to know), all animals need some

carbs. We are animals, aren't we? You may not want to eat grains or

tubers, " starches " as Heidi puts it, for whatever reasons you find

justifiable, but still you need carbs (glucose). As someone aptly

said here, even meat has carbs, but then again very little, like most

green veggies and fruits. Perhaps you meant to say that we need very

little carbs. Then I might agree with you ... but let me think it

over again.

Second point: I didn't mean to say that veggies and fruits are

valuable because of their carbs. What I was trying to say is that for

some/many people it may not be advisable to skip all starches and

rely only on veggies and fruits for carbs (supposing we need them

anyway).

Third point, I don't know what your current diet looks like. If I

remember well, you are eating no starches (grains and tubers).

Possibly you substitute fats for starches, because if you don't do

that, you could run the risk of starvation. I don't know how safe

that substitution is. Maybe I should try to educate myself better on

that. But I personally find most fats less palatable. And if I don't

eat a little starch every day, I think I will need more meals than

the ones I normally have. For hunger will get the better part of me.

In the long term, eating many times a day is not very practical to

me. Maybe that is not a problem for you, but I have always wondered

what people on a very low-carb (very low-starch) diet do in order to

shun the hunger attacks. I am not boasting, but I could even live on

one meal a day, provided that I get some starch, but I usually have

two, so I can be in more frequent contact with my family at this

important location we call " the table. "

José

> >> I think that you " might " (this is

> the conditional) be in trouble if you - a modern citizen, not an

> Eskimo - will rely " only " on veggies and fruits for your carbs. <<

>

> Since we have no dietary requirement for carbs at all... why would

that be?

>

> There are valuable nutrients in fruits and veggies, I agree... but

the carbs

> they contain are not among them.

>

> Christie

> Caber Feidh ish Deerhounds

> Holistically Raising Our Dogs Since 1986

> http://www.caberfeidh.com

> http://doggedblog.com

[Guest guest]

On 6/17/05 4:37 PM, the Muses inspired José Barbosa to write:

> Christie:

>

> Who was it who said " we have no dietary requirement for carbs at

> all " ? As far as I know (or used to know), all animals need some

> carbs. We are animals, aren't we? You may not want to eat grains or

> tubers, " starches " as Heidi puts it, for whatever reasons you find

> justifiable, but still you need carbs (glucose). As someone aptly

> said here, even meat has carbs, but then again very little, like most

> green veggies and fruits. Perhaps you meant to say that we need very

> little carbs. Then I might agree with you ... but let me think it

> over again.

I think for this point, saying we all need :carbs: isnt a good way to put

it. We all need glucose or we will die, but glucose is a particular

molecule that needs insulin present in order to be digested properly. All

other carbs are molecularly different. Some may cause more problems than

others. Some will be difficult for part of the population, easy for

another.

So the question is not :Can a person live without carbs?: That depends on

the carb in question. The important question is :Can an individual keep

their glucose (or whatever life sustaining substance) at a healthy range

given a particular diet?: This is going to be answered differently

depending on the individual and the diet in question.

But if an individual develops their ability to track nutritional

deficiencies, they can adjust their diet as needed. The best thing is not

to identity with a diet on an ideological level, but really pay attention to

what your body is telling you that you need. Correcting for addictions, of

course. Except in the case of addictions, it is never a good idea, IME, to

override the messages of the body and eat a food because you think you

:should:.

YR

[Guest guest]

>> Who was it who said " we have no dietary requirement for carbs at

all " ? As far as I know (or used to know), all animals need some

carbs <<

No, that's definitely not true.

What evidence do you have that all animals have a dietary requirement for

carbohydrate? There is nothing we require carbohydrate for that cannot be

obtained through other food sources. Canids and felids, the same. I am not

familiar with the needs of other species.

Christie

Caber Feidh ish Deerhounds

Holistically Raising Our Dogs Since 1986

http://www.caberfeidh.com

http://doggedblog.com

[Guest guest]

--- In , Rathbone <yvonr@e...>

wrote:

> On 6/17/05 4:37 PM, the Muses inspired José Barbosa to write:

## The Muses?

>

> I think for this point, saying we all need :carbs: isnt a good way

to put

> it. We all need glucose or we will die, but glucose is a particular

> molecule that needs insulin present in order to be digested

properly. All

> other carbs are molecularly different.

