Carb Loaded: A Culture Dying to Eat

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
And the whole anti-carb thing is silly. Europeans and Americans ate starches (and wheat [gasp]) for a LONG time, and it is only relatively recently that overweight and obesity has spiraled out of control. [/quote]

Oh BH, you make strawman long time! It’s not “anti-carb”, it’s low carb. If you are going to correct people you should be more accurate with your statements.

You might even have a point if you could find me a person 100 years ago that could eat the amount of carbohydrates in a day that a person could get today just by drinking a big gulp or two.

I seriously doubt 100 years ago people were eating highly refined seed products.

Your argument has be debunked.[/quote]

Oh, so wheat wasn’t being eaten 1912. Interesting. [/quote]

I dare you to eat 1000 calories of unrefined wheat.

Or you can have 1000 calories of Big Gulp.

Your choice.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
By the way, shit like candies and cakes and jellies and jams and syrups were available 100 years ago as well.

Are you on planet earth?[/quote]

Please! do you know how much sugar cost 100 years ago?

You know how much corn based sugar costs today?

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
And the whole anti-carb thing is silly. Europeans and Americans ate starches (and wheat [gasp]) for a LONG time, and it is only relatively recently that overweight and obesity has spiraled out of control. [/quote]

Oh BH, you make strawman long time! It’s not “anti-carb”, it’s low carb. If you are going to correct people you should be more accurate with your statements.

You might even have a point if you could find me a person 100 years ago that could eat the amount of carbohydrates in a day that a person could get today just by drinking a big gulp or two.

I seriously doubt 100 years ago people were eating highly refined seed products.

Your argument has be debunked.[/quote]

Oh, so wheat wasn’t being eaten 1912. Interesting. [/quote]

I dare you to eat 1000 calories of unrefined wheat.

Or you can have 1000 calories of Big Gulp.

Your choice.[/quote]

1)No thanks to the unrefined wheat.

  1. I’ve eaten 1000 shit calories before.

  2. There were indiscplined fat people 100 years ago.

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:
I am not that well versed in nutrition and am still learning, but it seems to me fat lazy people like to use carbohydrate as a bogeyman for why they are fat.

.
.
.

The truth is eating more calories than they worked off, for long periods of time made them fat. Lack of exercise made them fat and it is the idea of diets where you can eat more and lose weight, or cut carbs and lose weight rather than kill yourself in the gym which are a cause for well meaning fat people in the gym giving up. [/quote]

What are the pathways for lipogenesis?

Is the body’s response to fat calories the same as its response to the same amount of carbohydrate calories?[/quote]

I lost over four stone by eating a high carbohydrate diet and working my ass off. Did my body respond to me just using common sense and eating less than I burnt off or does my body have special carbohydrate defeating powers. People will use scientific arguments all day long, not do cardio because it burns muscle, not workout hard because it is over training, follow some restrictive diet because some study done on rats shows something.

I lost tonnes of body fat and gained muscle on a high carbohydrate diet and calorie deficit. So no matter how the body responds to fat or carbohydrate, it seems that working hard, eating a balanced diet and keeping to a routine is very, very effective.
[/quote]

Just because something worked for you doesn’t mean it’s the ideal approach for most people or even necessarily that it was ideal approach for you, despite your success. Most people will experience VERY different body composition results from eating 3000cal/day of fish, meat and green vegetables than they will from eating an equivalent quantity of refined carbohydrates, even if activity levels remain constant.

This is fairly easy to prove on an individual level. I love exercise, but it’s a small part of the fat loss picture. Most people could achieve a healthy body weight simply by eating well and walking briskly for 30mins/day. A low carb, or at least controlled carb approach will allow most people get most of the body composition results they want with relatively minimal effort, in the physical sense.

Arguing (as you do in your earlier post) that most people on sites dedicated to this or that diet are fat (which is true) ergo this or that diet doesn’t work is like arguing that most people on weightlifting sites are small are weak (which is true) ergo weightlifting doesn’t work. The obvious reason for this, IMO, is that fat people gravitate toward dieting the way small, weak people gravitate toward lifting.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

  1. There were indiscplined fat people 100 years ago. [/quote]

Yup, but I would say it was much more difficult for anyone to consistently eat surplus calories at all due to the relative scarcity and cost of food.

Today food, especially processed carbohydrate is cheap and readily available year round.

Edit: My quote fu is weak.

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:
I am not that well versed in nutrition and am still learning, but it seems to me fat lazy people like to use carbohydrate as a bogeyman for why they are fat.

