Naturally thin?

[LordGrover]

I wouldn't waste an hour on Taubes, but then I've read his books and many of his articles and videos.
I was a 'believer' until 1. I began to get ill and 2. I read opposing views for a more rounded understanding.

He's a sensationalist, populist, journalist - nothing more, nothing less.

[J4CKO]

johnwilliams77 said:

TartanPaint said:

Science doesn't prove anything. That's not what science does. Science allows us to reach consensus which can be challenged, by the scientific process, at any time. That's how we change our views on things collectively. Gary Taubes is presenting a hypothesis that is, by his use of the scientific process, well constructed and very credible. (And trust me, he is a first rate scientist, regardless of his expertise in biology or medicine or anything else)

It's not the complete picture, it's one aspect of health and diet, and it's bloody fascinating. I have no idea why anyone would dismiss it with prejudice. That's just wilful ignorance in my mind.

Your anecdote is still irrelevant, you still haven't watched the video (ask me how I can tell) and so I can't engage with you in any meaningful way. So, watch it so we can discuss it, or stop detracting from the discussion.

You said sugar makes me fat. I consume a lot of it and I am not fat. Perhaps if you say something with evidence rather than posting an hour long video I might feel compelled to give it more of my time.

I reckon its the Celery make people Obese

Sugar can make you fat, but not if its part of a number of calories that you use, it has more propensity to cause over indulgence though as it is so compelling and addictive, coupled with the fact that a lot of sugary stuff doesnt take much digestion.

Calories arent all created equal, its a bit like power at the crank vs at the wheels, 300 cals of steak vs 300 cals of sugar, the sugar is easily processed so you get most of the 300 calories where the Steak needs a lot more work to extract the energy from it, breaking down the muscle fibres etc, it isnt as easily turned into glucose, so in terms of net calories you may get 280 from the sugar and 230 from the Steak as you expended more energy processing it.

basically we dont quite work like the "Bomb Calorimiters" used to calculate the energy in food.

Then there is the whole Satiety thing, the steak will stay longer in your stomach keeping you fuller and secondly, it doesnt spike your blood sugar anywhere as much, so you dont end up hungry again soon after and eating yet more.

It is pretty complicated, and I dont profess to understand it all but basically, getting loads of calories from sugar is not a good idea, and can, make you gain weight.

[NDA]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I only eat one meal a day and yet I'm 16 stone.

It takes 4 hours to eat.

[johnwilliams77]

J4CKO said:

It is pretty complicated, and I dont profess to understand it all but basically, getting loads of calories from sugar is not a good idea, and can, make you gain weight.

Seems to work quite well for the best runners in the world (with a very high carb diet)

[TartanPaint]

Flibble said:

As compelling and fascinating as it is, it's just not supported by the facts, hence being dismissed.

The fact that you can lose weight and reduce cholesterol while eating a largely sugar based diet, despite Taubes' assertions. The twinkie diet is a class counter-example of his theories.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.d...

I'm not going to say it's a good thing, but it rather flies in the face of the "sugar is pure evil" assertion.

Edited by Flibble on Thursday 24th August 13:52

Firstly, thanks for engaging constructively! Good links, thanks. I haven't read the twinkie diet, but you might also find this idea interesting:

https://deniseminger.com/2015/10/06/in-defense-of-...

A summary video of that long blog post:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBBtQ4QwWxg


In a nutshell, ketosis is good up at the high-fat, zero-carb end of the scale. What if there's a different magic happening at the zero-fat, high-carb end of the scale? It's a cool idea.

And for balance, a half-baked critique/response from Dr Jason Fung

https://intensivedietarymanagement.com/thoughts-on...

[hyphen]

Who is this Taubes bloke?

As far as I knew, Dr Lustig (MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology), is credited for the work on sugar's impact on obesity, in particular, this Youtube video that went viral: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Edited by hyphen on Thursday 24th August 14:38

[TartanPaint]

hyphen said:

Who is this Taubes bloke?

As far as I knew, Dr Lustig (MD, UCSF Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology), is credited for the work on Sugar's impact on obesity, in particulate this Youtube video that went viral: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBnniua6-oM

Taubes credits Lustig and many others. Taubes is a good, accessible spokesman for the idea of low-carb health gains. Don't fixate on him as a person (although I think he's a good scientist, in that he follows a scientific process in his claims, right or wrong and is open to discussion of his hypotheses. ) He just happens to be a reasonably articulate author/speaker and has had lots of practice at explaining this subject in a neat 1-hour presentation.

[gweaver]

Bill said:

NorthDave said:

I'm not Lactose intolerant. The food test identified that Casein was a protein in dairy which doesn't agree with me. This might well be similar to the protein you mention above.

Casein intolerance is an allergic reaction and can cause absorption issues, so still doesn't explain your weight gain.

Consider that an allergic reaction causes an immune response, and might cause cortisol (the stress hormone) to spike, possibly with knock on effects on other hormone levels.
What do you think that might do to your metabolism?

[ORD]

gweaver said:

Bill said:

NorthDave said:

I'm not Lactose intolerant. The food test identified that Casein was a protein in dairy which doesn't agree with me. This might well be similar to the protein you mention above.

Casein intolerance is an allergic reaction and can cause absorption issues, so still doesn't explain your weight gain.

Consider that an allergic reaction causes an immune response, and might cause cortisol (the stress hormone) to spike, possibly with knock on effects on other hormone levels.
What do you think that might do to your metabolism?

A reasonably hypothesis, but isnt that consistent with the point I made above - i.e. loads of complex stuff goes on, but most of it is tinkering at the margins relative to the important of the basic calories in / calories out element?

At university, I needed about 5,000 calories a day because I was very physically active. Getting that from "healthy" foods is genuinely difficult. If you turn to desserts (high sugar and high fat), it is very easy. High sugar foods are very calorific. If I had to get fat very quickly, I would certainly turn to junk food, but that is almost all because I could easily get 10,000 calories a day from that rubbish,

[Bill]

gweaver said:

Consider that an allergic reaction causes an immune response, and might cause cortisol (the stress hormone) to spike, possibly with knock on effects on other hormone levels.
What do you think that might do to your metabolism?

Speed it up - fight or flight.

[Foliage]

OP sounds like you have a life, most people who are fat and complain about it don't have one. They have no hobbies, sit eating chocolate biscuits wallowing in their own self pity, while on facebook or watching soap operas wishing for someone else's life.

[J4CKO]

johnwilliams77 said:

J4CKO said:

It is pretty complicated, and I dont profess to understand it all but basically, getting loads of calories from sugar is not a good idea, and can, make you gain weight.

Seems to work quite well for the best runners in the world (with a very high carb diet)

Yeah, because everyone is an elite runner.

The general population shouldn't get the bulk of their calories from carbs, especially not refined sugar.

[otolith]

Eat owls.

[Long Drax]

RobM77 said:

This is the downside of the welfare state - people let themselves fall because they know the state will catch them. What I find depressing and a bit surprising is the large number of people who don't care about their health and how they feel, provided they're alive.

Absolute bullocks, mate.

Compare the obesity rate of say the U.S.A. with Sweden. Or do you consider that the former is also a de facto welfare state.

[NorthDave]

gweaver said:

Consider that an allergic reaction causes an immune response, and might cause cortisol (the stress hormone) to spike, possibly with knock on effects on other hormone levels.
What do you think that might do to your metabolism?

I did start to respond earlier but decided the weight of opinion in the thread was too much to get involved in a debate.

By changing this one element of my diet I can put on 1kg per week or stay stable (or lose it if it is the cause of putting the weight on). The dhal itself is only a couple of hundred calories and is replaced by other foods (of I assume similar calorific content) so this doesn't explain the weight loss.

I'm not a scientist so can't explain it. Eating dairy makes me pile on the pounds. Not eating it doesn't. This was highlighted in my food test.

[RobM77]

Long Drax said:

RobM77 said:

This is the downside of the welfare state - people let themselves fall because they know the state will catch them. What I find depressing and a bit surprising is the large number of people who don't care about their health and how they feel, provided they're alive.

Absolute bullocks, mate.

Compare the obesity rate of say the U.S.A. with Sweden. Or do you consider that the former is also a de facto welfare state.

I didn't state this was the only factor involved. It's an established downside of a welfare state though that people take advantage of it. On the same scale, if you cut or abolish it, people who genuinely need help miss out. The difficulty is striking the balance.

[Flibble]

RobM77 said:

Long Drax said:

RobM77 said:

This is the downside of the welfare state - people let themselves fall because they know the state will catch them. What I find depressing and a bit surprising is the large number of people who don't care about their health and how they feel, provided they're alive.

Absolute bullocks, mate.

Compare the obesity rate of say the U.S.A. with Sweden. Or do you consider that the former is also a de facto welfare state.

I didn't state this was the only factor involved. It's an established downside of a welfare state though that people take advantage of it. On the same scale, if you cut or abolish it, people who genuinely need help miss out. The difficulty is striking the balance.

If you have a really pared back welfare state, like the US, you end up with people at the bottom buying cheap foods. The cheapest foods currently are the least healthy, which tends to exacerbate the health issue. Improving the welfare state could help cut obesity by allowing people to eat better food.

[LordGrover]

They'd still have to choose to eat real food rather than the processed products.

[Flibble]

LordGrover said:

They'd still have to choose to eat real food rather than the processed products.

True, but then at least they have the option.

[gweaver]

NorthDave said:

I did start to respond earlier but decided the weight of opinion in the thread was too much to get involved in a debate.

By changing this one element of my diet I can put on 1kg per week or stay stable (or lose it if it is the cause of putting the weight on). The dhal itself is only a couple of hundred calories and is replaced by other foods (of I assume similar calorific content) so this doesn't explain the weight loss.

I'm not a scientist so can't explain it. Eating dairy makes me pile on the pounds. Not eating it doesn't. This was highlighted in my food test.

I am a scientist, but not an expert. I can think of a few hypotheses of the top of my head:
1) An allergic stress response to dairy is causing you to eat more
2) An allergic stress response to dairy is causing you to metabolise food differently
3) The microbes in your gut (there's a whole ecosystem down there!) just love dairy
4) Dairy is altering the microbial ecosystem in your gut

Of course it's difficult to test these. Probably the more important questions are:
1) Should you completely avoid dairy?
2) Is a little bit ok on a frequent basis?
3) Is a lot ok on occasion?
4) If you avoid dairy for a long time (this might lead to changes in the microbes in your gut), can you go back onto it without undesirable effects?

In any case, it sounds like daily copious quantities of cheese may be off the menu. You have my sympathies!