Caporegime
Quite an assertion from the man who spouts rubbish like this "Calories is made up nonsense to get everyone to consume carb products".
Anyone using Wegovy?
- Thread starter Diagro
- Start date
Quite an assertion from the man who spouts rubbish like this "Calories is made up nonsense to get everyone to consume carb products".
Man of Honour
This is in another thread.
My diabetes is getting worse and it's not due to me being obese, they now accept my innards aren't working correctly.
I have just been put on Semaglutide for free and looking at Google, Wegovy is also semaglutide.
I haven't been on it a week yet but I've had side effects such as tiredness and looking grey in my face according to other people.
For the first time in my life I got sent home from work last week because of the side effects but they sent me to the diabetic ward first for tests (lucky I work there).
As a diabetic calories aren't the issue, carbs are the issue so as Platinum says eat those giant steaks and the weight should drop off.
Eight months ago I cut my carbs and I've lost two stone so I've had no oatcakes, naan bread, white bread, bananas etc.
When I go out I have mixed grills and treat myself to a couple of chips.
Funnily enough my semaglutide is costing the NHS £100 a box.
My diabetes is getting worse and it's not due to me being obese, they now accept my innards aren't working correctly.
I have just been put on Semaglutide for free and looking at Google, Wegovy is also semaglutide.
I haven't been on it a week yet but I've had side effects such as tiredness and looking grey in my face according to other people.
For the first time in my life I got sent home from work last week because of the side effects but they sent me to the diabetic ward first for tests (lucky I work there).
As a diabetic calories aren't the issue, carbs are the issue so as Platinum says eat those giant steaks and the weight should drop off.
Eight months ago I cut my carbs and I've lost two stone so I've had no oatcakes, naan bread, white bread, bananas etc.
When I go out I have mixed grills and treat myself to a couple of chips.
Funnily enough my semaglutide is costing the NHS £100 a box.
Last edited:
Soldato
Caporegime
I just spent the last 20mins looking at scientific journals !
I'll skip to the conclusion.
I'll skip to the conclusion.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
Rob is talking in general terms for humans who are functioning correctly, Rob however is quite a poorly man so in his case he can't eat a lot.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
All diets usedin the present study were liquid homogenates prepared in the metabolic kitchen in sufficient quantity for each periodandimmediately frozen.
The composition of each regimenisshowninTableIII.
There's no table 3 in the document.
I've seen loads of these "ketogenic diet" studies where they give people 100+g of carbs per day, so colour me skeptical when they say the make up of the "food" liquid they gave them is included when it isn't.
Eating 4 times a day at 3 hour intervals is not also conducive to staying in ketosis. the whole point of the argument was that you can consume MORE on a keto type diet whilst still losing weight, eating 800 calories a day WILL reduce your BMR massively (as the study also notes). Fasting and Keto observed a 6-7% increase in weight loss, they've categorised that as "identical".
I mean, they had them on 800 calories and then 1200 calories for extended periods of time - thats not a ketogenic diet, thats a starvation diet whether or not it includes carbs is almost irrelevant at that point.
Last edited:
Caporegime
I want to take your argument on it but considering the source of the article…Columbia University in New York, vs …
Would you blame me for not trusting your argument? And take that these doctors knows what they are doing at face value.
Last edited:
Caporegime
I also came across this "opinion piece"
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The opinion itself is opinion, but it is backed up by a lot of scientific papers. It is therefore perhaps more useful if one read all the papers.
The Atkin’s diet controversy - PMC
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
The opinion itself is opinion, but it is backed up by a lot of scientific papers. It is therefore perhaps more useful if one read all the papers.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
thats up to you at the end of the day, I can look at that study and poke so many holes in it that I find its value extremely limited - on the one hand their data shows a 7% benefit for a certain type of diet and they've called that "identical", and then they also put people on 800-1200 calories for several weeks, noted the drop off in BMR and then called that a "keto" diet, which is isn't - you couldn't do 800-1200 calories with 10 days of fasting long term, thats not a sustainable diet its literally starving people for 30-40 days and then saying "all forms of starvation are identical if you ignore a 7% difference"
Wow, theres so much FUD spread thereI also came across this "opinion piece"
The Atkin’s diet controversy - PMC
The opinion itself is opinion, but it is backed up by a lot of scientific papers. It is therefore perhaps more useful if one read all the papers.