.
.
.

The truth is eating more calories than they worked off, for long periods of time made them fat. Lack of exercise made them fat and it is the idea of diets where you can eat more and lose weight, or cut carbs and lose weight rather than kill yourself in the gym which are a cause for well meaning fat people in the gym giving up. [/quote]

What are the pathways for lipogenesis?

Is the body’s response to fat calories the same as its response to the same amount of carbohydrate calories?[/quote]

I lost over four stone by eating a high carbohydrate diet and working my ass off. Did my body respond to me just using common sense and eating less than I burnt off or does my body have special carbohydrate defeating powers. People will use scientific arguments all day long, not do cardio because it burns muscle, not workout hard because it is over training, follow some restrictive diet because some study done on rats shows something.

I lost tonnes of body fat and gained muscle on a high carbohydrate diet and calorie deficit. So no matter how the body responds to fat or carbohydrate, it seems that working hard, eating a balanced diet and keeping to a routine is very, very effective.
[/quote]

Just because something worked for you doesn’t mean it’s the ideal approach for most people or even necessarily that it was ideal approach for you, despite your success. Most people will experience VERY different body composition results from eating 3000cal/day of fish, meat and green vegetables than they will from eating an equivalent quantity of refined carbohydrates, even if activity levels remain constant.

This is fairly easy to prove on an individual level. I love exercise, but it’s a small part of the fat loss picture. Most people could achieve a healthy body weight simply by eating well and walking briskly for 30mins/day. A low carb, or at least controlled carb approach will allow most people get most of the body composition results they want with relatively minimal effort, in the physical sense.

Arguing (as you do in your earlier post) that most people on sites dedicated to this or that diet are fat (which is true) ergo this or that diet doesn’t work is like arguing that most people on weightlifting sites are small are weak (which is true) ergo weightlifting doesn’t work. The obvious reason for this, IMO, is that fat people gravitate toward dieting the way small, weak people gravitate toward lifting.[/quote]

Hey man I think you misunderstood my point. I think doing a low carbohydrate, paleo or ketogenic diet can be great, for an already fit and relatively lean person looking to have that lean slim athletic body. My only criticism was that these diets can become crutches for fat people to blame their own current body and health problems on for not eliminating a certain macro nutrient sooner and fat people can lose a fair bit of weight on them and never get fitter, in my own personal opinion this leads to them never getting in better shape so that they can keep driving towards a healthier and fitter body and it also in my view does not build up a mental toughness that guarantees you will stick with a routine and healthy lifestyle forever like eating a balanced high carb diet and working out like a beast does.

That is not an attack on the diets and the people who follow them, just something I as a former obese person seemed to pick up from those circles. Obviously i compressed and generalized to reinforce the point. I apologize if that offended you, that was not my intention.

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:
I am not that well versed in nutrition and am still learning, but it seems to me fat lazy people like to use carbohydrate as a bogeyman for why they are fat.

.
.
.

The truth is eating more calories than they worked off, for long periods of time made them fat. Lack of exercise made them fat and it is the idea of diets where you can eat more and lose weight, or cut carbs and lose weight rather than kill yourself in the gym which are a cause for well meaning fat people in the gym giving up. [/quote]

What are the pathways for lipogenesis?

Is the body’s response to fat calories the same as its response to the same amount of carbohydrate calories?[/quote]

I lost over four stone by eating a high carbohydrate diet and working my ass off. Did my body respond to me just using common sense and eating less than I burnt off or does my body have special carbohydrate defeating powers. People will use scientific arguments all day long, not do cardio because it burns muscle, not workout hard because it is over training, follow some restrictive diet because some study done on rats shows something.

I lost tonnes of body fat and gained muscle on a high carbohydrate diet and calorie deficit. So no matter how the body responds to fat or carbohydrate, it seems that working hard, eating a balanced diet and keeping to a routine is very, very effective.
[/quote]

Just because something worked for you doesn’t mean it’s the ideal approach for most people or even necessarily that it was ideal approach for you, despite your success. Most people will experience VERY different body composition results from eating 3000cal/day of fish, meat and green vegetables than they will from eating an equivalent quantity of refined carbohydrates, even if activity levels remain constant.

This is fairly easy to prove on an individual level. I love exercise, but it’s a small part of the fat loss picture. Most people could achieve a healthy body weight simply by eating well and walking briskly for 30mins/day. A low carb, or at least controlled carb approach will allow most people get most of the body composition results they want with relatively minimal effort, in the physical sense.

