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 > LC Research/Media
User Name
Password
Register FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31   ^
Old Thu, May-07-15, 07:12
Judynyc's Avatar
Judynyc Judynyc is offline
Attitude is a Choice
Posts: 29,976
 
Plan: SBD->atkins twist->paleo
Stats: 274/000/160 Female 5'6"
BF:stl/too/mch
Progress: 240%
Location: NYC
Default

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alicegw...odily-downfall/

Exercise Can't Save Us: Our Sugar Intake Is The Real Culprit, Say Experts

Quote:
In a fascinating and scorching editorial in the British Journal of Sports Medicine, three authors argue that the myth that exercise is the key to weight loss – and to health – is erroneous and pervasive, and that it must end. The evidence that diet matters more than exercise is now overwhelming, they write, and has got to be heeded: We can exercise to the moon and back but still be fat for all the sugar and carbs we consume. And perhaps even more jarring is that we can be a normal weight and exercise, and still be unhealthy if we’re eating poorly. So, they say, we need a basic reboot of our understanding of health, which has to involve the food industry’s powerful PR “machinery,” since that was part of the problem to begin with.

The major point the team makes – which they say the public doesn’t really understand – is that exercise in and of itself doesn’t really lead to weight loss. It may lead to a number of excellent health effects, but weight loss – if you’re not also restricting calories – isn’t one of them. “Regular physical activity reduces the risk of developing cardiovascular disease, type 2 diabetes, dementia and some cancers by at least 30%,” they write. “However, physical activity does not promote weight loss.”


Plus, in the last 30 years, exercise has stayed about the same, while overweight and obesity have skyrocketed. So something else must be at play – like the type of food we’re eating. That part has gotten steadily worse over the years, as highly-processed sugary foods and sodas have taken over as our go-to choices. “According to the Lancet global burden of disease reports,” they write, “poor diet now generates more disease than physical inactivity, alcohol and smoking combined.” This is a disturbing statistic. But it gets worse.

The related and larger issue is that even normal weight people who exercise will, if they eat poorly, have metabolic markers that put them at very high risk of chronic illness and early mortality. “Up to 40% of those with a normal body mass index will harbour metabolic abnormalities typically associated with obesity, which include hypertension, dyslipidaemia, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and cardiovascular disease.”

And the crux of the issue is this: We’re continually “fed” the idea that all that’s behind the rise in obesity is lack of exercise, or sedentariness. There have certainly been a lot of studies and popular articles suggesting that sitting is our downfall. Instead of effective messages about diet and health that science actually knows to be true, “members of the public are drowned by an unhelpful message about maintaining a ‘healthy weight’ through calorie counting,” the team writes, “and many still wrongly believe that obesity is entirely due to lack of exercise. This false perception is rooted in the Food Industry’s Public Relations machinery, which uses tactics chillingly similar to those of big tobacco.”

What we know to be true is much simpler: “Sugar calories promote fat storage and hunger,” the write. “Fat calories induce fullness or satiation.” For every additional 150 calories in sugar (i.e., a can of soda) a person consumes per day, the risk for diabetes rises 11-fold, regardless of how much or little we exercise. The single most effective thing people can do for their weight, they write, is to restrict calories – and even more, restrict carbohydrates.

So if this is all true, and research seems to suggest it is, how will it change? It might take quite a lot of work to shift our psychology around food, especially since advertising is so saturated with the message that carbohydrates are good for us. The celebrity endorsements might need to be tweaked, the authors say, and certainly the way foods are advertised and, perhaps, created, need to be shifted. The public should be repeatedly hit with the message that whole, natural foods, where possible and affordable is the best way to go. If you’re trying to lose weight, reduce your calories (especially sugars) – don’t think exercise alone will cut it. And even if you’re normal weight, you can’t subside solely on junk and stay healthy.

The authors end with this powerful finale: “It is time to wind back the harms caused by the junk food industry’s Public Relations machinery. Let us bust the myth of physical inactivity and obesity. You cannot outrun a bad diet.”
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #32   ^
Old Thu, May-07-15, 22:06
aj_cohn's Avatar
aj_cohn aj_cohn is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 3,948
 
Plan: Protein Power
Stats: 213/167/165 Male 65 in.
BF:35%/23%/20%
Progress: 96%
Location: United States
Default

On a tangent about Big Food is Mark Schatzker's new book, The Dorito Effect. Schatzker's thesis is that (a) food flavor evolved as a cue for nutrition, and that all animals evolved to seek out the flavors associated with the nutrients they need at any given time (there's a reason babies usually shun broccoli). Big Food, once they figured out how to mimic natural flavors, have hijacked this relationship to promote their own products. They are now sophisticated enough to map flavors to emotional need states, and can craft flavor combinations in junk food that render their targeted populations craving the empty calories.

At the same time, Big Food has made traditionally nutritious food blander in pursuit of more efficient production. Schatzker's prime example is the chicken, which, he explains is slaughtered at what would be the human equivalent of 2 months and 220 lbs, if we could grow kids as fast as fowl. Baby animals are extremely bland, as those who eat veal know; lack of exercise and unnatural diets amplify that blandness. Similar trends exist in creating mutant vegetables grown in largely artificial growing media.

You can get an overview of Schatzker's in his interview on Underground Wellness, either on iTunes or on Facebook (plays on page).
Reply With Quote
  #33   ^
Old Fri, May-08-15, 04:21
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 13,414
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

I'd throw in switching to one percent milk--makes it harder for plain milk to compete with flavoured. And everybody ends up eating double-cream ice cream on the weekend, anyways, because all that cream is going to go somewhere. And taking away salt from the dinner table gives food manufacturers an edge as well. Even the distrust of msg sort of gives them an advantage as well. Grandma might have had a shaker of Accent at home, she could use it to compete with the big guys. I'm not saying msg is wonderful, just that using it in homemade cream of broccoli soup is probably safer than getting it from industrial foods.
Reply With Quote
  #34   ^
Old Fri, May-08-15, 04:35
M Levac M Levac is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 6,484
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

AJ, that makes sense. I mean if I wanted to do it, that's how I'd do it. I wonder if it's possible to do it with genuine food that hasn't been adulterated so that it's got more taste and actually feeds us. The choice then would be between two equally tasty foods, but one would be genuine food.
Reply With Quote
  #35   ^
Old Fri, May-08-15, 04:42
M Levac M Levac is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 6,484
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

On the other hand, flavor isn't needed to make it appealing. There's a condition called amylophagia where we eat one the blandest stuff ever - wheat starch - yet can't stop eating it. Technically they put that in the pica category but now we know more about the effect of wheat on our physiology.
Reply With Quote
  #36   ^
Old Fri, May-08-15, 07:46
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 11,382
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/149/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aj_cohn
Schatzker's thesis is that (a) food flavor evolved as a cue for nutrition, and that all animals evolved to seek out the flavors associated with the nutrients they need at any given time (there's a reason babies usually shun broccoli).



I am totally on board with that theory. I'm astonished at how little I eat when what I eat is nutritious.

I've reached the point with my illness where, as predicted by Dr. Kruse, I'm naturally, no hunger, fasting with a 5-7 hour window. The magic addition that made it happen?

I'm thinking it was my high dose niacin. Or maybe adding D-ribose. Or maybe all the things I've been doing for almost a year that has taken me from 20% of function to 80%.
Reply With Quote
  #37   ^
Old Fri, May-08-15, 08:00
teaser's Avatar
teaser teaser is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 13,414
 
Plan: mostly milkfat
Stats: 190/152.4/154 Male 67inches
BF:
Progress: 104%
Location: Ontario
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
On the other hand, flavor isn't needed to make it appealing. There's a condition called amylophagia where we eat one the blandest stuff ever - wheat starch - yet can't stop eating it. Technically they put that in the pica category but now we know more about the effect of wheat on our physiology.


I wonder if we can rule out other kinds of pica as nutrient sensing gone awry? We don't actually have to need the nutrient to be drawn to it.
Reply With Quote
  #38   ^
Old Sat, May-16-15, 11:30
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,069
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

The Washington Post carries on the topic too. Companion piece to the BMJ written also by Dr Malhotra, "Take off the FitBit, Exercise alone won't make you Lose Weight". Love the title. When an obese friend bought a top of line top FitBit (yet doesn't follow all the diet advice given her) I went a bit nuts. That was over a year ago, not one pound lighter. Recently sent her sent Dr Fung's Exercise is not TEE, but this is even clearer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/poste...ou-lose-weight/

https://intensivedietarymanagement....gy-expenditure/

AJ, that interview about The Dorito Effect was excellent. Sean is always well prepared and the author's info interesting.

Last edited by JEY100 : Sat, May-16-15 at 11:38.
Reply With Quote
  #39   ^
Old Sat, May-16-15, 14:50
deirdra's Avatar
deirdra deirdra is online now
Senior Member
Posts: 3,944
 
Plan: HF/vLC/GF,CF,SF
Stats: 197/136/150 Female 66 inches
BF:
Progress: 130%
Location: Alberta
Default

I have a Fitbit (the cheapest version) but mainly use it to see how well and how long I sleep and my level of activity throughout the day depending on what I eat and my IF patterns. I'm not aiming for 10,000 steps or using it for exercise, but trying to break up periodic couch-potato habits, like sitting still for 2 straight hours consuming entire websites that Janet just found and posted links to.
Reply With Quote
  #40   ^
Old Sun, May-17-15, 04:12
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,069
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Diedra....but there is an App for that!
Called Time-Out. Downloaded it when Chris Kresser recommended it a few years ago. Almost never have it on though, good reminder to start using it again
In my friend's case, she IS counting her 10,000 steps... like from walking in stiletto heels to a 3 course lunch at a restaurant.
Reply With Quote
  #41   ^
Old Fri, Jan-04-19, 07:07
JEY100's Avatar
JEY100 JEY100 is online now
To Good Health!
Posts: 11,069
 
Plan: IF Fung/LC Westman/Primal
Stats: 222/171/169 Female 5' 9"
BF:45%/25.3%/24%
Progress: 96%
Location: NC
Default

Dr Sanjay Gupta with short video on CNN today. A topic that doesn’t get enough press during the height of January fitness restarts:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/health/2...oss-orig-st.cnn

Why exercise won't help you lose weight

After eating all those extra calories this holiday season, hitting the gym might not be the best way to pursue your weight loss goal. CNN's Dr. Sanjay Gupta explains.
Reply With Quote
  #42   ^
Old Fri, Jan-04-19, 14:54
nawchem's Avatar
nawchem nawchem is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 8,701
 
Plan: No gluten, CAD
Stats: 196.0/158.5/149.0 Female 62
BF:36/29.0/27.3
Progress: 80%
Default

In chemistry we did an experiment with a calorimeter, I think a calorie is a calorie, BUT a cell breaks the food down into components and enzymes and hormones change the thermodynamic equation and determine the components ultimate outcome.
Reply With Quote
  #43   ^
Old Sat, Jan-05-19, 08:10
WereBear's Avatar
WereBear WereBear is offline
Posts: 11,382
 
Plan: Epi-Paleo/IF
Stats: 220/149/150 Female 67
BF:
Progress: 101%
Location: USA
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aj_cohn
On a tangent about Big Food is Mark Schatzker's new book, The Dorito Effect. Schatzker's thesis is that (a) food flavor evolved as a cue for nutrition, and that all animals evolved to seek out the flavors associated with the nutrients they need at any given time (there's a reason babies usually shun broccoli). Big Food, once they figured out how to mimic natural flavors, have hijacked this relationship to promote their own products. They are now sophisticated enough to map flavors to emotional need states, and can craft flavor combinations in junk food that render their targeted populations craving the empty calories.

At the same time, Big Food has made traditionally nutritious food blander in pursuit of more efficient production. Schatzker's prime example is the chicken, which, he explains is slaughtered at what would be the human equivalent of 2 months and 220 lbs, if we could grow kids as fast as fowl. Baby animals are extremely bland, as those who eat veal know; lack of exercise and unnatural diets amplify that blandness. Similar trends exist in creating mutant vegetables grown in largely artificial growing media.

You can get an overview of Schatzker's in his interview on Underground Wellness, either on iTunes or on Facebook (plays on page).


All excellent points. I agree that our cravings are often meant to guide us to nutrients we need, but this can be hijacked by processed food.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 10:48.


Copyright © 2000-2019 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.