## Yes, but can't they all be broken down into glucose?

Some may cause more problems than

> others. Some will be difficult for part of the population, easy for

> another.

## Absolutely.

> So the question is not :Can a person live without carbs?: That

depends on

> the carb in question. The important question is :Can an individual

keep

> their glucose (or whatever life sustaining substance) at a healthy

range

> given a particular diet?: This is going to be answered differently

> depending on the individual and the diet in question.

## I see, but however different we are from one another, we all may

need the " basics " . I think it may be a question of how much

(depending on your body, lifestyle, age, etc), rather than of what. I

don't think you'd take issue with me if I had said that we all needed

proteins. I am aware that we can't follow a linear thinking here and

immediately jump to the conclusion: " all of us need carbs, as well. "

But if the main source of glucose, which is what we ultimately need,

is carbs, starches to be more precise, I don't see why we should not

include a small portion of starches or, if you prefer, starchy

veggies and fruits (I am growing quite tolerant, ain't I?) in our

diet to meet our needs. I personally rely more on starches than on

veggies and fruits for several reasons, including the price. Also,

because I think that I - José - would need a huge lot of

veggies and fruits to meet my personal requirements, and I can't

tolerate that much. If I can do that with less starches, that is ok

for me. Which doesn't mean that I don't recognize the dangers of

starches. I do, but I relativize them.

> But if an individual develops their ability to track nutritional

> deficiencies, they can adjust their diet as needed. The best thing

is not

> to identity with a diet on an ideological level, but really pay

attention to

> what your body is telling you that you need.

## I have heard that before, . How can we identify what our

body is telling us that we need? If only the body had an unambiguous

voice ... This reminds me of instinctotherapy. Have you ever heard

about that? They say we " should " (I don't know if they use this verb,

anyway) eat following our forlorn instincts, especially the smell,

and everything will be all right. I am not very much convinced about

that, but anyhow it is a way. Perhaps you think along these lines?

José

Correcting for addictions, of

> course. Except in the case of addictions, it is never a good idea,

IME, to

> override the messages of the body and eat a food because you think

you

> :should:.

>

> YR

[Guest guest]

>> What I was trying to say is that for

some/many people it may not be advisable to skip all starches and

rely only on veggies and fruits for carbs (supposing we need them

anyway).

<<

But why?

>> But I personally find most fats less palatable. <<

You have instantly jumped from asking me what *I* eat to discussing whether

or not it's how you'd like to eat, or do well eating. You didn't ask me

about anyone but ME.

>> Maybe that is not a problem for you, but I have always wondered

what people on a very low-carb (very low-starch) diet do in order to

shun the hunger attacks. <<

For me this is backwards. The only thing that cut my endless, unappeasable

hunger was cutting the carbs out. Now I have no problems with my appetite.

Hence the weight loss.

I get around 75-80 percent of my calories from fat, just FYI.

>> I am not boasting, but I could even live on

one meal a day, provided that I get some starch <<

I don't understand why that would be " boasting, " perhaps a touch of the

orthorexia you mentioned before? <G>

Christie

Caber Feidh ish Deerhounds

Holistically Raising Our Dogs Since 1986

http://www.caberfeidh.com

http://doggedblog.com

[Guest guest]

> Re: no carb questions (to Christie)

>

>

>On 6/17/05 4:37 PM, the Muses inspired José Barbosa to write:

>

>> Christie:

>>

>> Who was it who said " we have no dietary requirement for carbs at

>> all " ? As far as I know (or used to know), all animals need some

>> carbs. We are animals, aren't we? You may not want to eat grains or

>> tubers, " starches " as Heidi puts it, for whatever reasons you find

>> justifiable, but still you need carbs (glucose). As someone aptly

>> said here, even meat has carbs, but then again very little, like most

>> green veggies and fruits. Perhaps you meant to say that we need very

>> little carbs. Then I might agree with you ... but let me think it

>> over again.