Arguing (as you do in your earlier post) that most people on sites dedicated to this or that diet are fat (which is true) ergo this or that diet doesn’t work is like arguing that most people on weightlifting sites are small are weak (which is true) ergo weightlifting doesn’t work. The obvious reason for this, IMO, is that fat people gravitate toward dieting the way small, weak people gravitate toward lifting.[/quote]

Hey man I think you misunderstood my point. I think doing a low carbohydrate, paleo or ketogenic diet can be great, for an already fit and relatively lean person looking to have that lean slim athletic body.
[/quote]

I would argue the reverse, these diets are better for people the fatter they are. In fact, there is some early research showing this to be true.

it’s kind of a boring watch, but in it she talks about how the worse off someone was, the better the diet seemed to work.

[quote]The Mighty Stu wrote:

[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
I agree, but many Americans who have already damaged their hormonal system would do well with a low, or at least lower-carb diet.

As for the PN system you just got, essentially leaner individuals can get away with more carbs, fatties, not so much :smiley:
[/quote]

^This, combined with obvious variance amongst the general public. The problem is that so many authors touting ‘their’ approach to eating seem to put forth the attitude that “THIS” is the way we should all eat. There is never a one size fits all approach that works when you’re dealing with real life situations.

I’ve always maintained that if people truly understood both sides of the carbohydrates sword (and the aspect of processed foods as well), they’re be better suited to actually take care of themselves long term.

Teach a man to fish…
(unfortunately most people have no interest in learning how)

S[/quote]Well, if you want to point my in the right direction, I’m all ears. I’m always looking to learn new things about nutrition.

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:
I am not that well versed in nutrition and am still learning, but it seems to me fat lazy people like to use carbohydrate as a bogeyman for why they are fat.

.
.
.

The truth is eating more calories than they worked off, for long periods of time made them fat. Lack of exercise made them fat and it is the idea of diets where you can eat more and lose weight, or cut carbs and lose weight rather than kill yourself in the gym which are a cause for well meaning fat people in the gym giving up. [/quote]

What are the pathways for lipogenesis?

Is the body’s response to fat calories the same as its response to the same amount of carbohydrate calories?[/quote]

I lost over four stone by eating a high carbohydrate diet and working my ass off. Did my body respond to me just using common sense and eating less than I burnt off or does my body have special carbohydrate defeating powers. People will use scientific arguments all day long, not do cardio because it burns muscle, not workout hard because it is over training, follow some restrictive diet because some study done on rats shows something.

I lost tonnes of body fat and gained muscle on a high carbohydrate diet and calorie deficit. So no matter how the body responds to fat or carbohydrate, it seems that working hard, eating a balanced diet and keeping to a routine is very, very effective.
[/quote]

Just because something worked for you doesn’t mean it’s the ideal approach for most people or even necessarily that it was ideal approach for you, despite your success. Most people will experience VERY different body composition results from eating 3000cal/day of fish, meat and green vegetables than they will from eating an equivalent quantity of refined carbohydrates, even if activity levels remain constant.

This is fairly easy to prove on an individual level. I love exercise, but it’s a small part of the fat loss picture. Most people could achieve a healthy body weight simply by eating well and walking briskly for 30mins/day. A low carb, or at least controlled carb approach will allow most people get most of the body composition results they want with relatively minimal effort, in the physical sense.

Arguing (as you do in your earlier post) that most people on sites dedicated to this or that diet are fat (which is true) ergo this or that diet doesn’t work is like arguing that most people on weightlifting sites are small are weak (which is true) ergo weightlifting doesn’t work. The obvious reason for this, IMO, is that fat people gravitate toward dieting the way small, weak people gravitate toward lifting.[/quote]

Hey man I think you misunderstood my point. I think doing a low carbohydrate, paleo or ketogenic diet can be great, for an already fit and relatively lean person looking to have that lean slim athletic body. My only criticism was that these diets can become crutches for fat people to blame their own current body and health problems on for not eliminating a certain macro nutrient sooner and fat people can lose a fair bit of weight on them and never get fitter, in my own personal opinion this leads to them never getting in better shape so that they can keep driving towards a healthier and fitter body and it also in my view does not build up a mental toughness that guarantees you will stick with a routine and healthy lifestyle forever like eating a balanced high carb diet and working out like a beast does.

