Once Again, Scientific Evidence Supports Bulletproof/paleo/high-Fat

1567911

Comments

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    When it comes to the betterment of an individual from a health perspective, you look for specific changes in the organism to verify if you are improving or deteriorating the overall health and vitality of it. Putting aside ALL forms of caloric dieting, macronutrient selection/partitioning, food choice, etc, this is how you rate the outcomes as to whether or not to continue or stop what is being done:

    (This in only in regard to weight loss, do not confuse with adding mass diets or maintenance diets)


    1. Bodyfat down, lean mass increase (recomposition) - this is the gold standard, likely the hardest thing to accomplish, if you see this don't change anything.


    2. Bodyfat down, lean mass stable- very good, metabolism is intact, continue.


    3. Body fat down, lean mass down- this is bad, stop what you are doing immediately and make a change, metabolism is needlessly being compromised, seek assistance if unsure what steps to take.


    4. Bodyfat unchanged, lean mass down- even worse, see 3. for actionable items


    5. Body fat increase, lean mass down- WTF have you done! Run away as fast as possible and never take charge of your food intake again!


    So you see, no matter what the style of diet, I can not in good conscience acknowledge or condone the needless wasting of a persons metabolism, it's ones or zeros and whatever that group did (low carb in that case) was a failure to be avoided.




     


    Sounds like a reasonable list. However, you can reverse all kinds of chronic conditions by going low-carb, starting with diabetes. For me, it was a yeast condition from exposure to mold and bad diet. If I ate a certain amount of carbs, I would get extreme fatigue. It took a really long time to slowly titrate my carbs up so they didn't cause an overgrowth. I still have to watch my carbs. You may have never experienced this.


    It's simply un-can-do-without-it-able for many people who are suffering and are extremely far away from worrying about a few pounds of muscle loss. If an obese individual ends up losing muscle mass in the process of reconstituting their entire body mass (and improving it), then isn't it a good way to "reset?" Also, I've seen plenty of before & after photos of people who went high-fat, low-carb on the hflc site. Many of them end up quite buff in very short amounts of time. I know you're going to say that's trumped up or fake and unscientific, but to me, it is convincing evidence. Sometimes a picture says a thousand words.

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Never heard of it. You conveniently ignored everything I said, why's that?




     


    Because it's just diversion, like almost everything you say. Plus I don't have time to address all of your overwrought points. I know you're not going to listen and will find further diversion. Apparently I don't have as much time on my hands as you do. 

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭


    Because it's just diversion, like almost everything you say. Plus I don't have time to address all of your overwrought points. I know you're not going to listen and will find further diversion. Apparently I don't have as much time on my hands as you do. 




    So you're steadfastly ignoring my explanations of why I asked you for details on your fat detox claims? You're going to continue to call me a troll after it's been proven that I had a cogent reason for asking you for details? Isn't that incredibly dishonest? 


     


    You've also had the time to respond twice with responses that ignored what I said, so it seems like you have plenty of time. Not to mention that you are still pretending to read my mind. I thought you were interested in truth? Falsely accusing people of having ulterior motives so you can ignore what they say looks more dismissive and dishonest than truth-seeking.

  • ACH85ACH85 ✭✭

    Catching up on this wonderful thread after some time away...


     




    Yes, telling people they don't have to count calories, as Dave Asprey has done with his wonderful, extremely effective, simple, and for me life-changing diet. I am so sold out to this approach for those who are truly suffering, that I will take any opportunity to share things that reinforce the effectiveness of this one bit of advice in particular. 




     


    MLS, the above seems to be the crux of your argument: skipping calorie counting and following BP worked wonders for you so now you recommend it as frequently as possible for the average person who wants to lose fat.


     


    I was an average person who wanted to lose fat, but when I followed standard BP, I discovered I am part of what I believe is a significant minority of people who's appetite is totally killed by ketones. By "going by hunger" I ended up in over a 1000 calorie deficit, and sustained it long enough to cause some metabolic damage. I believe it may have taken me a year or more to get back to baseline. Though I do think the initial switch caused a metabolic "reset" as you describe where I fixed some insulin issues, failing to count calories over the long term was damaging for me. 


     


    Time and again I have seen people come to the forum who, when we analyze their food intake, are massively undernourished. I believe they share my trait of having hunger repressed by ketones to an unhealthy degree. For us, calorie counting is essential while following BP macros, otherwise we don't eat nearly enough. 


     


    Our physiology might be a bit different than yours: your physiology seems to direct you to eat the correct amount of food without counting calories in a low-carb environment, while ours does not. Therefore your personal experience is a poor guide for us, and following your recommendations will lead to metabolic dysfunction.


     


     


    So, it seems to me you are giving recommendations while relying a bit too heavily on your own positive experience and excluding relevant data that doesn't match your worldview.


     


    That's concerning to me, since presumably the people that find their way to the forum are struggling with the BP diet, and might need to hear an alternative viewpoint, especially if they are undernourished. I hope it's clear I'm writing out of concern for them and in the hopes that you might remove a bit of the certainty from your recommendations, not to troll you. 


