Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #736   ^
Old Fri, Mar-17-06, 20:39
theBear theBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 311
 
Plan: zero-carb
Stats: 140/140/140 Male 5'6"
BF:
Progress:
Default

Your desire for various items in your diet has nothing to do with your organs of taste or smell (ever smell a durian fruit? Limburger cheese?). It is learned behaviour, which in some cases overrides a natural impulse of rejection- turnips and radishes are vegetables many like myself find totally repulsive. Hot chillies?

Our taste buds are important early warning detectors of the nature of things taken into the mouth. The bitter taste sense, for instance does not mean that we were destined by nature to like or need Swedish Bitters, it is there to warn you of alkaloids in plants, common defensive chemicals which can be very fatal. Likewise, sweet, salt and sour are not indicators of what you should be taught to like as food, they are there so you can measure and test- some food may have gone bad, if it is sour- milk for instance. Taste buds are simply chemical detectors which every animal has, and are generic in response- not indicators to any specific food liking, that is learned behaviour- cued by taste (and smell). Most of what we view as the taste of something is mostly the smell.

Salt is a simple chemical, sodium chloride, a mineral substance mined from where it has been deposited from weathered rocks or pools of seawater. It can be found contaminated with a wide variety of additional compounds, depending on the source it is derived from. Some kinds may also be toxic- as well as unhealthful, as is pure salt in all its forms. Human commerce in salt began with the use of vegetation as a major item of human food. Only herbivorous animals will seek out and consume salt- because sodium is lacking in all terrestrial plant tissues. Carnivores do not need any salt. Your taste for salt on meat is learned behaviour only.

The taste buds are important as an adjunct to texture as a part of the mouth-feel of food.

As a young child I did not like cake frosting, which is a pure fine sugar and flour mix- very sweet. I thought it tasted 'hot', and refused to eat it. I would only accept a thin lemon glaze on an angel food cake, one of the less-sweet kind of cakes as my birthday cake. I was lucky I guess, but trust me my 'sense' of sweetness was the same as yours. I disliked candy also until my teens.

Even heavily flavoured (but sugar-free) ice cream (smelled wonderful) was detected by my mouth as 'cold library paste' during the period I lost the function of my taste buds due to radiotherapy. Fortunately that passed!

Indeed there is only one biological carb- glucose, everything gets broken down to that. No vegetable is 'good for digestion', all are difficult for the human gut to process, whether pre-rotted by bacteria or not. Even the holiest of all fermented foods, yoghurt, is not good. The fermentative bacteria (contrary to the hype) used to 'spoil' the milk for yoghurt are not native to our gut, and the lactose is converted into other sugars like galactose which are worse for you in the end they cause some difficulties. Soy is bad, period, although the fermented salt-source is less toxic than other forms even tofu, it is best seriously avoided- the protein content is not the kind your body can use. Protein content in foods is experimentally determined by combusting a sample in a 'bomb' at high temperature. The nitrogen quantity that in the resulting gas is taken as a measure of protein, without regard to what kind, or whether it has human bioavailabilty.

All 'Health gurus', so far as I can determine are various types of vegetarians, and therefore know absolutely nothing about good health in the human body.
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #737   ^
Old Fri, Mar-17-06, 20:59
TwilightZ's Avatar
TwilightZ TwilightZ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 359
 
Plan: meat and meat by-products
Stats: 270/191/150 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 66%
Location: TwilightZone (Phila, PA)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theBear
All 'Health gurus', so far as I can determine are various types of vegetarians, and therefore know absolutely nothing about good health in the human body.

The one's I'm referring to are actually low-carb promoters, but it doesn't matter.

What about those people you hear about in the Caucasus region of Russia that eat yoghurt all their lives and live to 100?
Reply With Quote
  #738   ^
Old Fri, Mar-17-06, 21:52
theBear theBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 311
 
Plan: zero-carb
Stats: 140/140/140 Male 5'6"
BF:
Progress:
Default

What about George Burns? He smoked and drank his entire life, yet lived to reach 100? I doubt his diet was exemplary, either.