>

>I think for this point, saying we all need :carbs: isnt a good way to put

>it. We all need glucose or we will die, but glucose is a particular

>molecule that needs insulin present in order to be digested properly. All

>other carbs are molecularly different. Some may cause more problems than

>others. Some will be difficult for part of the population, easy for

>another.

I'm about to make a technical point. It is NOT an endorsement of any

particular diet. Just a statement of fact, as far as the scientific

community it is concerned. Christie is right that humans have no specific

requirement for carbohydrates, unlike fats and proteins. EFAs are considered

by the vast majority of the scientific community as *essential* fatty acids

that MUST be derived from one's diet as the body cannot make them. As well,

there are 9 essential amino acids that also must be derived from the diet

that our bodies cannot make themselves. In contrast, there are NO

" essential " carbohydrates. In fact, our bodies can make glucose out of

several amino acids. These are called " gluconeogenic amino acids " . So,

technically we can survive without carbs, but would perish without certain

fats and amino acids.

This does not necessarily mean we would be better off without any

carbohydrates in the diet. As I mentioned in a previous post this would be

next to impossible anyways since even meat contains a tiny amount of carbs.

Also, in reference to -' post about other animals not surving

without carbs, this is simply not the case. For instance, neither cats nor

dogs have a dietary requirement for carbohydrates, yet both have a dietary

requirement for both amino acids and fatty acids. I suspect this is likely

true for other carnivores and omnivores as well. Carbs are simply not as

necessary as the other macronutrients, at least as far as the body of

science is concerned at this point in time.

FWIW.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

“The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times.” --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

[Guest guest]

First, because I havent posted much to the list, I am not anti carb. At

the moment, I personally eat a lot of carbs in the form of gf muffins, whole

grains, rice pudding, veggies, fruit, and ice cream. I am not a poster

child for low carb. I have recently gone gluten free and am delving into

probiotics, such as kefir and feel much better. I will also change my diet

tomorrow if something makes sense to do.

If a particular diet is working for someone (they feel great and are

healthy) who am I to say what they should do? Thats like the doctors who

said the Iron Man Triathelete was obese because of some technical ratio

between fat and muscle, even though the guy could do a triathelon and had no

chloresterol/high bp etc. Generalizations do not serve anyone no matter

which direction you make them. Each person has their own metabolism and

must learn what is right for them.

n 6/17/05 5:24 PM, the Muses inspired José Barbosa to write:

>> I think for this point, saying we all need :carbs: isnt a good way

> to put

>> it. We all need glucose or we will die, but glucose is a particular

>> molecule that needs insulin present in order to be digested

> properly. All

>> other carbs are molecularly different.

>

> ## Yes, but can't they all be broken down into glucose?

You cut out the sentence where I explain why it isnt so simple as this.

Different carbs have different molecular structures. That means they will

interact with other molecules in the body differently. They are also broken

down into glucose differently. It is these differences that cause the

different dietary needs of people.

> But if the main source of glucose, which is what we ultimately need,

> is carbs, starches to be more precise,

I cant give you that :if:. We dont need so many carbs that we must eat

starches or grains. (Again, if it works for you, fine!) We can get a lot

of carbs from meat and veg, and any other fuel we need can be in the form of

fats.

But again, IMO, the point isnt to find a generalization, but to find out

what *you* need.

YR

[Guest guest]

--- Rathbone <yvonr@...> wrote:

> So the question is not :Can a person live without carbs?: That depends on

> the carb in question. The important question is :Can an individual keep

> their glucose (or whatever life sustaining substance) at a healthy range

> given a particular diet?:

To clarify this - unless a person has a seriously impaired glucose/insulin

functioning,

the body can generate glucose from protein.

Which is why, when formulating his low-carb diet, Dr. Atkins warned against

overdoing on

the protein.

The amount of glucose needed by the body (and the brains) can be easily

generated from

low-carb vegetables and protein.

There are very few food items that have pure fat and little or no protein.

Saturated cooking oil fats like Coconut oil, palm oil, being the exceptions.

I think it is extremely difficult to have a diet that doesn't give you enough

glucose.

-Pratick

____________________________________________________

Sports

Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football

http://football.fantasysports.