  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭
    edited July 2016


    Catching up on this wonderful thread after some time away...


     


     


    MLS, the above seems to be the crux of your argument: skipping calorie counting and following BP worked wonders for you so now you recommend it as frequently as possible for the average person who wants to lose fat.


     


    I was an average person who wanted to lose fat, but when I followed standard BP, I discovered I am part of what I believe is a significant minority of people who's appetite is totally killed by ketones. By "going by hunger" I ended up in over a 1000 calorie deficit, and sustained it long enough to cause some metabolic damage. I believe it may have taken me a year or more to get back to baseline. Though I do think the initial switch caused a metabolic "reset" as you describe where I fixed some insulin issues, failing to count calories over the long term was damaging for me. 


     


    Time and again I have seen people come to the forum who, when we analyze their food intake, are massively undernourished. I believe they share my trait of having hunger repressed by ketones to an unhealthy degree. For us, calorie counting is essential while following BP macros, otherwise we don't eat nearly enough. 


     


    Our physiology might be a bit different than yours: your physiology seems to direct you to eat the correct amount of food without counting calories in a low-carb environment, while ours does not. Therefore your personal experience is a poor guide for us, and following your recommendations will lead to metabolic dysfunction.


     


     


    So, it seems to me you are giving recommendations while relying a bit too heavily on your own positive experience and excluding relevant data that doesn't match your worldview.


     


    That's concerning to me, since presumably the people that find their way to the forum are struggling with the BP diet, and might need to hear an alternative viewpoint, especially if they are undernourished. I hope it's clear I'm writing out of concern for them and in the hopes that you might remove a bit of the certainty from your recommendations, not to troll you. 




     


    Thanks for sharing, man! Wow, this is a thoughtful look at the BP experience and what can go wrong/right about it. To tell you the truth, I like the idea of counting calories when you're trying to get more. I think J. Miller feels the same way, and he thinks I don't like counting when it comes to getting more calories. I do. I just haven't had to do that myself. 


    And I DID have a negative experience to start, however, the benefits I experienced when I fully understood the philosophy were numerous. In fact, I can't live without this diet. People think this is a full keto diet, but I beg to differ. Actually, the negative experience I had was from a ketogenic diet. That is decidedly not the Bulletproof approach, I have found after listening to enough podcasts, reading the book, and reading enough of Dave's articles.


    So, the question is, do we throw out the baby with the bathwater when we find that the misunderstood diet can be detrimental? I don't think so. I think we just try to make the diet's message more obvious. The forums seem to be a total critique of the basic principles. Many posters almost completely eschew the main tenets. I am going to hold to the line that in order to lose weight, one need not count—more accurately, limit—calories. The reason I'll do this is that this is one of the principles that sets the diet apart and keeps people from yo-yo dieting and getting frustrated. I believe in it, and everyone I've seen do it right has benefited. Some people gain weight, and if I actually think about it, I gained some weight after getting down way too low (like 160) from a zero-carb diet that almost destroyed my gallbladder. This makes Bulletproof seem like more of a lifestyle that adjusts your body to the appropriate composition for the individual, rather than just a crash diet that makes you look emaciated and anorexic.


    Wouldn't the appropriate response to a forum poster who has fatigue and turns out wasn't eating enough, to just tell them to eat an extra serving of this or that? Or to raise carbs? Rather than tell them to go back to practices that weren't serving them in the past (calorie-counting)? 


    I must say: I can't see recommending that others adjust in patently Bulletproof ways as "concerning." I find the opposite of telling them to do something not Bulletproof as more of an issue.


    Also, let me ask: Did you lose weight, when you weren't getting enough calories but still pretty much following Bulletproof?


  • ACH85ACH85 ✭✭
    edited July 2016


    Wouldn't the appropriate response to a forum poster who has fatigue and turns out wasn't eating enough, to just tell them to eat an extra serving of this or that? Or to raise carbs? Rather than tell them to go back to practices that weren't serving them in the past (calorie-counting)? 


    I must say: I can't see recommending that others adjust in patently Bulletproof ways as "concerning." I find the opposite of telling them to do something not Bulletproof as more of an issue.


    Also, let me ask: Did you lose weight, when you weren't getting enough calories but still pretty much following Bulletproof?




     


    I think telling them to raise carbs and/or eat more is the start of an appropriate response, but can be inadequate for many people: without mentioning the finer points about carbs and water weight, often people who are desperate to lose weight see the scale go up as they add carbs and decide "carbs just aren't for me." Especially because BP does not exist in a vacuum, often people come from Slow Carb, keto, paleo, whatever. At first blush, all of those ideas point to "carbs are evil." This can really put the zap on people's heads by the time they arrive here, which is why I think a period (perhaps only a few days) of macro and calorie counting may be required to help these people understand what their body really requires. So, for many people, I think "eat a bit more carbs and maybe more food" may not be enough, so yeah, a strong voice that anything more is definitely not required concerns me.


