Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Avoiding Carbs, is this healthy/good/too much?

Options
1356

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    @Bruno26 why do you just ignore posts that provide evidence against your view? Surely if your view was correct you could refute any contrary information put to you? Why do you just post links by people with financial incentives in promoting the high fat cult? You haven't given one shred of reputable information out, you've filled pages with dangerous and false information with zero regard for peoples' health. Any sane person in your position would question the fact that there is no evidence to back up their claims, but not you. In my view spurious health claims such as yours with no evidence and purposeful ignorance of requests for evidence, because it goes against science and common sense and puts peoples' health at risk, warrants a ban. Man up and answer some of the questions about your information.

    Some of your language / hostility/ encouraging a ban doesn't deserve a response.

    It's actually not my view you've contradicted- it's a view of one of the worlds leading professors of sports science that I happen to agree with!
    Do you know more than a professor of sports science?



    This person actually agreed with you until they changed their view and admitted they were wrong. There are vested interests involved in any book or study to do with nutrition regardless of what angle is taken.

    Is Mark Sisson also wrong?

    You're actually missing the point by taking a short term view. 2 people on the modern western diet - one given fat as fuel the other given carbs as fuel . The carb person will probably perform better. It's takes time (anything from 4/5 days to a few months) to become fat adapted. In the long run fat will be far more effective as fuel for our bodies.


  • Options
    #63
    popolive
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭popolive


    boredatwork82 wrote: »
    I am trying to lose a bit (a lot!) of weight, down about 3 stone already but I have started to get a bit slack, so I have decided to focus more on my diet than ever before.

    The only carbs I am eating is a bowl of porridge.

    Anyways this is a sample of what I am doing.

    Morning: Wheatgrass, flaxseed mixed with water, bowl of porridge with milk, and mug of green tea

    Mid morning about 10 grapes

    Lunch: large lunch box of leaves, with some red onion and celery, half a lemon squeezed over it, 1 tin tuna infused with chilli, garlic and lemongrass (did this myself with a drop of coconut oil), and 2 hard boiled eggs.

    Mid afternoon: more grapes.

    Late dinner: large helping of leaves, some home made guacamole (chillis, avocado, garlic, coriander, diced red onion, lime juice), 2 bbq chicken fillets, 1 bbq sausage.

    My breakfast will probably be the same most mornings, but my worry is that I am eating too much of the healthy stuff even if its healthy.

    My lunch today is about 1 and a half chicken fillets, with a large lunch box of salad, 2 hard boiled eggs and an avocado too much.

    Anyone want to critique or offer opinions on this. I have just had a realization that I am ridiculously uneducated when it comes to nutrition - hence why I have so much weight to lose.

    From the above list: Make the porridge with water instead of milk. Milk is high in calories without making you feel full. Additionally: ''According to some, milk causes osteoporosis because it is high in calcium and low in magnesium.'' source: http://www.4.waisays.com/magn-calc.htm

    I would eat a grapefruit instead of a few grapes.

    Cut out the : ''1 bbq sausage''

    And while avocados are amazing you realistically should limit your intake to half an avocado and a tablespoon of fish oil.


    Non expert advice*


  • Options
    #64
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Some of your language / hostility/ encouraging a ban doesn't deserve a response.

    It's actually not my view you've contradicted- it's a view of one of the worlds leading professors of sports science!

    Someone who actually agreed with you until they changed their view and admitted they were wrong. There are vested interests involved in any book or study to do with nutrition regardless of what angle is taken.

    You're actually missing the point by tak

    Again, total waffle and avoidance. I'm not contradicting anything, I'm relaying fact.

    I hope you're not saying Mark Sisson is a profressor? He didn't do undergraduate let alone post graduate so that's an impossibility.
    In my younger days, I was on the track toward medical school for a while (BA in Biology from Williams College), but I got detoured by a different track – literally – and a dream of making the US Olympic team for the marathon. As the decades passed, I realized that my calling was as an independent researcher, critical thinker, motivator, and communicator

    Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/about-2/mark-sisson/#ixzz35H4cLcWQ

    He has no scientific credentials whatsoever, the last sentence in that quote is a fancy way of saying he's a con artist.

    I'll ask you a question that's often asked to religious fundamentalists. They tend to avoid the question in pretty funny ways but avoidance of it shows that they have made their mind up and will not change it under any circumstances which would mean that there is no reason to trust them.

    Brruno26, what would it take for you to change your views?


  • Options
    #65
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    Again, total waffle and avoidance. I'm not contradicting anything, I'm relaying fact.

    I hope you're not saying Mark Sisson is a profressor? He didn't do undergraduate let alone post graduate so that's an impossibility.



    Read more: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/about-2/mark-sisson/#ixzz35H4cLcWQ

    He has no scientific credentials whatsoever, the last sentence in that quote is a fancy way of saying he's a con artist.

