You guys apparently have no Italian heritage (like me)! Life without breads? I can't even imagine it! :)KennyB wrote:I've been on the same diet as Johan for the last 6 months - lost 19 pounds (8.6 Kilos), can fit into clothes I bought 20 years ago & no more blood sugar issues.
Just cut out biscuits & cake, bread, potato, rice, pasta & pastry.
If you don't buy it, you can't eat it.
Easy.
KB.
Banana's yay or nay (before shooting)
Moderators: pilkguns, Marcus, m1963, David Levene, Spencer
-
Telecomtodd
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2008 12:15 pm
- Location: Saint Charles, MO
It's true, I have no Italian in me...
My rationale is that I don't have a particularly physical existence - quite sedentary in fact - so why do I need all these carbs?
I don't particularly go for the "high fat" bit - I still avoid obvious saturated fat & ready meals, have skimmed milk in my coffee but get through a fair amount of yoghurt, cheese & nuts.
I still get carbs from fruit & veg, just not as much - so I'm slowly burning the fat around my midriff.
The weight loss is quite gradual, it's not a crash diet - more a lifestyle thing.
Today I was at a "Chilli Shoot" and allowed myself some rice with my chilli.
I'm not fanatical about it...
KB.
My rationale is that I don't have a particularly physical existence - quite sedentary in fact - so why do I need all these carbs?
I don't particularly go for the "high fat" bit - I still avoid obvious saturated fat & ready meals, have skimmed milk in my coffee but get through a fair amount of yoghurt, cheese & nuts.
I still get carbs from fruit & veg, just not as much - so I'm slowly burning the fat around my midriff.
The weight loss is quite gradual, it's not a crash diet - more a lifestyle thing.
Today I was at a "Chilli Shoot" and allowed myself some rice with my chilli.
I'm not fanatical about it...
KB.
Sorry for the long reply, but several things I would like to comment on have come up recently.
You do not need carbs for repair though, just protein (or more correctly, amino acids have to be present in the bloodstream to give the signal for muscle synthesis)
Contrary to popular belief, there is still a discussion within the scientific community on this topic. It is not yet decided what leads to what (i.e. high cholesterol = heart attack), it could be some other process that we currently are not aware of. So a thing that has classically been considered bad/unhealthy doesn't have to be so. For example, elderly people with higher cholesterol levels tend to live longer than those with lower levels.Colin wrote: I just thinking cholesterol levels that's all.
Yes, without higher glycogen levels, high intensity weight lifting or cardio will be much harder and you probably won't get the same results. But how often do you put your body through those extremes? I bet that no-one in this forum does that (I spend a lot of time at the gym and am never up to level 5 cardio or over 90% of 1RM)AusTarget wrote: The body, especially when put to its extremes during physical exercises needs a good load of carbs for repair and recovery. Having such a restriction in diet, surely cannot be that healthy.
You do not need carbs for repair though, just protein (or more correctly, amino acids have to be present in the bloodstream to give the signal for muscle synthesis)
If you eat according to the diet you have more fat to move around in the bloodstream meaning that your cholesterol levels will go up compared to a diet with less fat (cholesterol = the vessel where lipids gets transported in). For most people the levels will drop though because they also lose weight and that will almost certainly lead to lower cholesterol levels.Johan_85 wrote:That the cholesterol level should rise with LCHF is wrong.
Since you are from Sweden and seem interested in food & nutrition I assume you read traningslara.se? Their information is more based in science than AE's one-sided blog is.Johan_85 wrote: http://www.dietdoctor.com/
This is true, but you would lose weight on any diet you follow correctly. I have not seen any research suggesting that weight loss stops automatically when one reaches ones "normal" weight.Johan_85 wrote:Another thing that is interesting is if you are suffering from excess weight you will loose it and when you reach your "normal" weight then the weight loss stops.
Sorry, you will lose some muscle if you lose weight, the key is to lose a smaller proportion of muscle if you can.Johan_85 wrote: It's just fat that will go away all muscles remains.
Oh yes that is already understood, I already maintain a high protein and amino acid level, mainly from good food sources. It's just in terms of body physiology carbs are the transporters of protein, most of your protein intake if not aided by a carbohydrate level, is not completely utilised by the body.
There is those who lowered the cholesterol without loosing weight, but as you wrote there is nothing that say that a lower cholesterol is any good. The mix of HDL and LDL seems more important.
I've not read traninglara.se. I don't thing AE blog is one sided, there is studies there that was started to prove that LCHF is bad and they did not come up with that result. There is a bunch of other sites and books but they are in swedish only. If you think about it, the native eskimos do they eat carbs and vegetables? The answer is no and they have always been healthy until quite recent when they adopted the western food culture. There is links to scientific studies on AE:s blog.
About the weight that will not stop when reached "normal". I can assure you that it will otherwise I would be dead along time ago because i'm 183cm and weighing 68kg. I've lost 0,5kg in 1,5 years with LCHF. There is numerous examples of this.