I studied Russian language at same time I studied ballet- my turn-on to ballet was seeing the men dance in the Bolshoi Ballet in 1958. I was not able to talk to the dancers backstage, so I decided to learn Russian as well as dance.

One of the many old Russians I met in the little LA Russian expat community where I lived (in a rented room in the house of Micheal Chechov's widow), once told me the secret of the great ages tribes people in the remote Caucasian region often lived to- alleged to be as long as 158 years in one or two cases. He said that they lived simply and did not overeat. He also said they never ate but one specific thing at any given meal. I mean only ONE thing. Bread alone might be one meal. Cabbage plain would fully constitute one meat. A cut of meat made one complete meal. It was his contention that the human stomach was only capable of digesting a single thing, alone, at a time, and mixing even two things was a bad idea for your health. I could not ague this, it seemed so simple really, and I knew he had lived amongst those people when he was a cossack (soldier)...

Long ago, a situation of surviving a lack of prey animals, may have been how we first came to eat any vegetable. To imagine a variety being available or even try-able at the same time seems unlikely- so just one thing would most likely be collected and be eaten at a time. No one knows.

I did not think to enquire how the Caucasian's teeth responded to their dietary habits, it was not in the top of my mind back then.
Reply With Quote
  #739   ^
Old Fri, Mar-17-06, 22:12
TwilightZ's Avatar
TwilightZ TwilightZ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 359
 
Plan: meat and meat by-products
Stats: 270/191/150 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 66%
Location: TwilightZone (Phila, PA)
Default

Another question. You state that carbs are never burned as fuel but only directly stored as fat, and that fat is the only fuel that is burned. If that is so, then why when one eats carbs does the ketone indicator show no ketones in the urine, but when one then eliminates carbs the indicator tests positive for ketones in the urine? If ketones are a result of fat burning, shouldn't they show up in the urine either way?

Also going back to the Caucasians--did you ever try to eat that way--just one item for a meal, but experiment by eating one type of carb?

Last edited by TwilightZ : Sat, Mar-18-06 at 19:11.
Reply With Quote
  #740   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 06:03
LadyArya's Avatar
LadyArya LadyArya is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 640
 
Plan: No one plan
Stats: 208.5/180.5/150 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Florida
Default

If I may jump in and add some anecdotal support to Bear's claims...

(Please ignore any typos... brain fog is back... see below)

I've been eating the same as Bear for a week now. During the entire time I've felt amazing. My "brain fog" has cleared, I don't need naps in the afternoon... heck I even started taking my pups for rediculously long walks that I could just never handle before (a win-win situation... you know the old saying "a tired dog is a well behaved dog"? Well have you ever tried tiring out a lab/greyhound mix? Near impossible This finally worked.) My cravings are zero and I'm never hungry. Where I was taking in ridiculous amounts of calories before, I don't think I've passed 1600 in the past two days.

I'm not counting calories on this diet, but I did add things up in fit day just to give me a rough idea of how my eating habits changed.

I still have a box of entenmann's chocolate donuts sitting here... they haven't posed the slightest interest to me. And even last night when I was in my car and starving because I hadn't eaten in 12 hours, I considered driving to the chinese buffet and restarting the diet today.. when I then realized I wasn't craving chinese, I was just hungry and falling back on my old habits. I started running over the foods available at the buffet in my head and became nauseous at the thought of all the sugar. I drove home and had a steak and felt great.

But due to my fear of not having BMs as frequently as I did when I was eating carbs, last night after my juicy steak I forced down 2 cups of romaine lettuce. Where I used to love lettuce smothered in dressing (and now suspect that my "love of veggies" wasn't actually the veggies themselves, but instead a love of the dressings I put on them), I felt horrible. When I woke up this morning I was still exhausted, my brain fog was back and my face was so puffy I looked...well, swollen.

IMO, I should never have forced down the salad in the first place. I was not "consitpated" in the sense of being uncomfortable, I just didn't feel the need to go. And, I believe it was just as others have said here that a change in your diet like this leads to temporary irregularity. But after shoving that salad down last night and seeing the after effects this morning, I'd much rather deal with temporary irregularity than a swollen face, exhaustion and brain fog.