    I'll ask you a question that's often asked to religious fundamentalists. They tend to avoid the question in pretty funny ways but avoidance of it shows that they have made their mind up and will not change it under any circumstances which would mean that there is no reason to trust them.

    Brruno26, what would it take for you to change your views?

    Since when does having a BA in Biology equal no science credentials?

    Did you read my post properly? Are you more knowledgeable than Tim Noakes?


    The problem is you are convinced you have all the facts. Have you ever thought you might be wrong?

    You're also convinced you must be some sort of scientist (Tim Noakes) to be accepted.

    My view would change if I went back to my old diet, ate as much as I wanted of bread, rice, pasta, processed food etc. and stayed in the same shape and felt as good as I do now. At the end of the day it is what works for the individual. However I'm convinced the methods I follow will work for anyone. See the buzz created in South Africa by him. He's also not in it for the money as he has set up a not for profit foundation.

    Same question to you?


  • Options
    #66
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    My view would change if I went back to my old diet, ate as much as I wanted of bread, rice, pasta, processed food etc. and stayed in the same shape and felt as good as I do now.

    Will you ever go back to your old diet?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    Will you ever go back to your old diet?

    If sometime I want to get fat again and feel less energetic and rely on Lucozade sport and Jaffa cakes for energy during exercise then yes!

    Otherwise no - what idiot would do that?

    Answer my question are you more knowledgeable than Tim Noakes and / or Mark Sisson?


  • Options
    #68
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    You say the only thing that would change your views is if you went back to your old diet.

    You say you wont go back to your old diet.

    You have just said you will never change your views.

    You are a self admitted zealot.


  • Options
    #69
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    You say the only thing that would change your views is if you went back to your old diet.

    You say you wont go back to your old diet.

    You have just said you will never change your views.

    You are a self admitted zealot.

    Ha ye I'm a zealot- you're gas!

    However your also such a contradiction and a hypocrite - avoiding 2 questions I've asked!


  • Options
    #70
    Mick Murdock
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Mick Murdock


    I'm one of the weirdos who voted nay to the Jaffa Cakes debate. :o


  • Options
    #71
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    popolive wrote: »
    From the above list: Make the porridge with water instead of milk. Milk is high in calories without making you feel full.

    And while avocados are amazing you realistically should limit your intake to half an avocado and a tablespoon of fish oil.


    Non expert advice*

    I'm sure they will feel fuller with porridge made with milk rather than water.
    Why should they only eat half an avocado?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    However your also such a contradiction and a hypocrite - avoiding 2 questions I've asked!

    I've noticed that you can't handle more than one point in any post at a time, sometimes not even that. You haven't directly addressed any of my posts until now, I'm not going to address any of yours from now on, as you a zealot, a lost cause, a waste of time.


  • Options
    #73
    popolive
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭popolive


    I only read the OP . What did this thread mutate into ? :D


  • Options
    #74
    Mick Murdock
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Mick Murdock


    popolive wrote: »
    I only read the OP . What did this thread mutate into ? :D

    Same as every other thread here as far as I can see! :)


  • Options
    #75
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    I've noticed that you can't handle more than one point in any post at a time, sometimes not even that. You haven't directly addressed any of my posts until now, I'm not going to address any of yours from now on, as you a zealot, a lost cause, a waste of time.

    To quote jack Nicholson "You can't handle the truth."

    Are you more knowledgable than Tim Noakes?


  • Options
    #76
    Shakespeare's Sister
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,412 ✭✭✭Shakespeare's Sister


    Limiting carbs definitely benefits me but I couldn't cut them out completely - fibre is obviously good.
    I just keep them to a minimum and don't eat any "white" carbs.
    To completely cut them out means cutting out fruit and veg, which is obviously inadvisable.


  • Options
    #77
    Essien
    Registered Users Posts: 2,985 ✭✭✭Essien


    Mick Murdock wrote: »
    Same as every other thread here as far as I can see! :)

    In fairness, it's usually grand. I have noticed an influx of nutrition nazis around here in the past couple of months though. I'm sure it hasn't always been as bad.


  • Options
    #78
    Mick Murdock
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,543 ✭✭✭Mick Murdock


    I'm enjoying the back and forth tbh! I'm surprised Bruno has so many detractors here (not saying I agree or disagree. I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable folk). I would have expected more people to be on his side of the low carb/high fat debate..

    I admire the hell out of anybody who can stick at it. I've never taken heroin but if it's worse than carb withdrawal I certainly wouldn't like to try!


  • Options
    #79
    popolive
    Closed Accounts Posts: 166 ✭✭popolive


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    I'm sure they will feel fuller with porridge made with milk rather than water.
    Why should they only eat half an avocado?


