Twinkie diet guy revisited after 9 months off diet
Quote:
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/3...n-twinkie-diet/ |
Quote:
Wasnt his calories much less than that? 1600 is probably maintenence for alot of people. |
Here is a snippet from an earlier article:
Quote:
|
Quote:
No, it could not. That's because there is no known biological pathway for "calories". However, we can explain everything by the reduction in sugar consumption. Body fat reduction, cholesterol improvements, triglycerides drop, etc. Quote:
No, he does not. But yes, he eats less. Less what? He eats a lot less sugar than he did before the experiment during which he lost 27lbs. However, he eats a bit more sugar than during that experiment considering that he gained back a couple lbs. Remember he said that for a man his size, he should eat about 2600kcals/day. This means he now eats 400kcals less. But everybody here knows that merely cutting calories won't get you far, you gotta cut sugar. This means he eats about 100g less sugar every day. |
Quote:
That sounds insane.. He ate mostly sugar and junk (but little meat apparently) during the period where he lost weight and his lab numbers improved. |
Quote:
Hehe, it gives you an idea of just how bad he ate before. |
so you are saying he ate more sugar and junk before the experiment? and you know this for certain how?
so for this junk food experiment he actually cut down on sugar (eating debbie cakes as every meal) to the point where his lab numbers make good improvement and he loses 13% of his weight in a couple of months or so? that is what you are claiming? seems to me what is mostly missing in his junk food experiment are meats. |
What is missing from the conversation is this guy was not insulin resistant...He only ate this for 2 months...His body adapted and fortunately he was healthy enough to avoid damage...But what if he were to eat that diet for 2 years??? I think we would be seeing a much different outcome!This is the important part to look at...It is not what I eat for a month or two,but what I am eating for years,a lifetime!! :agree:
|
The guy was not just eating Twinkies and Little Debbie Snacks.
Go to Tom Naughton's blog... or others... Haub made his food log public. Here is Naughton's blog from that era: Fathead Blog: Quote:
|
well something is not right because the diet was suppose to be just a shake, a vitamin, some canned vegges, celery, and sugar junk food.... didn't he end the junk food diet in the beginning of November? are those 2 days he selected from the actual diet period?
where is the complete log? we do know that his calories went up to 2200 afterwards, apparently a satisfactory amount to him and he only gained 2 pounds after 8 months |
still a lot of sugar and processed junk happening there
|
Check out november 15th:
Hostess Apple Fruit Pie Caribou Coffee Depth Charge Hostess Apple Fruit Pie Water Muscle Milk Protein Shake Beef Noodle Soup Paula Deen's Twice Baked Potato Casserole Pringles Pringles Honey Mustard One A Day Multivitamin Teen Advantage For Him Mountain Dew Voltage Blackberry, Raw Banana Kroger 2% Chocolate Milk Cals = 1,776 Fat = 68g Cholest = 135mg Sodium = 2,151mg Carbs = 236g Sugars = 155g (2/3 a cup) some of the days he has listed there seem incomplete |
Quote:
Sugar has distinct and unmistakable effects on human metabolism. We couldn't confuse those effects from those of meat for example. And removing or significantly reducing sugar from a diet also has unique and unmistakable effects on metabolism. But don't take my word for it, read it for yourself in GCBC. For reference: Link Quote:
We could say that the cause of these metabolic effects is about as obvious as the cause of a burnt down house. |
Quote:
Here is food for thought. Where do obese toddlers fit in ? |
I'm just sort of stunned that a professor thinks he can "prove" it's a matter of calories by this experiment. The logic of proof doesn't work that way. (There's no way to prove all swans are always white, but you can disprove that thesis simply by producing just one black swan.)
We all know lots of people who lost weight after restricting calories, but as has been pointed out repeatedly, there could be a number of explanations for that beyond CICO. The proof needs to go in the other direction: If one person loses weight through an increase in calories, then we know the mechanism isn't simple CICO/ELMM. There are lots of people like that on this forum, and I'm one of them. His loss on a diet of twinkies is meaningless; it's just another white swan. |
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 21:36. |
Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.