This makes so much sense now as we discover that "normal high carbohydrate dietary habits" was the main cause for original obesity in first place
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
I also came across this "opinion piece"
The Atkin’s diet controversy - PMC
The opinion itself is opinion, but it is backed up by a lot of scientific papers. It is therefore perhaps more useful if one read all the papers.
^ To start with, low-carbohydrate diets force the body to use fats as the main energy source, leading to ketosis. The brain, thereby devoid of its main energy source, glucose, is forced to make use of the metabolic breakdown products of fats and ketone bodies, leading to common side effects: nausea, dizziness, constipation, headache, fatigue, and smelly breath. In addition, ketosis leads to metabolic dehydration whereby the body consumes its own water stored within the body’s broken down proteins, leading to initial additional weight loss probably over and above that caused by a conventional low-calorie, low-fat diet.
Whoever wrote this apparently wants to ignore the fact that gluconeogenesis is a thing. I don't get any of those so called "side effects", like what nonsense is that about.
Some people do get a little of this when they first make the switch because once you are not chronically inflammed from eating sugar all day every day you start carrying less water which also retains less electrolytes, so you need to eat a bit more salt and that prevents the so called "keto flu" and muscle cramps from creeping in. But its just an adjustment, it is not a long term problem if you know what you are doing.
"As recommended by the American Dietetic Association"
The organisation started by the protege of Kellog, Lenna F. Cooper, both members of the 7th day adventist church who believe that eating meat causes masturbation, good source of "science" then
Here's another example of good science from the 7th day adventists, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4191896/
their conclusion after "adjusting" the data, vegetarian diets are healthiest for all cause mortality - their raw data before adjustment however shows that the "meat eating" cohort had the lowest risk of all cause mortality
and another; high protein diet causes heart disease https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/...lerosis-some-data-in-mice-and-some-in-people/
guess what the "high protein diet" they gave people was, a protein shake the no.1 ingredient of which was glucose - in other words what they proved was that giving people a high glucose shake every day causes heart disease but they report the protein as the issue
much of modern "nutrition science" is completely morally bankrupt, bought and paid for by the food companies in america who fund 90% of nutrition research - and they fund conflicting research deliberately to confuse people so people just give up and eat their crap (according to someone that used to work for them)
the other good one I read recently was I saw a doctor on TV saying how "dark chocolate is good for you" - in the study they referenced they actually gave people a dark chocolate drink PLUS 10 times the amount of flavanols - so not dark chocolate at all, but a bunch of chemicals extracted from cocoa beans, you then get doctors on TV going around telling everyone a chocolate bar is "healthy" but neglecting to mention that to get that amount of flavanols you'd need to eat 10 bars of chocolate - obviously NOT healthy - guess who it was funded by, oh year, Mars
Last edited:
Caporegime
Are you saying this is FUD?
Caporegime
I did say the opinion itself is an opinion, there is a reason I said that. Which is why I said the sentence following it about reading the papers.
But again, do I trust a random on ocuk or researchers?
Who would you suggest I choose?
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
you don't need to read the papers, the sentences they've written flat out don't make any sense logically if you know anything about basic human biology (e.g. gluconeogenesis)
Caporegime
Why not? Just take your word on it?
Pardon by bluntness, and your credibility comes from which research you’ve conducted?
Or perhaps I think it’s more prudent to read scientific papers and draw one’s conclusion than believe ocuk?