As for the sea salt vs. table salt argument, if you google the following:
+"sea salt" +better
you'll come up with a ton of articles explaining that sea salt and table salt are almost identical because they are both refined, that sea salt does indeed contain trace amounts of minerals, but the amounts are so tiny you would have to ingest copious amounts to receive any benefit... and as one article said "is just not worth the extra money".

Just my two cents. I'll go back to my coffee now

Last edited by LadyArya : Sat, Mar-18-06 at 06:08.
Reply With Quote
  #741   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 13:31
CGraff CGraff is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 35
 
Plan: my own
Stats: -/-/- Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress:
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Default email from Barry Groves

Hello Carolyn

Thanks for writing. Sorry to keep you waiting for a reply. I have been away
for a month soaking up the sun in the Canary Islands.

Yes, it is quite safe to eat just meat with the fat. It is meat without the
fat that is dangerous. I have added a story below from Vilhjalmur
Stefansson's autobiography, Discovery, which will be of interest. You might
also see http://www.thebear.org/essays1.html#anchor496162

If you want to eat this way, the correct proportions are 25% of calories
from protein and 75% from fat. that means roughly 6 times as much lean as
fat as the lean is only about 23% protein.

Regards

Barry Groves PhD
Author: Eat Fat, Get Thin!
http://www.second-opinions.co.uk

Case history

Lord Strathcona - the Donald Smith of Mount Sir Donald and Smith's Landing
and countless towns and natural features throughout Canada - was Canada's
High Commissioner in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century and one
of the richest men in the British Empire. Vilhjalmur Stefansson gives the
following account of Lord Strathcona's dietary habits which illustrate well
how a restricted diet can be eminently healthy:



'I [Stefansson] told him what I had learned from the Eskimos, and he told me
that years ago in Canada he had begun a regimen all his own by skipping
lunch and ultimately breakfast too. Then he had begun to wonder why, since
he liked some things better than others, he should bother to eat something
different on Tuesday when he had liked what he had eaten on Monday better.
This led to his questioning what he really did like and, when he got the
answer, eating nothing else - eggs, milk, and butter. Although this
combination would not have made up my favorite meal, much as I favor butter,
the point was that Strathcona and I were in agree–ment on the feeling that
the longer a man ate one complete food exclusively, the more likely he was
to relish it.

'I had many opportunities to observe the High Commissioner while I was in
London, for he frequently invited me to dinner at his home in Grosvenor
Square, saying that So-and-So would be present and he thought I would like
to meet him. Strathcona, a broad-shouldered man taller than six feet, would
be seated at one end of the long table, Lady Strathcona at the other. As
course after course was served to the rest of us, he would converse,
drinking a sip or two of each wine as it was poured. Sometime during the
mid–dle of the dinner, his tray was brought: several medium-soft boiled eggs
broken into a large bowl, with plenty of butter and with extra butter in a
side dish, and, I believe, a quart of whole milk, or per–haps
half-and-half.'



This story illustrates just how unimportant fruit and vegetables are
if the underlying diet is correct. And Lord Strathcona must have been doing
something right because lived entirely healthily to the ripe old age of 93.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Carolyn Graff" <zgraff~charter.net>
To: <groves~second-opinions.co.uk>
Sent: Friday, March 03, 2006 9:53 PM
Subject: low-carb


>I heard you on Bari Caine's radio show. would it be healthy for us to eat
> only animal foods and animal fats?
>
> would it be healthy to eliminate all carbs from our diets?
>
>
Reply With Quote
  #742   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 13:35
CGraff CGraff is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 35
 
Plan: my own
Stats: -/-/- Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress:
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Default

Eat Fat And Grow Slim
by Richard Mackarness, M.B.,B.S. (1958)
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/fat/
Reply With Quote
  #743   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 14:38
CGraff CGraff is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 35
 
Plan: my own
Stats: -/-/- Female 67 inches
BF:
Progress:
Location: Madison, Wisconsin
Default

Vegetables, etc. - Who Defines Food?
raypeat.com/articles/articles/vegetables.shtml
Reply With Quote
  #744   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 19:07
TwilightZ's Avatar
TwilightZ TwilightZ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 359
 
Plan: meat and meat by-products
Stats: 270/191/150 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 66%
Location: TwilightZone (Phila, PA)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyArya
As for the sea salt vs. table salt argument, if you google the following:
+"sea salt" +better
you'll come up with a ton of articles explaining that sea salt and table salt are almost identical because they are both refined, that sea salt does indeed contain trace amounts of minerals, but the amounts are so tiny you would have to ingest copious amounts to receive any benefit... and as one article said "is just not worth the extra money".


