Author Topic: Episode #660  (Read 4016 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Episode #660
« Reply #105 on: March 13, 2018, 11:19:44 AM »

What is the standard American diet? 


50% of calories from carbs, including lots of fast simple carbs from  sugar breads, pastries, pasta, and processed foods. Moderate fat and protein intake.

It’s the diet for excess fat storage. It’s led to 3/4 of the population being overweight or obese.
Quote
There are many, many people who aren’t overweight.  And there’s no one diet that they all eat.

Yes, about a quarter of the population.



Quote
Agreed.  There’s a lot of Americans who are overweight, even obese, just as there are many Australians who are similarly overweight.

We have a head start against the Aussies and most of the rest of the world in the race to become the most obese nation.
Quote
Someone who is overweight long term (some people may have short term reasons for being overweight) are overweight because their normal diet and activity levels predispose them to putting on weight.  They need to change their diet and activity levels permanently.  There’s no short term fix after which the person can go back to their normal diet and activity levels.

Fat is stored in fat cells. And as fat cells grow they expand their surface area and blood supply. When their stored fat is released they are large depleted cells that will readily take in and store more fat whenever insulin is high. So for most people temporary weight problems are a myth. Once you begin adding excess fat it is easier to replace it than it was to add it in the first place.

Quote
I’ve had considerable success with a low fat/high carbohydrate diet for decades.  I agree that other diets might have produced equal success.  I don’t think that there’s evidence indicating that one diet is better than any other diet, long term.  Not just over a year, but decades.

Repeating your anecdote/talking point doesn’t make it better evidence, or relevant.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #106 on: March 13, 2018, 03:59:53 PM »
CarbShark,

There’s no evidence that there’s one diet that’s better for long term weight loss and maintenance of a healthy weight.

I have no doubt that there are individuals who have managed to lose a significant percentage of weight (around 25%) and kept it off for decades on a high fat/low carbohydrate diet as I did on a low fat/high carbohydrate diet, but that’s similarly anecdote.

Studies purporting to show the short term benefits of a high fat/low carbohydrate diet are little better than anecdotes.  They’re not double-blinded studies.  The investigators and the participants know what diets they’re on.  The enthusiasm of the investigators and participants for a particular diet can easily induce increased motivation in the participants to succeed.

I still insist - your best friend for successful weight loss and weight maintenance is a good set of bathroom scales, not kitchen scales. And to use them daily, even after the weight has been successfully lost.  And to aim not to allow weight to be regained.  It’s not necessary to count calories.  I successfully lost a large amount of weight 30 years ago changing my diet, increasing my exercise activity and weighing myself daily.  I haven’t shown any subsequent propensity for my fat tissue to suck up excess calories as fat, somehow.

But what I did isn’t necessarily for everyone.  I devised it for myself without any professional assistance or advice.

Short term studies showing that there’s some differences in gluconeogenesis or whatever with high fat/low carbohydrate diets are interesting, but it’s always difficult to extrapolate from basic science to recommendations concerning diet.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #107 on: March 13, 2018, 04:09:11 PM »
Studies purporting to show the short term benefits of a high fat/low carbohydrate diet are little better than anecdotes.  They’re not double-blinded studies.  The investigators and the participants know what diets they’re on.  The enthusiasm of the investigators and participants for a particular diet can easily induce increased motivation in the participants to succeed.

So are you saying that all diet studies are little better than anecdotes? Or just the ones that have results you don't like?

The double blind standard would make diet studies impossible.

You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline Alex Simmons

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 734
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #108 on: March 13, 2018, 05:01:43 PM »
It's too onerous if it cannot be transferred into normal habitual eating habits. IOW it's not a sustainable diet if old eating habits return.

Whether a particular diet meets that criteria will be dependent on the individual. Some might be able to maintain a particular diet for a while, perhaps even a year or so but ever see it go to shit when some significant stress factor enters their life? We've all seen that and it's just reality that what influences how, how much and what we eat is subject to many factors.

It's not a question of "motivation", sure there needs to be some will to make a change, but rather it just reflects the reality that everyone is different in how successful they are able to make each particular component of change become a sustainable one, and everyone has different circumstances that influence their ability to maintain/sustain a particular diet or dietary change.

Hence the answer lies in finding out what method works for each individual, such that they can transition to a sustainable and habitually healthful diet that has the appropriate energy content for their weight management needs, and the habitual change is robust enough that it can withstand factors which tend to drag people back to old habits.

Spruiking one particular diet over another as being best or better is pointless. It's a complex mix of psychological, physiological, and environmental circumstances that means the correct approach is going to be individualised, and may require trying a range of options to find one that works.

