Diet Thread

Forum rules
The information / discussion in the Cycling Health Forum is not qualified medical advice. Please consult your doctor.
kaniSS
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:38 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby kaniSS » Mon Sep 17, 2018 4:40 pm

I've given up my daily run and walking for cycling, due to my knees giving me hell. I cycle 20km per night 5 times a week, combined with a healthy diet. 3 Weeks in and haven't lost anything yet.

Do you really lose weight by cycling? Or should I give it up and push my bung knees back to running???

User avatar
Tim
Posts: 1953
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:02 pm
Location: Gippsland Lakes

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Tim » Mon Sep 17, 2018 5:16 pm

More miles, less food.
Energy in (reduce), energy out (increase).
I keep it simple, it works for me.
You are probably burning less energy on the bike than you were on foot.
Gradually increase the mileage. Play it safe and up the mileage by no more than 10%/week.
Throw in a higher intensity ride once or twice a week. Add some variety, eg. one long ride, one high intensity ride, three easy rides. The same ride day in day out becomes very monotonous (and won't do much for your fitness or weight loss).
Is the diet truly healthy? How much fat and sugar are you consuming?

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:14 pm

CKinnard wrote:In the last year, I've spoken with 3 GPs and 4 dietitians about GIP and GLP-1, and their cell source K and L cells, and none of them have heard of this before.

Yes but in their defence (I know, that's strange coming from me) none of them need to know the reactions that deeply. The GP may barely know about diet, since they're about meds and procedures. The dietitians only need to match diets to different medical conditions.

CKinnard wrote:On a final note, gastric bypass surgery is rising across the country. On a recent stint in Mildura, I was stunned at the number of people who had had the surgery, after whining diets didn't work for them (a few questions from me made me realize their dieting was token and uninformed at best).

So they were average Australians then. It shouldn't be the case, but IME uninformed is the default. Actually a visit to any of the loser threads over recent years shows a fair number of token dieters too. Mainly cut the obvious junk, limit the processed carbs and up the cycling appears to be the norm. It works, but it's slow. And if they couldn't exercise, the weight might start climbing again.

CKinnard wrote:One gent told me 5 members of his family had had the surgery, and he was absolutely convinced his obesity was due to family genes. I asked him whether he knew if any of his grand or great grand parents were obese - he didn't know. (probability favors they weren't).

More likely due to family traditions of eating and activity. I saw somewhere that genes only make a few percent variance to one's weight. Not knowing your grandfather isn't a good sign though.

CKinnard wrote:In fact, one study showed that when gastric bypass candidates were just put onto the same diet as they would after surgery, they lost the same amount of weight as they would if they had surgery.

Got the study for that? Would be nice to reference as seeing it might help someone to avoid the surgery.

CKinnard wrote:One final point can be made about overcoming a dulled satiety signaling system. That is to use mechanical bulking of the small intestine to more powerfully trigger the satiety cascade of events. This can be done most effectively by eating a much higher volume of raw and cooked non starchy vegetables (8+ cups a day).

Wow, that standard is getting higher. It was only 7+ cups about a month ago. :P
Just as well I added an onion to my usual. Still scraping by. :D

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:45 pm

kaniSS wrote:I've given up my daily run and walking for cycling, due to my knees giving me hell. I cycle 20km per night 5 times a week, combined with a healthy diet. 3 Weeks in and haven't lost anything yet.

Do you really lose weight by cycling? Or should I give it up and push my bung knees back to running???

As Tim said, could you tell us what you eat daily?
When it comes to exercise, it depends what study one cites. However weight control is considered to be approx. 80% diet and 20% exercise. I find it's almost entirely diet for me over the long term, as my body adapts to the activity level.

I suggest exercising 3 times a week to give your knees more of a chance to heal. As well as changing to a better, low inflammatory diet. That way you could have better weight control with less exercise and it could also make a big difference to your knees. It did for me, but it took years for the knees to get better (but I'm 50 yo). Better than never getting better though. Think about how much good knees would be worth to you. There are many other benefits to a near ideal diet.

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Mon Sep 17, 2018 6:57 pm

Nobody wrote:Got the study for that? Would be nice to reference as seeing it might help someone to avoid the surgery.



Actually I was wrong. They lost MORE weight on the post surgery diet without surgery than with!
And their blood glucose also improved MORE without surgery.

http://care.diabetesjournals.org/content/36/9/2741.long
Diabetes Care. 2013 Sep;36(9):2741-7
Rapid improvement in diabetes after gastric bypass surgery: is it the diet or surgery?
Lingvay I1, Guth E, Islam A, Livingston E.

Abstract
OBJECTIVE:

Improvements in diabetes after Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) often occur days after surgery. Surgically induced hormonal changes and the restrictive postoperative diet are proposed mechanisms. We evaluated the contribution of caloric restriction versus surgically induced changes to glucose homeostasis in the immediate postoperative period.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS:

Patients with type 2 diabetes planning to undergo RYGB participated in a prospective two-period study (each period involved a 10-day inpatient stay, and periods were separated by a minimum of 6 weeks of wash-out) in which patients served as their own controls. The presurgery period consisted of diet alone. The postsurgery period was matched in all aspects (daily matched diet) and included RYGB surgery. Glucose measurements were performed every 4 h throughout the study. A mixed-meal challenge test was performed before and after each period. RESULTS Ten patients completed the study and had the following characteristics: age, 53.2 years (95% CI, 48.0-58.4); BMI, 51.2 kg/m(2) (46.1-56.4); diabetes duration, 7.4 years (4.8-10.0); and HbA1c, 8.52% (7.08-9.96). Patients lost 7.3 kg (8.1-6.5) during the presurgery period versus 4.0 kg (6.2-1.7) during the postsurgery period (P = 0.01 between periods). Daily glycemia in the presurgery period was significantly lower (1,293.58 mg/dL · day [1,096.83-1,490.33) vs. 1,478.80 mg/dL · day [1,277.47-1,680.13]) compared with the postsurgery period (P = 0.02 between periods). The improvements in the fasting and maximum poststimulation glucose and 6-h glucose area under the curve (primary outcome) were similar during both periods.
CONCLUSIONS:

Glucose homeostasis improved in response to a reduced caloric diet, with a greater effect observed in the absence of surgery as compared with after RYGB. These findings suggest that reduced calorie ingestion can explain the marked improvement in diabetes control observed after RYGB.
________________________

Nobody wrote:Wow, that standard is getting higher. It was only 7+ cups about a month ago. :P
Just as well I added an onion to my usual. Still scraping by. :D


Did you ever have dulled satiety signaling and accompanying significant weight issue?

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:16 pm

kaniSS wrote:I've given up my daily run and walking for cycling, due to my knees giving me hell. I cycle 20km per night 5 times a week, combined with a healthy diet. 3 Weeks in and haven't lost anything yet.

Do you really lose weight by cycling? Or should I give it up and push my bung knees back to running???


Absolutely you can lose weight cycling, or sitting on your ass.
Though in my highest volume weeks of riding (a couple of 700km weeks and a few months averaging over 300km/week, I didn't lose weight).

Why do you need to lose weight if you were walking and running regularly beforehand?

Losing weight isn't about a healthy diet. It's about a Calorie deficit.
Explain how you calculated your Calorie deficit?

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Sep 17, 2018 7:29 pm

CKinnard wrote:Actually I was wrong. They lost MORE weight on the post surgery diet without surgery than with!
And their blood glucose also improved MORE without surgery.

Thank for posting the study. We might never know how many people it helps. Even one operation prevented would be enough.

CKinnard wrote:Did you ever have dulled satiety signaling and accompanying significant weight issue?

Actually sometimes I thought I did have dulled satiety signalling. Then when I saw that I lost weight and waist size over winter, I realised it must have been real hunger. Yes, my "significant weight issue" was I was getting too thin. :)

Below is a recent screen shot of my spreadsheet. I've added g/kgBW of macros for some extra clarity. Although the weight was entered as 64 kg, so everything is a bit low.
On the bottom left you can see that there is 16.8, 75 gram serves of fibrous veg. So that should be 8+ (150 g) cups, or 1.26 kg. Enough anyway. Also 127 g of fibre which should be keeping up with the tribals. :mrgreen:
Image

___________________________________________________________________________


CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Sep 18, 2018 7:25 am

Nobody wrote:On the bottom left you can see that there is 16.8, 75 gram serves of fibrous veg. So that should be 8+ (150 g) cups, or 1.26 kg. Enough anyway. Also 127 g of fibre which should be keeping up with the tribals. :mrgreen:


I think I may have raised this before, but your grain Cals/gram (oats) suggest you are using wet weight, not dry weight.
It's more the convention to use dry, as adding water is an additional variable. Though if you consistently measure water added accurately I suppose it doesn't matter.

So you are getting 1.275 kg of fibrous a day? That should do it.
Re recommended (fibrous) vege, I said 8 cups a day above, meaning mixed fibrous, which weigh 70g/cup.
But you exclude leafy greens, so I presume a cup of your mix would weigh more like 85g/cup.
So that's 15 cups/day.
Have I got that right?

Incidentally, I think a very interesting experiment for you to consider would be to do a 3 month trial of eating several cups of dark green leafys (kale, spinach, Asian greens). I appreciate you avoid them due to their iron content, but I have a view that it isn't a given they will drive your iron levels up. Leafy greens are the most nutrient dense of all plant foods. I think there's much we don't understand about digestion and absorption of individual elements. Just as there's much we don't know about food boluses, refining carbs, insulin secretion and satiety signaling.

What I find interesting about hemochromatosis is onset in men is usually over 40 years of age, and women after menopause.
This would indicate that the intestines, or iron absorption signaling, have to endure significant wear/damage before the disease develops.
It is paradoxical that the intestines become more 'efficient' at absorbing iron via cellular transport mechanisms, as the system ages or wears.

It makes more sense that higher iron absorption in middle age is occurring due to unrecognized pathology, in which case, foods known to have a reparative effect on the gut (leafy greens) may normalize iron absorption.

Two states in the duodenum and jejunum have strong effects on iron :
- ACID pH significantly increases iron absorption, such as with high secretion of gastric acid into the duodenum. It's possible leafy greens could neutralize stomach acid in the duodenum quicker. Other acid lowering interventions could be calming oneself for 15 minutes before eating, drinking 500mls of water before meals, drinking 250 mls of water after a meal.
- HYPOXIA is a strong signal to increase iron absorption. It is plausible that compromised blood flow to the parts of the small intestine stimulate increased iron absorption. A reasonable therapy for this would be to calm oneself before meals, focus on diaphragmatic breathing, and do hatha yoga that stimulates better blood flow to the gut (via physical movement of the intestines, and enteric nervous system de-stressing).

Iron absorption is still not well understood. i.e. we don't know the mechanism by which iron enters the mucosal cells of the duodenum and jejunum. And researchers don't think of natural therapeutic interventions. So all food for thought in my books.


Depending on pre and post blood test results, you might then consider similarly experimenting with legumes, another highish source of iron. However, they are also a significant source of phytates (phytic acid) which blocks iron absorption.

I was going through some old medical documents last night, and there was one GP's note that I had high iron (about 15 years ago). I don't recall it being an issue over the last 10 years however.

kaniSS
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2018 9:38 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby kaniSS » Tue Sep 18, 2018 9:37 am

Tim wrote:More miles, less food.
Energy in (reduce), energy out (increase).
I keep it simple, it works for me.
You are probably burning less energy on the bike than you were on foot.
Gradually increase the mileage. Play it safe and up the mileage by no more than 10%/week.
Throw in a higher intensity ride once or twice a week. Add some variety, eg. one long ride, one high intensity ride, three easy rides. The same ride day in day out becomes very monotonous (and won't do much for your fitness or weight loss).
Is the diet truly healthy? How much fat and sugar are you consuming?


Good advice mate, thanks for that. My rides are pretty intense, I go up and down hills and really push myself. Something I can't even walk properly the next day. I have 3 different routes, I pick a different one every night.

Look the diet was a semi diet, but I still didn't overindulge myself. Typical day would be. Weetbix with Fruit, Fruit for lunch with muesli, Dinner Chicken Breast with Salad, or salad on it's own. Yogurt at night. + 2-3litres of water during the day. 4 times a week.
Fridays / Sat & Sun, a bit of indulgence, <-----this is probably what levels me out and I don't lose weight :(

Now I'm gearing up to go full on, no more indulgence on weekends. Lets see how it goes at the end of this week.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Tue Sep 18, 2018 11:24 am

CKinnard wrote:I think I may have raised this before, but your grain Cals/gram (oats) suggest you are using wet weight, not dry weight.
It's more the convention to use dry, as adding water is an additional variable. Though if you consistently measure water added accurately I suppose it doesn't matter.

For the Cal calculation, it's dry. Dry is entered off screen and multiplied by a variable to include water weight. Then the macros and other components/100g are divided by that same variable before further calculations are made. So it works for both the display of the Cal density calculations, as well as outright Cal calculations. In other words, the water weight variable only changes the Cal density.

CKinnard wrote:So you are getting 1.275 kg of fibrous a day? That should do it.

I got 1.26 kg (16.8 x 75g) so about that.

CKinnard wrote:But you exclude leafy greens, so I presume a cup of your mix would weigh more like 85g/cup.
So that's 15 cups/day.
Have I got that right?

You know the weights of such things, so I'll go by your estimation. I've only weighed beans and rice by cups and found about 150g/cup. So yes, I think that's about right.

CKinnard wrote:Incidentally, I think a very interesting experiment for you to consider would be to do a 3 month trial

Did 80g average/d of English spinach for 3 months. Only block where I got an increase in ferritin, as opposed to the typical drop. Tried legumes for 3 months too, but they didn't make a difference for increasing iron. I only eat peas these days as the other disagree with me digestion wise too much. As I've been on the climb with ferritin for the last year - and back into the danger zone above 50 - which probably has a lot to do with the added veg, I won't be adding green leafy. This block I'm trying adding some calcium. I don't expect much, but I've been surprised before.

CKinnard wrote:What I find interesting about hemochromatosis is onset in men is usually over 40 years of age, and women after menopause.
This would indicate that the intestines, or iron absorption signaling, have to endure significant wear/damage before the disease develops...

That's because it takes until the 30s or 40s in men for the liver to fill to dangerous levels with about 5 grams of stored iron.

CKinnard wrote:I was going through some old medical documents last night, and there was one GP's note that I had high iron (about 15 years ago). I don't recall it being an issue over the last 10 years however.

As you would know, a ferritin over 50 is considered a higher cancer risk. That is why I'm trying to get mine to stay under 50.
However the medical profession only considers out of range saturation levels to be an indicator of haemo, or generally any kind of iron problem for that matter. My father had a ferritin of about 530 and they didn't think that was a problem because his saturation was well within range. According to the link, the majority of the population have a ferritin over 50 and no-one seems to care. No wonder the cancer rates are as high as they are. I think GPs see so many cases of poor health, that they get numb to it. Nothing raises that much alarm or concern anymore. Not that they would expect to get much patient cooperation if they did raise alarm.

One of the biggest problems with western societies is that everyone seems to accept that you get overweight and unhealthy/sick as you age and there's nothing that can be done about it. I think they call it the appeal to futility fallacy. I got it from my manager last week. "The world is poisonous, so why bother trying" IIRC. I retorted with "the world is poisonous, so why add to it". I suppose that's the difference that places me at odds with our society in general.
Last edited by Nobody on Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

march83
Posts: 777
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2013 10:41 pm

Re: Diet Thread

Postby march83 » Tue Sep 18, 2018 12:38 pm

this is quite interesting. looking at my historical ferritin, when I was a meat heavy paleo eater I was above 200. When I moved to a lower meat intake I tested around 125 a few times. Even after 9 months of eating vegan I was still just a little over 100 with a saturation of 46%. I haven't had a blood test in a while now (well and truly due), this is probably enough motivation to go and get one done I think...

@nobody: I know you take a fairly precise dose of zinc to reduce iron absorption - what else can be done to reduce it on a PBWF diet?
Image

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:14 pm

Nobody wrote:That's because it takes until the 30s or 40s in men for the liver to fill to dangerous levels with about 5 grams of stored iron.


Yes I appreciate that's the consensus, however I query how "insidious" iron store accumulation can be so slow as to mask the disease for 35+ years.

If a child has an iron over-absorption problem (HFE gene mutation), they should hit liver iron storage overload much earlier in life than the 4th decade, based on average daily losses.
This is especially so considering the higher intake of food (obesity rate), especially animal bits (heme iron) in the last 50 years.

Nobody wrote:However the medical profession only considers out of range saturation levels to be an indicator of haemo, or generally any kind of iron problem for that matter. My father had a ferritin of about 530 and they didn't think that was a problem because his saturation was well within range. According to the link, the majority of the population have a ferritin over 50 and no-one seems to care. No wonder the cancer rates are as high as they are. I think GPs see so many cases of poor health, that they get numb to it. Nothing raises that much alarm or concern anymore. Not that they would expect to get much patient cooperation if they did raise alarm.


AFAIK, trf saturation can be elevated when ferritin is still normal, and vv. However, I think there's more transient or lifestyle choice causes (age, inflammation, obesity) for elevated ferritin, which may be why doctors are not as worried about it as elevated trf sat.
I'll have to read more!

Either way, the driver is still excessive absorption, and not all HFE mutants get haemochromatosis.
I think I have asked you before if you do soy products (soy milk or tofu) as these block iron absorption, via phytic acid and conglycinin. Can't remember your response.
Just rehashing, absorption inhibitors are : calcium, tannin, phytates, polyphenols, less acid pH, better O2sats in enteric circulation.
Last edited by CKinnard on Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Tue Sep 18, 2018 1:46 pm

march83 wrote:@nobody: I know you take a fairly precise dose of zinc to reduce iron absorption - what else can be done to reduce it on a PBWF diet?

If I had a saturation of 46% I'd be keeping a close eye on my iron studies results. Your liver may be getting full by now and your ferritin could be on the rise. I think my max ever result was 64% and I've been < 46% on many blood tests. But I still need to be bled twice a year.

There are plenty of variables to play with. Whether they will work for you is another story.
  • No green leafy. They have too much iron and absorb well IME.
  • Besides nuts, I generally avoid all plant foods with > 1 mg/100g of iron. When I started looking at this closely I started to make progress. Peas are the exception for me as the zinc to iron ratio is above 1. But they could still be problematic for me. I haven't tested it.
  • On another part of my spreadsheet I have a zinc:iron and calcuim:iron ratio columns. I try favouring the foods with relatively high zinc and calcium relative to iron, since they all compete for absorption. This has also been relatively successful for me.
  • Besides a small zinc supplement, take a small calcium supplement. But there are dangers associated with both supplements, so don't go nuts. I only take 12 mg/d of zinc (not every day) and 200 - 300 mg/d of calcium so far. Others (I don't know) have reported some success with this. I'm still testing this. I might know more at year end.
  • Drink peppermint tea with meals. It hasn't worked for me, but it might help you.
  • Avoid high vit-C foods with meals. I don't do this and it's probably my downfall as this can increase iron absorption multiple times.

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:22 pm

Another approach to reducing iron stores would be intermittent fasting, or an extended fast if you have sufficient fat reserves.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Tue Sep 18, 2018 2:49 pm

CKinnard wrote:AFAIK, trf saturation can be elevated when ferritin is still normal...

True. But saturation is a short term measure and ferritin the long term according to the specialist. If sat is high for an extended period, then ferritin should increase slowly.