As KennyB wrote this isn't a quick fix that will get you down in weight very rapid but you never need to go hungry and you feel great. It's a lifestyle. I suffer from alot of pain with spinal disc herniation and some other stuff with my neck and right shoulder and my problems have reduced since I changed diet. I didn't start with this diet to loose weight, I started it to feel good and be healthy.
There is alot of people loosing fat and building muscle on LCHF and I've not lost any muscles. Not that I have much but if I lost any I would have noticed.
I was sceptical about LCHF but then I read all information that is available about it and I'm convinced that is good but if you don't believe in it then you got to do what you think is best.
I've not read traninglara.se. I don't thing AE blog is one sided, there is studies there that was started to prove that LCHF is bad and they did not come up with that result. There is a bunch of other sites and books but they are in swedish only. If you think about it, the native eskimos do they eat carbs and vegetables? The answer is no and they have always been healthy until quite recent when they adopted the western food culture. There is links to scientific studies on AE:s blog.
About the weight that will not stop when reached "normal". I can assure you that it will otherwise I would be dead along time ago because i'm 183cm and weighing 68kg. I've lost 0,5kg in 1,5 years with LCHF. There is numerous examples of this.
As KennyB wrote this isn't a quick fix that will get you down in weight very rapid but you never need to go hungry and you feel great. It's a lifestyle. I suffer from alot of pain with spinal disc herniation and some other stuff with my neck and right shoulder and my problems have reduced since I changed diet. I didn't start with this diet to loose weight, I started it to feel good and be healthy.
There is alot of people loosing fat and building muscle on LCHF and I've not lost any muscles. Not that I have much but if I lost any I would have noticed.
I was sceptical about LCHF but then I read all information that is available about it and I'm convinced that is good but if you don't believe in it then you got to do what you think is best.
Mind you the eskimo's have adaptated over thousands of years to living in a harsh environment that requires a high fat diet. Their body is far more capable of handling such a diet unlike us.
Nevertheless its worth a look at, but as I've stated before, a standard food habit (not diet) of carbs, proteins, minerals, vitamins, low fat etc i can see being far more beneficial, considering it acts as a true source of nutrition for the body, with far more vitamins than fat could give.
Nevertheless its worth a look at, but as I've stated before, a standard food habit (not diet) of carbs, proteins, minerals, vitamins, low fat etc i can see being far more beneficial, considering it acts as a true source of nutrition for the body, with far more vitamins than fat could give.
Well I don't know about you but here in Sweden we haven't been eating alot of carbs before say 1950-1960 and you get all the vitamins you need from meat and some broccoli, paprika and such.
But if you don't believe it don't use it. If you should try it for let's say 6 months then I can almost guarantee you should like it.
But if you don't believe it don't use it. If you should try it for let's say 6 months then I can almost guarantee you should like it.
Yes it's on the contrary to what our goverment suggest that you should eat and that is making me a little upset because what they suggest isn't supported by any scientific studies.
If you decide to test it read alot first so you know what will happen when you adapts to fat as fuel otherwise you can get a little worried.
This was very off topic but I'm so amazed by this so I was eager to tell about it.
If you decide to test it read alot first so you know what will happen when you adapts to fat as fuel otherwise you can get a little worried.
This was very off topic but I'm so amazed by this so I was eager to tell about it.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0002162/
Increased serum potassium should not cause an increase in heart rate. Typically when a person's potassium is too high, their heart rate will be slow, and the electrical activity in their heart will be abnormal. Bear in mind, that is for people who's potassium gets significantly too high, not the slight increase likely to be caused by eating a banana or two, or even six, during a line break. So long as your kidneys work and you stay hydrated, they should get rid of most extra potassium (or sodium, or whatever other electrolytes you eat too much of). If your kidneys don't work, and you're ignoring the advice of your physician in favor of nutritional recommendations on a shooting forum, then you and you alone are responsible for the outcome.
On the other hand, low serum levels of potassium can cause increased heart rate, in addition to muscle cramps, tics, spasms, etc, all of which are obviously bad for shooting (unless they occur in an opponent). So if you want to eat some potassium-rich foods during your line breaks, feel free. They shouldn't hurt your shooting, and given how much I know I sweat during the summer months while layered up in my shooting gear, they are likely to help.
Increased serum potassium should not cause an increase in heart rate. Typically when a person's potassium is too high, their heart rate will be slow, and the electrical activity in their heart will be abnormal. Bear in mind, that is for people who's potassium gets significantly too high, not the slight increase likely to be caused by eating a banana or two, or even six, during a line break. So long as your kidneys work and you stay hydrated, they should get rid of most extra potassium (or sodium, or whatever other electrolytes you eat too much of). If your kidneys don't work, and you're ignoring the advice of your physician in favor of nutritional recommendations on a shooting forum, then you and you alone are responsible for the outcome.
On the other hand, low serum levels of potassium can cause increased heart rate, in addition to muscle cramps, tics, spasms, etc, all of which are obviously bad for shooting (unless they occur in an opponent). So if you want to eat some potassium-rich foods during your line breaks, feel free. They shouldn't hurt your shooting, and given how much I know I sweat during the summer months while layered up in my shooting gear, they are likely to help.