    I took a gamble and assumed the OP was looking for a way to cut back on his calories without causing his nutritional requirements to suffer. Avocados and milk have high calories. The former has high value nutritionally but the latter is not as great as people think. Also there is no nutritional need to eat any more avocado beyond a certain point when your body already took what it needed. Time then to diversify your diet. He should eat something like Kale if he needs calcium and magnesium.


    Edit: Just wanted to add that experts don't recommend eating porridge for the milk but because of the properties of oats even though many people assume milk should go into it. If the OP does not feel full with his diet then milk is not the solution. Milk does not make you feel full. Drinking your meals does not make you feel full. Example : eating ten oranges will keep you full for a long time but drinking orange juice from ten oranges and throwing away all the pulp and fibre will leave you hungry in 20 minutes.


  • Options
    #80
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    generic2012 wrote: »
    I've noticed that you can't handle more than one point in any post at a time, sometimes not even that. You haven't directly addressed any of my posts until now, I'm not going to address any of yours from now on, as you a zealot, a lost cause, a waste of time.


    Can someone reply with valid reasons telling me that Tim Noakes is wrong please?


  • Options
    #81
    Clearlier
    Registered Users Posts: 4,454 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Can someone reply telling me that Tim Noakes is wrong please?

    Tim Noakes is wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    Clearlier
    Registered Users Posts: 4,454 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    Clearlier wrote: »
    Tim Noakes is wrong.

    To get a bit more specific. Tim Noakes is a bit of a zealot on the issue of diet. He was quite clear in his earlier writings that high carb was the way to go. He has since discovered that high carb wasn't such a good idea and that the best way to manage his bodys response to decades of high carb is to go very low carb. That's great but he has then generalised feom the particular to the universal which is not scientific. He spends a lot of time announcing corroborating evidence and I happen to think that the western world could do with adopting a few of his ideas but for the moment anyway (based on my reading his twitter feed) he has given up nuance and balanced argument in favour of advocacy.

    The kalenjin tribe are an example of a society that lives almost exclusively off carbs but hasn't got all of the disease and illness that he ascribes to those who follow a high carb diet


  • Options
    #83
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Clearlier wrote: »
    To get a bit more specific. Tim Noakes is a bit of a zealot on the issue of diet. He was quite clear in his earlier writings that high carb was the way to go. He has since discovered that high carb wasn't such a good idea and that the best way to manage his bodys response to decades of high carb is to go very low carb. That's great but he has then generalised feom the particular to the universal which is not scientific. He spends a lot of time announcing corroborating evidence and I happen to think that the western world could do with adopting a few of his ideas but for the moment anyway (based on my reading his twitter feed) he has given up nuance and balanced argument in favour of advocacy.

    So he's right then?


  • Options
    #84
    Clearlier
    Registered Users Posts: 4,454 ✭✭✭Clearlier


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    So he's right then?

    No. I just added an example to my previous post.


  • Options
    #85
    mulbot
    Registered Users Posts: 1,794 ✭✭✭mulbot


    Clearlier wrote: »
    To get a bit more specific. Tim Noakes is a bit of a zealot on the issue of diet. He was quite clear in his earlier writings that high carb was the way to go. He has since discovered that high carb wasn't such a good idea and that the best way to manage his bodys response to decades of high carb is to go very low carb. That's great but he has then generalised feom the particular to the universal which is not scientific. He spends a lot of time announcing corroborating evidence and I happen to think that the western world could do with adopting a few of his ideas but for the moment anyway (based on my reading his twitter feed) he has given up nuance and balanced argument in favour of advocacy.

    The kalenjin tribe are an example of a society that lives almost exclusively off carbs but hasn't got all of the disease and illness that he ascribes to those who follow a high carb diet

    Any idea of the source of their carbs? I would think the carbs aren't of the "western world" type e.g. processed,industry type


  • Options
    #86
    metamorphosis
    Registered Users Posts: 4,991 ✭✭✭metamorphosis


    Some tribes ferment the food they eat. I cannot speak on the example above but other tribes have and do ferment much of what they eat when its from the earth.

    Also, remember 2 points that are in the charter. One is to attack the post, not the poster and two is to provide scientific evidence or links (wiki and google are not relevant). This applies to both sides of the argument. If people are going to be so stubborn (which is the norm in nutritional science since everyones views are the correct ones, right?), then at least provide decent links for others to make their own informed opinions.

    I see this thread has again gone down the 'primal' route. We don't eat primally today people. Wake up.The food environment has changed so so much. Also, our ancestors ate grains, ate meant and fish that resembles nothing of today (even Irish grass fed beef and even if you farm your own hens and eat their precious golden eggs). They ate bugs and insects. Primal is now a brand with a line of products from books to vitamins (get some sun and east veg and fruit) to supplements to food items too. Back then it was about SURVIVING, now it is about optimal living and you can do that in a variety of ways nutritionally and taking other lifestyle factors into consideration.