Not all sea salt is refined. Some is simply sun dried and packaged. But I agree that the amounts of trace minerals are minute.
Reply With Quote
  #745   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 19:10
theBear theBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 311
 
Plan: zero-carb
Stats: 140/140/140 Male 5'6"
BF:
Progress:
Default

Ketone metabolism is not a 'rapid response mechanism'. Full keto-adaptation takes several weeks, and until that has been done, a slowly reducing level of ketones will spill into the urine. Once adapted, the ketones are barely present in the urine, having been used by the body (in place of glucose). (Resist the Monkey's meddlesome nature and accept that you need to learn new things all your life.)

It is rather childlike to concentrate on how often or when one poos. Perhaps it is due to your mum being anal-oriented during your early years, as a result you have too much of your attention focused on body functions which should follow their own natural schedule. My wife can set her clock by her toilet visit each morning, whereas I may go at any time, day or night, everyday or not, makes no sense, but just is the way it is, people differ in small details.

The carnivorous diet has no left-over rubbish and masses of dead bacteria to void and even if you wind up only going every other day or even less, it is of no consequence. Eating veggies like lettuce while attempting a meat diet will REALLY upset your gut.
Reply With Quote
  #746   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 19:32
TwilightZ's Avatar
TwilightZ TwilightZ is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 359
 
Plan: meat and meat by-products
Stats: 270/191/150 Male 5' 11"
BF:
Progress: 66%
Location: TwilightZone (Phila, PA)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theBear
Ketone metabolism is not a 'rapid response mechanism'. Full keto-adaptation takes several weeks, and until that has been done, a slowly reducing level of ketones will spill into the urine. Once adapted, the ketones are barely present in the urine, having been used by the body (in place of glucose). (Resist the Monkey's meddlesome nature and accept that you need to learn new things all your life.)


Bear, I understand that--you've explained it before. That's not my question. I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be difficult, but here it has to make logical sense. I'm willing to accept your information, but if 2+2 doesn't equal 4 then I have to know why.

The question: Why do ketones not appear in my urine WHEN I EAT GLUCOSE? I am still burning fat which produces ketones. And they should be there, especially since there would be no keto-adaptation because there's plenty of glucose.
Reply With Quote
  #747   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 20:16
LadyArya's Avatar
LadyArya LadyArya is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 640
 
Plan: No one plan
Stats: 208.5/180.5/150 Female 5'10"
BF:
Progress: 48%
Location: Florida
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by theBear
It is rather childlike to concentrate on how often or when one poos. Perhaps it is due to your mum being anal-oriented during your early years, as a result you have too much of your attention focused on body functions which should follow their own natural schedule.


Well that was completely uncalled for. 47 years on a diet or not does not give you the right to attempt psycho analysis of our familes and consider us childlike for having a worry that you may not have. For some people, no matter their fat intake, constipation is a real problem. And I mean this not as missing one day, but instead a week or so. It happens.

I've read your posts and I've been intrigued, informed, offended, appalled, awed and so on. However it occurs to me that you've gone beyond blunt, past brutal and into full fledged arrogance.

While I agree with your statements on heath and find your lifestyle over the past 47 years intriguing, I've grown weary of your holier than thou attitude in your posts. So, like many others on this thread, I too am done.
Reply With Quote
  #748   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 20:28
Fauve Fauve is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,141
 
Plan: Carnivore
Stats: 000/000/000 Female 63
BF:
Progress: 94%
Location: Victoria, BC
Default

It is Saturday evening here on the Pacific Coast of Canada, and I am watching the Grateful Dead movie (1974) on tv! In 74, I was still in Europe, just had my first baby, and I was totally unaware of the band. It's time I remedy that. It is quite a fun movie to watch. Did you have long blond hair then Bear?
Reply With Quote
  #749   ^
Old Sat, Mar-18-06, 21:57
theBear theBear is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 311
 
Plan: zero-carb
Stats: 140/140/140 Male 5'6"
BF:
Progress:
Default

I did not appear in that rather awful 1975 Dead movie, and I have dark brown hair (or rather I had then, it is pretty much grey now). I thought the performances were mediocre, the lighting atrocious. The best part IMHO was the animated intro and the various interviews with the band and audience. My period as soundman was the very beginning, from 1966 to '70 and '72 until I built the Wall of Sound system in late 73, which had no 'soundman', per se. The band lasted a long time, but the very best, most fun times, their 'golden age', was '66 to '70.


Strict meat eaters are never constipated, full stop.

Cheese eaters may well be bound up and constipated.

Heavy coffee drinkers may have very loose bowels.

Neither of these is due to meat.

Dietary carbs feed and support vast colonies of intestinal bacteria. It is the dead bacteria which compose over 80% of the bowels content which require frequent evacuation, sometimes as often as every two or three hours- all day and night.

Normal body function is highly variable from one individual to another, and especially so when changing dietary content. A week even is not pathological, so long as it is soft, and not hard.

I mentioned the psychological issue only because I read the same complaints on more than a few posts, therefore I do not feel the comment misplaced, even if it is not understood.

"...But due to my fear of not having..." If this is not an expression of a psychological state, then what is? I was not being arrogant nor 'insulting', only offering a possible explanation. At least in my life, I have only seen an obsession with those functions in children, not adults.


I am only attempting to place some information in context when I respond to questions and statements made. I have 'been there and done that', if that supposedly gives me some kind of weird 'superiority', i.e., defines a 'holier than thou attitude' I am very surprised, since I am very egalitarian and have absolutely no pretensions of this sort.

Anyone can eat as I do, but none do, the question I raised and still seek the answer to, is why not? By leaving in a huff rather than considering a suggestion, we get no further along the path. Since I have not seen anyone else post who has any real longevity in low to zero carb diet, I must assume many of the questions are at least addressed to me. Is this arrogance?

If expressing knowledge is arrogance, heaven help those who want to learn.

I have actually been able to codify a lot of my knowledge in the short period of Q & A on this thread, and yet I still have not been able to figure out how I have done something that virtually no one else has. Understanding and being able to explain this oddity is my goal. Along with offering encouragement to others against the very heavy weight of popular opinion.

I am sorry whenever my comments cause offense, it was in not intended that way.

Last edited by theBear : Sat, Mar-18-06 at 22:08. Reason: edit
Reply With Quote
  #750   ^
Old Sun, Mar-19-06, 02:26
JandLsMom's Avatar
JandLsMom JandLsMom is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 1,719
 
Plan: atkins induction
Stats: 330/330/165 Female 5' 10"
BF:
Progress: 0%
Location: Illinois
Default

Bear,
just wanted to tell you..i made it only 3 and a half days on the meat and egg fast before i almost went completely insane...what does that mean?? lol...i couldnt take it anymore..i was wanting cheese so bad...i ended up mini-binging..i had 2 ozs of cheese, a handful of cashews, a tb of whipcream and 3 bites of my sons meatballs sandwich before my insanity ended. lucky for me my son is on atkins and his meatball sandwich had low carb spag sauce and was on low carb bread..im glad he didnt have a pizza or a reeses peanut butter cup in his hand...or i might have been in worse trouble!! So...seriously Bear..why do you think this happened to me? i had lost 2.5 lbs in the 3 days i did stick to the fast...my appetite was practically gone, my cravings seemed to be gone...then suddenly on day 4 i had visions of cheese in my head and when i had to make salads and meatballs sandwiches for hubby and son for dinner...that was it..i went insane!!
Reply With Quote
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:30.


Copyright © 2000-2017 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.