Another long response...
The counter argument to the native northern populations are the native southern population which gets their biggest energy portion from plant sources and are equally healthy.
For you particular case I think you already gave the correct answer earlier when you mentioned water loss. Add some glycogen and you have a weight loss of 1/2 kilo.
Adding to the reply by mtncwru, eating a banana is not enough potassium to cause any problems plus the time it takes for it to work it's way out to the bloodstream (takes longer than a few minutes). Therefore, if anything does happen, the level will slowly increase and then slowly decrease again.
By a high amino acid level I mean directly after your workout. Eating a fast acting protein source will digest faster and put the amino acids in the bloodstream where they signal the muscle synthesis to start up. This happens unrelated to blood glucose levels (that is, you do not need an elevated blood glucose to start muscle synthesis = no carbs needed). For the second part of your comment, the majority of the protein you ingest will go to oxidation (energy) no matter what you eat. This is perfectly normal and how it should work. The body breaks down and rebuilds muscle tissue, hormones, transport molecules and enzymes on a daily basis and reuses the amino acids for the same purpose. The protein you eat goes into the same pool but since you won't need most of it, it ends up as energy. So, what I am trying to say is this: if you don't cover your energy needs (by fat or carbs), more protein will be used as energy than planned (meaning less will go to the rebuilding processes)AusTarget wrote:Oh yes that is already understood, I already maintain a high protein and amino acid level, mainly from good food sources. It's just in terms of body physiology carbs are the transporters of protein, most of your protein intake if not aided by a carbohydrate level, is not completely utilised by the body.
Everything he points out is on the positive side of what he promotes and most of it is also correct. The problem is the other side(s) that you won't hear or know about unless you gather information from other sources as well. In short, LCHF is probably not bad for you but it's not better than any other kind of healthy eating (on a population level of course).Johan_85 wrote: I've not read traninglara.se. I don't thing AE blog is one sided, there is studies there that was started to prove that LCHF is bad and they did not come up with that result. There is a bunch of other sites and books but they are in swedish only. If you think about it, the native eskimos do they eat carbs and vegetables? The answer is no and they have always been healthy until quite recent when they adopted the western food culture. There is links to scientific studies on AE:s blog.
The counter argument to the native northern populations are the native southern population which gets their biggest energy portion from plant sources and are equally healthy.
Your weight will stop decreasing when the intake matches the outtakes, not when you reach an arbitrary "normal" weight. Where that will be is derived from numerous variables (activity level, BMR, previous weight, height, satiety etc) and hard to calculate before.Johan_85 wrote: About the weight that will not stop when reached "normal". I can assure you that it will otherwise I would be dead along time ago because i'm 183cm and weighing 68kg. I've lost 0,5kg in 1,5 years with LCHF. There is numerous examples of this.
For a person to simultaneously lose fat and gain muscle (not just gain strength) you have to do most things perfect, it is a very hard task. What most people who loses their weight sees is a combination of having more energy left over and the reduced weight they don't have to move around anymore. Add a more toned body and it's easy to think you gained in muscle mass. If this hypothetical person then starts going to the gym and increases the training weights (like anyone starting a new strength program will) they feel they have gained muscle mass. What happens though is an adaptation by your nervous system to the increased work load and activates more muscle fibres during training (you will become better at using the whole muscle instead of a smaller portion of it).Johan_85 wrote:There is a lot of people loosing fat and building muscle on LCHF and I've not lost any muscles. Not that I have much but if I lost any I would have noticed.
For you particular case I think you already gave the correct answer earlier when you mentioned water loss. Add some glycogen and you have a weight loss of 1/2 kilo.
Adding to the reply by mtncwru, eating a banana is not enough potassium to cause any problems plus the time it takes for it to work it's way out to the bloodstream (takes longer than a few minutes). Therefore, if anything does happen, the level will slowly increase and then slowly decrease again.
-
Thedrifter
- Posts: 280
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2011 8:26 am
- Location: San Antonio, TX
An alternative diet:
Have cervical fusion operation result in severe nearly constant pain. Be required to use narcotic pain relievers in modest doses indefinitely.
Find appetite drops to near zero; even the nicest food looks revolting.
Survive wife's complaints that she's doing her best and please eat her cooking.
Lose 37 pounds (say 16.5 kg) in 7 months.
When narcotic dose tapers off, agree to eat her diet for a Type II diabetic; keep weight off.
This is highly not recommended, and you should never try it on your own. But it did work.[/u]
Have cervical fusion operation result in severe nearly constant pain. Be required to use narcotic pain relievers in modest doses indefinitely.
Find appetite drops to near zero; even the nicest food looks revolting.
Survive wife's complaints that she's doing her best and please eat her cooking.
Lose 37 pounds (say 16.5 kg) in 7 months.
When narcotic dose tapers off, agree to eat her diet for a Type II diabetic; keep weight off.
This is highly not recommended, and you should never try it on your own. But it did work.[/u]