    Taking elements of what mark throws out and then build up around it is good. Meat, fish, fruit, veg are good places to start and then personalize around it. maybe a little dairy etc. It is always wise to cut down wheat consumption. There is a large grey area. It is not black and white for 6 bllion people


  • Options
    #87
    generic2012
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,013 ✭✭✭generic2012


    metamorphosis wrote: »
    Some tribes ferment the food they eat. I cannot speak on the example above but other tribes have and do ferment much of what they eat when its from the earth.

    Also, remember 2 points that are in the charter. One is to attack the post, not the poster and two is to provide scientific evidence or links (wiki and google are not relevant). This applies to both sides of the argument. If people are going to be so stubborn (which is the norm in nutritional science since everyones views are the correct ones, right?), then at least provide decent links for others to make their own informed opinions.

    I see this thread has again gone down the 'primal' route. We don't eat primally today people. Wake up.The food environment has changed so so much. Also, our ancestors ate grains, ate meant and fish that resembles nothing of today (even Irish grass fed beef and even if you farm your own hens and eat their precious golden eggs). They ate bugs and insects. Primal is now a brand with a line of products from books to vitamins (get some sun and east veg and fruit) to supplements to food items too. Back then it was about SURVIVING, now it is about optimal living and you can do that in a variety of ways nutritionally and taking other lifestyle factors into consideration.

    Taking elements of what mark throws out and then build up around it is good. Meat, fish, fruit, veg are good places to start and then personalize around it. maybe a little dairy etc. It is always wise to cut down wheat consumption. There is a large grey area. It is not black and white for 6 bllion people

    Agree with everything apart from the wheat part. What about moving any HFLC and Paleo discussion to the religion forums where they would be most suited?


  • Options
    #88
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    metamorphosis wrote: »
    Some tribes ferment the food they eat. I cannot speak on the example above but other tribes have and do ferment much of what they eat when its from the earth.

    Also, remember 2 points that are in the charter. One is to attack the post, not the poster and two is to provide scientific evidence or links (wiki and google are not relevant). This applies to both sides of the argument. If people are going to be so stubborn (which is the norm in nutritional science since everyones views are the correct ones, right?), then at least provide decent links for others to make their own informed opinions.

    I see this thread has again gone down the 'primal' route. We don't eat primally today people. Wake up.The food environment has changed so so much. Also, our ancestors ate grains, ate meant and fish that resembles nothing of today (even Irish grass fed beef and even if you farm your own hens and eat their precious golden eggs). They ate bugs and insects. Primal is now a brand with a line of products from books to vitamins (get some sun and east veg and fruit) to supplements to food items too. Back then it was about SURVIVING, now it is about optimal living and you can do that in a variety of ways nutritionally and taking other lifestyle factors into consideration.

    Taking elements of what mark throws out and then build up around it is good. Meat, fish, fruit, veg are good places to start and then personalize around it. maybe a little dairy etc. It is always wise to cut down wheat consumption. There is a large grey area. It is not black and white for 6 bllion people

    generic2012 wrote: »
    Agree with everything apart from the wheat part. What about moving any HFLC and Paleo discussion to the religion forums where they would be most suited?

    I agree with all of that except I'd move generic2012 to the religious forum!


  • Options
    #89
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,552 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    generic2012 wrote: »
    What about moving any HFLC and Paleo discussion to the religion forums where they would be most suited?


    That's unfair to posters like ford2600 who believe in the benefits of HFLC because it works for them and don't push it as a silver bullet.


  • Options
    #90
    Bruno26
    Registered Users Posts: 979 ✭✭✭Bruno26


    Mick Murdock wrote: »
    I'm enjoying the back and forth tbh! I'm surprised Bruno has so many detractors here (not saying I agree or disagree. I'll leave that to the more knowledgeable folk). I would have expected more people to be on his side of the low carb/high fat debate..

    I admire the hell out of anybody who can stick at it. I've never taken heroin but if it's worse than carb withdrawal I certainly wouldn't like to try!

    The carb withdrawal feelings will go after 4-7 days you stick at it. I do eat carbs but I just stay below 100 grams most days.

    Many detractors because many people believe in the food pyramid, in counting calories, in what we are told by the authorities etc. They don't like listening to an alternative view that challenges the consensus.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    Alf Veedersane
    Registered Users Posts: 24,552 ✭✭✭✭Alf Veedersane


    Bruno26 wrote: »
    Many detractors because many people believe in the food pyramid, in counting calories, in what we are told by the authorities etc. They don't like listening to an alternative view that challenges the consensus.

    It's the New World Order, innit.


Advertisement