So ignore all the scientific peer reviewed studies that find significant, consistent and stable advantages for some diets, and just tell people "Find a diet that works for you?"
The science may tell us Diet A, on average, have some advantage over Diet B (C, D, E...), but it does not tell us Diet A always works well for everyone. There will always be a range of individual responses. The average response does not tell us about the individual response.

For some people another approach/diet may be a better option, because that is the approach that they are able to effectively implement.

What does work is when the calorie balance is appropriate and the diet is healthful, and sustainable to the point it becomes habitual. There are several ways to achieve that outcome, and no single diet option will work for every individual. Suggesting it can/will is just plain wrong.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #109 on: March 13, 2018, 05:43:23 PM »
The science may tell us Diet A, on average, have some advantage over Diet B (C, D, E...), but it does not tell us Diet A always works well for everyone. There will always be a range of individual responses. The average response does not tell us about the individual response.

So who is arguing that any diet always works well for everyone?

But the study results show is that pretty consistently one diet does better for a larger number of study participants than others.

Since we (doctors, dietitians, health professionals) actually recommend diets to people who are overweight or obese and at risk for the numerous associated conditions, shouldn't the default diet recommended be the one shown to be the most effective in the largest number of people?

If that doesn't work, then the next most effective, etc.

(Believe it or not, the USDA is now recommending diets that have not been shown effective in RCTs, but simply match "eating patterns" that some fairly weak science has identified as healthy.)

Quote

... no single diet option will work for every individual. Suggesting it can/will is just plain wrong.

And suggesting that I have suggested that is just plain wrong.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #110 on: March 13, 2018, 06:34:35 PM »
Studies purporting to show the short term benefits of a high fat/low carbohydrate diet are little better than anecdotes.  They’re not double-blinded studies.  The investigators and the participants know what diets they’re on.  The enthusiasm of the investigators and participants for a particular diet can easily induce increased motivation in the participants to succeed.

So are you saying that all diet studies are little better than anecdotes? Or just the ones that have results you don't like?

The double blind standard would make diet studies impossible.

You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

I developed my cynicism regarding dietitians and diets after I developed my very effective strategy for maintaining a healthy body weight of skipping breakfast and not eating for the first time until 2-3 pm (or later) and subsequently read the repeated claim from dietitians that skipping breakfast causes weight gain.

I was very pleased to read last July in the Australian ‘The Monthly’ a medical column from an Australian physician who counsels the overweight and who noted that around 25% of each consultation is taken up with refuting persistent diet myths held by her patients.  Including the breakfast myth.  She noted, as I’ve pointed out many times, the idea of the importance of the breakfast is actually a very modern idea. 

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.

Your bathroom scales are your best friend, not dietitians.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #111 on: March 13, 2018, 06:40:00 PM »
You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

........

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.


So there's evidence published in peer reviewed journals, but you dismiss it because it can't be double blinded.

Which means there's no evidence to your liking, which means you have a hypothesis that can't be falsified.

Nice work, skeptic.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #112 on: March 13, 2018, 08:21:39 PM »
You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

........

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.


So there's evidence published in peer reviewed journals, but you dismiss it because it can't be double blinded.

Which means there's no evidence to your liking, which means you have a hypothesis that can't be falsified.

Nice work, skeptic.

Evolutionary psychologists publish their studies in peer-reviewed journals, but that doesn’t make their work correct.

I have a hypothesis which could have been falsified but it wasn’t.  The best way to lose weight and keep it off is slow and steady.  People took years to become overweight, obese even, so it’s unrealistic to expect to be able to lose it rapidly.  The idea that there’s a special diet (such as a high fat/low carbohydrate one)that will work in most people is just magical thinking.  Reduce the amount you eat each day, avoid certain foods (cream doughnuts, pizza and hamburgers aren’t good foods), increase your daily exercise, and invest in a good set of bathroom scales, and weigh yourself daily at around the same time each day.  Aim to lose around 0.5 kg each week.  Don’t worry about day-to-day variations (I notice that my body weight often varies by 0.5 kg day-to-day reflecting my hydration).  Take note of the general trend.  If the general trend isn’t for a 0.5 kg weight loss or thereabouts per week, then you’re doing something wrong, and need to make changes, either reducing your food intake or increasing your physical activity slightly.

It worked for me.  I went from 85 kg to 75 kg losing 10 kg in 6 months.  Being able to see success, slow and steady, worked wonders in maintaining my motivation.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #113 on: March 13, 2018, 08:39:37 PM »
You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

........

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.


So there's evidence published in peer reviewed journals, but you dismiss it because it can't be double blinded.

Which means there's no evidence to your liking, which means you have a hypothesis that can't be falsified.