     


    This is why my biggest critique of the BP diet has always been the small print under the carbs column on the infographic. "eat a serving of starchy foods a day and take one day to eat more" should not be an afterthought, and as it is currently in fine print many people miss it entirely, then arrive here complaining of serious issues after a month without a refeed. (Hint to the BP team: there should be a weekly timeline across the whole top of the infographic that includes a refeed and ONE exercise day, with larger print saying women and more exercise can require additional refeeds.) 


     


    I lost weight at first, then I'd stop losing weight but also not be hungry, so instead of ramping back up to rebuild my BMR, I'd naturally eat less with hunger, lose a bit more, rinse and repeat. So I did lose weight, but I backed myself into a low-calorie corner (without calorie counting - again just going by hunger.) I was down near 1500 calories/day and when I finally realized my mistake, I could gain fat eating 1700/day. Nutty. Just for reference, my daily burn seems to be around 2450 now, considerably more with activity. 


  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭
    edited July 2016

    Just continuing to fight advice that doesn't work, and blames the individual (rather than bad information and bad food) for their problems. CICO and steady-state cardio in combination has been the prevailing paradigm for years that has fed the corporate and governmental landscape of dietary intervention. Now is the time for things to change. Bulletproof is a huge step in the right direction, and I won't stand by if this lifestyle, which is the antithesis to that horrible lie, starts to be coopted by people claiming quite incorrectly that calorie-counting and steady-state cardio has anything to do with it. Whether you think those things work or not, you're just wrong if you think those things are Bulletproof, or at the very least you're definitely wrong if you think they're part of the major principles and recommendations of this alternative approach.




  • Just continuing to fight advice that doesn't work, and blames the individual (rather than bad information and bad food) for their problems. CICO and steady-state cardio in combination has been the prevailing paradigm for years that has fed the corporate and governmental landscape of dietary intervention. Now is the time for things to change. Bulletproof is a huge step in the right direction, and I won't stand by if this lifestyle, which is the antithesis to that horrible lie, starts to be coopted by people claiming quite incorrectly that calorie-counting and steady-state cardio has anything to do with it. Whether you think those things work or not, you're just wrong if you think those things are Bulletproof, or at the very least you're definitely wrong if you think they're part of the major principles and recommendations of this alternative approach.




     


    Lets agree to disagree.

    Make, [then,] thyself to grow to the same stature as the Greatness which transcends all measure; leap forth from every body; transcend all Time; become Eternity; and [thus] shalt thou know God. Conceiving nothing is impossible unto thyself, think thyself deathless and able to know all,—all arts, all sciences, the way of every life.  – Corpus Hermeticum XI “The Mind of Hermes”

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭


    [...]coopted by people claiming quite incorrectly that calorie-counting and steady-state cardio has anything to do with it. Whether you think those things work or not, you're just wrong if you think those things are Bulletproof, or at the very least you're definitely wrong if you think they're part of the major principles and recommendations of this alternative approach.




    Nobody has said this. Jason has been explaining how you are wrong about the science behind counting calories, not saying that calorie counting is part of Bulletproof. He hasn't mentioned steady state cardio at all. Where are you getting this?

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Lets agree to disagree.




     


    Fine, but the majority of posters tend to pile on my threads that advocate exactly what Dave is saying.

  • Modern Life SurvivalistModern Life Survivalist Saturated Fat Truther ✭✭


    Nobody has said this. Jason has been explaining how you are wrong about the science behind counting calories, not saying that calorie counting is part of Bulletproof. He hasn't mentioned steady state cardio at all. Where are you getting this?




     


    We've had other threads where we've disagreed on steady-state cardio. I'd dig it up, but I don't want to get back into that thread.

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭
    edited July 2016

    I think he's confusing chronic cardio with steady-state cardio.

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭

    As far as the colloquial usage, chronic cardio usually means performing cardio without adequate recovery periods leading to some sort of physiological degradation or burn out. I don't think it is a term recognized in any sort of medical literature, though the colloquial usage does put it outside your MVR.


     


    We could coin the term "chronic CICO" or "chronic calory counting" in the same way, a psychological obsessiveness or overexertion in one specific area that takes something beneficial and turns it detrimental, in this case counting calories. I think there's a term in psychology that would encompass that though, orthoerexic? Orthorexia? It might fall underneath that category.


  • SkeletorSkeletor The Conqueror Worm ✭✭✭


     where's Skeletor to write this shit down!




    Sitting on the sidelines. Reading. Judging.


     


    lol

    "I know how to despise mere cool intelligence. What I want is intelligence matched by pure, physical existence, like a statue." --Yukio Mishima

     

    Let's be friends on MyFitnessPal!

  • sparefilmssparefilms Post-human Construct ✭✭✭


    Sitting on the sidelines. Reading. Judging.




    Plotting your revenge against that do-gooding He-Man!

Sign In or Register to comment.