That is not an attack on the diets and the people who follow them, just something I as a former obese person seemed to pick up from those circles. Obviously i compressed and generalized to reinforce the point. I apologize if that offended you, that was not my intention.
[/quote]

No offense taken at all. Doesn’t make a difference to me one way or the other really. It’s just my opinion that the average overweight person will be more successful eating a lower carb, “paleo-ish” diet while gradually incorporating moderate amounts of physical activity than they will eating a higher carb diet and “working out like a beast” to try to burn it all off. I would actually say that a heavier person will get more immediate benefit from a lower carb diet than the already fit relatively lean person you describe. Actually, I would say fit, lean guy could probably get away from eating a more carb-dominant “balanced” diet in order to support the more intense workouts he would be capable of, if he were so inclined. Leaner fitter guy is also probably better set up hormonally to tolerate and make appropriate use of the carbs he eats.

I don’t mean to sound argumentative at all, and I apologize if I did. Like I said, it doesn’t make much difference to me what anyone else eats. Just offering an opinion for the sake of discussion. FTR I somewhat agree with what you’re saying about how adopting this or that diet/fitness fad willy nilly is detrimental to people’s long term success. However I fell that is more of a commentary on people than the “fad” itself.

Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well. [/quote]

I don’t pretend to the answer.

But, here are a few first steps that would do major good.

If the USDA and authority figures (doctors, but mainstream ones like Dr. Oz) were to go on TV, media, internet and spend as much money to promote the idea that SFA/Cholesterol (beef, eggs) are perfectly healthy for us, but it’s the processed foods that are driving disease, then maybe, just maybe the general public’s perception as a whole would shift. But, it will never happen, the gov’t can’t come out and speak out against processed foods, too much money from industry flying around.

The gov’t also needs to stop making the most processed of foods the cheapest. How the fuck are foods that go through a ton of processing in million dollar factories cost less than apple, or pastured-eggs. Boggles my mind.

In the end, the nation as a whole needs a major wake up call and to change their behaviors, because the market will listen if people demand it. The sad thing is, the level of deceit in the nutritional world will keep things either buried, or confusing as hell for the average person.

I speak to people on these topics and a few times people will say “Who do we trust”… There’s little old me, and providing some videos of medical professionals saying it, then there’s the media, and shitty nutritional science and their personal doctors telling them this stuff is bad.

just my ramblings on the issue :wink:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well. [/quote]

I think less state infrastructure would be good, localized economies, either true free market ones or communal ones depending on how the people in each town decide to organize their own community. The health care system would then fall in line in both economies, the free market would mean no welfare and no government jobs which in turn would mean no people being able to eat tonnes of food while contributing nothing. In the areas people choose to use a cooperative template, no one will want to give an equal share to a fat lazy person who contributes nothing, so I see a localized democracy as being the best hope of ending the crazy problem of over consumption .

DID THAT GO HOW YOU EXPECTED IT TO?

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well. [/quote]

I think less state infrastructure would be good, localized economies, either true free market ones or communal ones depending on how the people in each town decide to organize their own community. The health care system would then fall in line in both economies, the free market would mean no welfare and no government jobs which in turn would mean no people being able to eat tonnes of food while contributing nothing. In the areas people choose to use a cooperative template, no one will want to give an equal share to a fat lazy person who contributes nothing, so I see a localized democracy as being the best hope of ending the crazy problem of over consumption .

DID THAT GO HOW YOU EXPECTED IT TO?

[/quote]

Great post.

Any thoughts on indocrination from a young age in our schools–more bluntly and rudely put: how do we instill in young people that being fat and slovenly isn’t good?

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well. [/quote]

I think less state infrastructure would be good, localized economies, either true free market ones or communal ones depending on how the people in each town decide to organize their own community. The health care system would then fall in line in both economies, the free market would mean no welfare and no government jobs which in turn would mean no people being able to eat tonnes of food while contributing nothing. In the areas people choose to use a cooperative template, no one will want to give an equal share to a fat lazy person who contributes nothing, so I see a localized democracy as being the best hope of ending the crazy problem of over consumption .

DID THAT GO HOW YOU EXPECTED IT TO?

[/quote]

Great post.

Any thoughts on indocrination from a young age in our schools–more bluntly and rudely put: how do we instill in young people that being fat and slovenly isn’t good?[/quote]

Teach children about nutrition and exercise from a very, very early age, also when we see a mother who is 20 stone feeding her children crisps and chips and making them horrifically obese, we should as a community step in the same way we should if we see a mother beating, sexually abusing or emotionally bullying her kids. It is a form of child abuse for sure in my eyes.