You have a sample of 1 in your own self…I too did lose 4st by calorie counting…so between us, we cancel each other out.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
I just meant you don't need to read the papers they reference when the statement they make is so obviously illogical to human biology - when people eat "enough" protein, the excess is converted to glucose via gluconeogenesis, so for that author to say that on an atkins type diet there is no glucose for the brain is obviously wrong, referencing a paper wouldn't help that assertion
I did also lose 4.5 stone doing calorie restriction in my late 20's, I managed to stick with it for about 3 months, and I hated it, I was tired, couldn't concentrate and I gave up and put it all back on over the next few years - its not completely unviable short term, but its also not sustainable long term - I've lost 6 stone on low carb - I'm the same weight now as when I was about 16 years old.
I find low carb to be completely sustainable long term, and that makes sense when you review the research that shows that hominids were low carb for 4.5 million years
I'm not a doctor, or a researcher, but thats appeal to authority fallacy, if you want to blindly follow someone with letters after their name thats up to you
Last edited:
Caporegime
I think if you eat 3000 cal everyday* (your choice of diet) for 6 months with NO fasting, and see your before and after weight. It would be interesting huh?
* adjusted to create a 500 cal net positive if exercise involved.
* adjusted to create a 500 cal net positive if exercise involved.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 11,375
I eat to satiety and fast only when I'm not hungry, eating a set number of "calories" has no interest to me - I track them from time to time out of interest (and mainly to keep an eye on my macros) but I wouldn't force myself to over or under eat on any particular day as thats the whole point of how I eat now
Long-term effects of a ketogenic diet in obese patients - PMC
Although various studies have examined the short-term effects of a ketogenic diet in reducing weight in obese patients, its long-term effects on various physical and biochemical parameters are not known. To determine the effects of a 24-week ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
it also references "Brehm et al (23) showed that obese women on a low carbohydrate ketogenic diet lost 8.5 kg over six months compared with 4.2 kg lost by those in the low fat diet group"
so thats another study where they were calorie matched, yet the low carb group lost more weight than the low fat group on the same caloric intake
but cico though
Last edited:
Are you not getting such impression from language used? A scientific article should be more specific. Either they can find a problem or they can't
However, numerous studies have shown that low carbohydrate diets are unlikely to produce significant long-term weight loss and may lead to serious health problems. The caution of leading medical and nutrition organizations worldwide against all low carbohydrate diets stems from the fact that these diets greatly increase fat and protein consumption, which could lead to many serious ill effects, and greatly restrict consumption of essential nutrients: minerals, trace elements and vitamins, and fiber—all of which promote improved health and help prevent many diseases.
However, being unrealistic and unconventional, the low-carbohydrate diet is neither palatable nor enjoyable enough to be followed for a long time, resulting ultimately in an insignificant difference in weight loss compared with low-calorie, low-fat diets—hence the inability to conclude with confidence whether the weight loss is actually due to the low-carbohydrate diet. This was clearly highlighted by the two longest (12 months) randomized investigations.
However, being unrealistic and unconventional, the low-carbohydrate diet is neither palatable nor enjoyable enough to be followed for a long time, resulting ultimately in an insignificant difference in weight loss compared with low-calorie, low-fat diets—hence the inability to conclude with confidence whether the weight loss is actually due to the low-carbohydrate diet. This was clearly highlighted by the two longest (12 months) randomized investigations.
Caporegime
Did you miss the bit where I SPECIFICALLY said it is an opinion, why did you think I said that? both the first time I posted it, and the 2nd time I replied to Andy?
p.s. I am losing weight and eats carbs everyday...so much for carbs are bad. After the initial water weight loss, the trend is still going downwards. Just had a pastry for breakfast, some multi grain rice for lunch and white rice with other things for dinner. I even put sugar in my coffee...
Moderation, balanced diet, and don't eat too much.
A diet is pointless if it sucks and you can't do it long term, what I do is eat the same thing, but merely less of it. That's it.
Last edited: