The Fats You Don’t Need to Fear, and the Carbs That You Do

Post by wdewind » Wed, Oct 21, 2015, 2:10 PM UTC

mathgeek wrote: post #29

bad_user wrote: post #26

> It’s really important to distinguish between healthy fats and bad fats, healthy carbs and bad carbs What a bunch of crap. They said the same thing about cholesterol after fucking up monumentally and the history repeats itself over and over again. Just man up, recognize how incompetent you are, how your non-scientific advice has been hurting people over the past 50 years and switch jobs because the science you're pr…

Can you link the sources for your claims? I'm asking sincerely, as I'm sure people interested in the topic will want to see the research.

Post by wdewind » Wed, Oct 21, 2015, 2:14 PM UTC

zappo2938 wrote: post #25

bad_user wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... the fast should begin around 5pm ... there is no reason to have big dinners which are ridiculous Actually there is a very big reason for why your advice is harmful, for me at least, but I suspect that for others as well. At 5pm I'm still at work, which means that whatever meal I'll have will be fast food and not a home cooked meal. But even more problematic is that dinner is also the perfect opportunity to sit…

The American overweight problem is cultural and not an issue with eating high or low glycemic foods like the article states. If losing weight is an issue for someone. They are better off having a larger second meal and a smaller third meal even if that third meal is at 9 or 10pm so they can enjoy it with family or after work. The idea is not to have more blood sugar than then the liver can store as glycogen at bed ti…

Post by hga » Wed, Oct 21, 2015, 2:15 PM UTC

sageabilly wrote: post #13

I am particularly excited for the rise of easier genome sequencing and the role that will play in nutritional advice for individuals. The more we learn about genes and how people react differently to different foods the more intrigued I am by the idea of an "optimal" diet only being achieved on a person-by-person level.

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Oct 21, 2015, 2:19 PM UTC

bagacrap wrote: post #35

zappo2938 wrote: post #12

The role of liver function and glycogen should be included in this conversation.[1] There might be a lot more at work than just elevated blood sugar levels. In most normal people, meaning without diabetes and other metabolism problems, the liver doesn't immediately convert sugar to fat. Rather extra sugar is converted to glycogen which can be easily accessed for energy. What happens when a runner carbo loads the nigh…

Perhaps the strategy should be to eat when hungry and abstain when not hungry. (Americans tend to be good at the former but not the latter.) A one-size-fits-all approach to meal timing is not practical or effective. > There is no reason to have readily available sugars while sleeping Night time is when humans are most hormonally active, and going to bed with an energy surplus will help engender a more anabolic state.

Post by visakanv » Wed, Oct 21, 2015, 2:21 PM UTC

zappo2938 wrote: post #25

bad_user wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ... the fast should begin around 5pm ... there is no reason to have big dinners which are ridiculous Actually there is a very big reason for why your advice is harmful, for me at least, but I suspect that for others as well. At 5pm I'm still at work, which means that whatever meal I'll have will be fast food and not a home cooked meal. But even more problematic is that dinner is also the perfect opportunity to sit…

The American overweight problem is cultural and not an issue with eating high or low glycemic foods like the article states. If losing weight is an issue for someone. They are better off having a larger second meal and a smaller third meal even if that third meal is at 9 or 10pm so they can enjoy it with family or after work. The idea is not to have more blood sugar than then the liver can store as glycogen at bed ti…