Nice work, skeptic.

Evolutionary psychologists publish their studies in peer-reviewed journals, but that doesn’t make their work correct.

I have a hypothesis which could have been falsified but it wasn’t. 

The best way to lose weight and keep it off is slow and steady.  People took years to become overweight, obese even, so it’s unrealistic to expect to be able to lose it rapidly.  The idea that there’s a special diet (such as a high fat/low carbohydrate one)that will work in most people is just magical thinking.  Reduce the amount you eat each day, avoid certain foods (cream doughnuts, pizza and hamburgers aren’t good foods), increase your daily exercise, and invest in a good set of bathroom scales, and weigh yourself daily at around the same time each day.  Aim to lose around 0.5 kg each week.  Don’t worry about day-to-day variations (I notice that my body weight often varies by 0.5 kg day-to-day reflecting my hydration).  Take note of the general trend.  If the general trend isn’t for a 0.5 kg weight loss or thereabouts per week, then you’re doing something wrong, and need to make changes, either reducing your food intake or increasing your physical activity slightly.

It worked for me.  I went from 85 kg to 75 kg losing 10 kg in 6 months.  Being able to see success, slow and steady, worked wonders in maintaining my motivation.

That post is as divorced from science and skepticism as any I've seen in quite a while.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #114 on: March 13, 2018, 09:41:09 PM »
You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

........

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.


So there's evidence published in peer reviewed journals, but you dismiss it because it can't be double blinded.

Which means there's no evidence to your liking, which means you have a hypothesis that can't be falsified.

Nice work, skeptic.

Evolutionary psychologists publish their studies in peer-reviewed journals, but that doesn’t make their work correct.

I have a hypothesis which could have been falsified but it wasn’t. 

The best way to lose weight and keep it off is slow and steady.  People took years to become overweight, obese even, so it’s unrealistic to expect to be able to lose it rapidly.  The idea that there’s a special diet (such as a high fat/low carbohydrate one)that will work in most people is just magical thinking.  Reduce the amount you eat each day, avoid certain foods (cream doughnuts, pizza and hamburgers aren’t good foods), increase your daily exercise, and invest in a good set of bathroom scales, and weigh yourself daily at around the same time each day.  Aim to lose around 0.5 kg each week.  Don’t worry about day-to-day variations (I notice that my body weight often varies by 0.5 kg day-to-day reflecting my hydration).  Take note of the general trend.  If the general trend isn’t for a 0.5 kg weight loss or thereabouts per week, then you’re doing something wrong, and need to make changes, either reducing your food intake or increasing your physical activity slightly.

It worked for me.  I went from 85 kg to 75 kg losing 10 kg in 6 months.  Being able to see success, slow and steady, worked wonders in maintaining my motivation.

That post is as divorced from science and skepticism as any I've seen in quite a while.

Your blind faith in nutritional science as practiced by dietitians is as divorced from science and scepticism as any I’ve seen in quite a while.

Nutritional science as practised by most dietitians is more ideology than science.  It would be science if they were considering why people become fat.  They are practising ideology in proscribing how people ought to lose their fat.

As I’ve said many times, there’s no magic weight-reducing diet that works for everyone.  If you’ve succeeded on your high fat/low carbohydrate diet, then congratulations.  I’ve succeeded on my low fat/high carbohydrate diet, which includes a high proportion of bread (‘the staff of life’) to the extent that San Francisco sourdough or other sourdough bread makes up around 40% of daily calories (mainly carbohydrate, with very little fat or simple sugars - I’ve just looked up the figures).  Some adherents of high fat/low carbohydrate diets recoil in horror as if they’re Dracula shown a crucifix if they’re offered a single innocent bread roll.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #115 on: March 13, 2018, 10:31:52 PM »
You're basically dismissing dozens (>100) randomized controlled studies that have been published in peer review journals. In fact you're dismissing pretty much all diet studies.

Yes I am.  Diet studies are little better than evolutionary psychology. In fact, I regard dietitians (I’m not talking about the pseudo-science ‘nutritionists’) as being little better than evolutionary psychologists.  Actually, evolutionary psychology is more plausible.

........

And anyway.  There is no evidence that any one diet is superior for long term (years and decades) weight maintenance.  Pointing to studies that show that high fat diets are associated with larger or faster results in the short term says nothing about long term success.


So there's evidence published in peer reviewed journals, but you dismiss it because it can't be double blinded.

Which means there's no evidence to your liking, which means you have a hypothesis that can't be falsified.

Nice work, skeptic.

Evolutionary psychologists publish their studies in peer-reviewed journals, but that doesn’t make their work correct.