I have a woman on my street who is massive, has had gastric bands put in at the taxpayers expense and still kept eating, has no money for her son to play for the local under 10’s team but can afford a boatload of food and cigarettes. I think a massive problem with society is that behavior is cyclic, so a parent gives her kids terrible food, bad environment, this kid grows up and sees that as normal and recreates the cycle.

I think the only realistic way to end this is not through government but through people having a strong community, acting as a group in looking after one another and when necessary preventing the sort of cyclic patterns of behavior that the law is incapable of preventing.

The other side of that could be maybe I am a nosy little prick who should mind his own buisness and not tell others how to live or raise their children. That was the womans reaction when I said that giving her 5 yeard old son a bag of chips and crisps in one meal was very unhealthy and not fair on the child.

Very good posts!

Any thoughts on eugenics?

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Very good posts!

Any thoughts on eugenics?[/quote]

countries that are ugly < eugenics.

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:

[quote]BeginnerBrah wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Alright folks, what policies and programs do you consider will be the best to completely rewire our country’s economy, industries, lifestyles, healthcare and educational systems, and physical education programs so that there will be less fat and unhealrhy and indiscipline people?

Eugenics is one step in the right direction.

Please provide input.

I have other ideas as well. [/quote]

I think less state infrastructure would be good, localized economies, either true free market ones or communal ones depending on how the people in each town decide to organize their own community. The health care system would then fall in line in both economies, the free market would mean no welfare and no government jobs which in turn would mean no people being able to eat tonnes of food while contributing nothing. In the areas people choose to use a cooperative template, no one will want to give an equal share to a fat lazy person who contributes nothing, so I see a localized democracy as being the best hope of ending the crazy problem of over consumption .

DID THAT GO HOW YOU EXPECTED IT TO?

[/quote]

Great post.

Any thoughts on indocrination from a young age in our schools–more bluntly and rudely put: how do we instill in young people that being fat and slovenly isn’t good?[/quote]

Teach children about nutrition and exercise from a very, very early age, also when we see a mother who is 20 stone feeding her children crisps and chips and making them horrifically obese, we should as a community step in the same way we should if we see a mother beating, sexually abusing or emotionally bullying her kids. It is a form of child abuse for sure in my eyes.

I have a woman on my street who is massive, has had gastric bands put in at the taxpayers expense and still kept eating, has no money for her son to play for the local under 10’s team but can afford a boatload of food and cigarettes. I think a massive problem with society is that behavior is cyclic, so a parent gives her kids terrible food, bad environment, this kid grows up and sees that as normal and recreates the cycle.

I think the only realistic way to end this is not through government but through people having a strong community, acting as a group in looking after one another and when necessary preventing the sort of cyclic patterns of behavior that the law is incapable of preventing.

The other side of that could be maybe I am a nosy little prick who should mind his own buisness and not tell others how to live or raise their children. That was the womans reaction when I said that giving her 5 yeard old son a bag of chips and crisps in one meal was very unhealthy and not fair on the child.[/quote]
ah to be young and naive. There is no way the community is going to step in and tell people how to raise their kids. Even if they did, parents wouldn’t listen and would do what they wanted while claiming they have the right to raise their kids the way they want to. There probably isn’t any realistic way to stop people from being overweight. The most realistic way I can think of is regulating the food companies so they can’t sell some of the most harmful processed foods to people.

Otherwise, people are just going to keep on eating that crap. Although, even if you got rid of all processed food, I’m not sure that would help. People might still eat too many calories and stay fat. The majority of people have little self-control as the rising obesity numbers show. I’m not sure whether this is due to the addictive quality of junk food or something else, but I doubt most people are going to wake up one day with the ability to control their food intake and lose weight. People are lazy.

[quote]Grimlorn wrote:

People might still eat too many calories and stay fat. The majority of people have little self-control as the rising obesity numbers show. I’m not sure whether this is due to the addictive quality of junk food or something else, but I doubt most people are going to wake up one day with the ability to control their food intake and lose weight. People are lazy.[/quote]

You really think people would eat too many calories (if that is even the culprit) of beef, eggs, fish, veggies, fruit, nuts?

it takes serious effort to overeat on unprocessed foods. That’s a big reason obesity has not been an issue for that majority of our exicstence.

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Very good posts!

Any thoughts on eugenics?[/quote]

Not sure if serious…

[quote]batman730 wrote:

[quote]BrickHead wrote:
Very good posts!

Any thoughts on eugenics?[/quote]

Not sure if serious…

[/quote]

Completely serious. I’ve been in favor of this since I ever learned of the word and what it means. I’ve actually developed a monarchical/dictatorial/authoritarian view on government and socioeconomic policies.