I have a hypothesis which could have been falsified but it wasn’t. 

The best way to lose weight and keep it off is slow and steady.  People took years to become overweight, obese even, so it’s unrealistic to expect to be able to lose it rapidly.  The idea that there’s a special diet (such as a high fat/low carbohydrate one)that will work in most people is just magical thinking.  Reduce the amount you eat each day, avoid certain foods (cream doughnuts, pizza and hamburgers aren’t good foods), increase your daily exercise, and invest in a good set of bathroom scales, and weigh yourself daily at around the same time each day.  Aim to lose around 0.5 kg each week.  Don’t worry about day-to-day variations (I notice that my body weight often varies by 0.5 kg day-to-day reflecting my hydration).  Take note of the general trend.  If the general trend isn’t for a 0.5 kg weight loss or thereabouts per week, then you’re doing something wrong, and need to make changes, either reducing your food intake or increasing your physical activity slightly.

It worked for me.  I went from 85 kg to 75 kg losing 10 kg in 6 months.  Being able to see success, slow and steady, worked wonders in maintaining my motivation.

That post is as divorced from science and skepticism as any I've seen in quite a while.

Your blind faith in nutritional science as practiced by dietitians is as divorced from science and scepticism as any I’ve seen in quite a while.

Nutritional science as practised by most dietitians is more ideology than science.  It would be science if they were considering why people become fat.  They are practising ideology in proscribing how people ought to lose their fat.

I have no idea how you became so confused. It sounds like we agree on dietitians, but what you don't realize is they generally agree with you.
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #116 on: March 13, 2018, 11:11:50 PM »
CarbShark,

‘I have no idea how you became so confused.  It sounds like we agree on dietitians, but you don’t realise is that they generally agree with you.’

I don’t disagree with dietitians.  I just ignore them as being ideological or coming out with nonsensical statements.  Such as not including potatoes as one of the recommended ‘five vegetable, 2 fruits’ (potatoes are fine microwaved).  Or that sugar can be part of a healthy diet.

What I’m disagreeing with is your assertion that a high fat/low carbohydrate diet is best for weight loss.  I regard the studies purportedly showing this methodologically ‘iffy’ along with any study showing that low fat/high carbohydrate diets to be best.  They’re little better than studies demonstrating the efficacy of acupuncture.

Online CarbShark

  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 8093
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #117 on: March 13, 2018, 11:18:06 PM »
CarbShark,

‘I have no idea how you became so confused.  It sounds like we agree on dietitians, but you don’t realise is that they generally agree with you.’

I don’t disagree with dietitians.  I just ignore them as being ideological or coming out with nonsensical statements.  Such as not including potatoes as one of the recommended ‘five vegetable, 2 fruits’ (potatoes are fine microwaved).  Or that sugar can be part of a healthy diet.

What I’m disagreeing with is your assertion that a high fat/low carbohydrate diet is best for weight loss.  I regard the studies purportedly showing this methodologically ‘iffy’ along with any study showing that low fat/high carbohydrate diets to be best.  They’re little better than studies demonstrating the efficacy of acupuncture.

Keep explaining. You're doing just fine. Thanks, it saves me a lot of effort arguing with you. I'll just read
and Donald Trump is President of the United States.

I'm not a doctor, I'm just a guy who has done a ton of research into diet and nutrition.

Offline bachfiend

  • Keeps Priorities Straight
  • ***
  • Posts: 357
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #118 on: March 13, 2018, 11:53:12 PM »
CarbShark,

‘I have no idea how you became so confused.  It sounds like we agree on dietitians, but you don’t realise is that they generally agree with you.’

I don’t disagree with dietitians.  I just ignore them as being ideological or coming out with nonsensical statements.  Such as not including potatoes as one of the recommended ‘five vegetable, 2 fruits’ (potatoes are fine microwaved).  Or that sugar can be part of a healthy diet.

What I’m disagreeing with is your assertion that a high fat/low carbohydrate diet is best for weight loss.  I regard the studies purportedly showing this methodologically ‘iffy’ along with any study showing that low fat/high carbohydrate diets to be best.  They’re little better than studies demonstrating the efficacy of acupuncture.

Keep explaining. You're doing just fine. Thanks, it saves me a lot of effort arguing with you. I'll just read

Because you don’t have any arguments justifying your assertions that are plausible.

I don’t disagree that a high fat/low carbohydrate diet won’t be successful in some, perhaps many people.  The evidence that it will be successful in most is ‘iffy.’

Offline stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Reef Tank Owner
  • *********
  • Posts: 9776
Re: Episode #660
« Reply #119 on: March 15, 2018, 03:49:05 AM »

 

personate-rain