CKinnard wrote:Either way, the driver is still excessive absorption, and not all HFE mutants get haemochromatosis.

And not all normal gene people avoid haemo. I'm living proof. 64% saturation should be enough to dispel any doubts about whether I have it or not. But my gene test shows normal. Maybe I have another yet unknown factor that's at work.

CKinnard wrote:I think I have asked you before if you do soy products (soy milk or tofu) as these block iron absorption, via phytic acid and conglycinin. Can't remember your response.

No soy in any form. I'm sure if I was willing to concentrate on beating iron overload at all costs, I could do it. But I've got other health priorities as well.

It would be nice in theory if I could get monthly blood tests for iron studies. That way I could try different strategies and see how I was tracking. Currently I'm on 6 monthly with the specialist.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Tue Sep 18, 2018 3:19 pm

march83 wrote:@nobody: I know you take a fairly precise dose of zinc to reduce iron absorption - what else can be done to reduce it on a PBWF diet?

Some others that may be worth consideration:
  • Filter your tap water. Since you don't know how much iron/copper/lead is being picked up from the pipes.
  • Avoid using iron pots, pans, cutlery etc. Especially with acidic foods. I have a titanium spoon and fork and a ceramic knife for processing. My pot is still stainless because titanium is expensive and I don't like aluminium. My colander is enamel coated. I suppose I could try an enamel pot. But the stuff I boil isn't acidic. You can obviously use plastic for some functions. But it has its own problems, especially with interactions with heated food. Or so some some experts say.
  • Wear gloves when handling steel. Wear a mask when cutting/grinding steel with power tools. It is something some have to consider anyway. I often wear gloves at work when building enclosures for equipment.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Thu Sep 20, 2018 12:46 pm

Should doctors just put patients on Weight Watchers? - SMH

The study's authors advocated for government funding or Medicare subsidies for commercial weight loss programs proven to be cost-effective ways of managing obesity.
However, neither method resulted in Australia meeting its World Health Organisation target of zero increase in obesity rates by 2025.


I doubt that many countries will meet the WHO's target. I suspect most countries' obesity rates will conversely be accelerating by then. But at least governments are starting to think about it a bit more.

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Thu Sep 20, 2018 2:19 pm

Nobody wrote:I doubt that many countries will meet the WHO's target. I suspect most countries' obesity rates will conversely be accelerating by then. But at least governments are starting to think about it a bit more.


The WHO pulls these targets from where?
They are just a pontificating bureaucratic behemoth of ideologue boffins shuffling spreadsheets. too harsh? :D

I am firming up on this view:
some people who have a more intact locus of control are capable of losing weight without State intervention. The glazed eyed won't change until popular culture changes, similar to how regulation worked to reduce drink driving and smoking in many public spaces.

In this respect, I think some regulation is in order:
- of fast food
- of supermarket ploys to entice people to buy junky impulse lines
- of a tax on unhealthy fast food and supermarket produce, similar to tobacco taxes.
Those taxes can go to subsidizing fruit and vege.
Not easily implemented though.

I also think welfare pmts should not be all cash, but food stamps and funds paid straight to landlords.
In addition to people having to work for unemployment benefits. even if cleaning streets.

I spent Sunday with a friend and his wife. He is 72 and has advanced diabetes. His vision and sensation in his legs is steadily deteriorating. We've talked many times about the importance of diet. He assures me yeah I eat healthy, as his wife controls the food and she wants him healthy. Well, anyway, we had lunch together, and to put it straight, his diet is heavy on refined carbs and light on the good stuff. I was disappointed, for both of them. A lot of suffering and heart ache is ahead. And I sensed it is time for me to channel my time and energy more where it is wanted!

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Thu Sep 20, 2018 4:02 pm

CKinnard wrote:The WHO pulls these targets from where?

Dreamland? They are starting to remind me of cocaine fuelled advertising executives for their lack of grip on reality.

CKinnard wrote:They are just a pontificating bureaucratic behemoth of ideologue boffins shuffling spreadsheets. too harsh? :D

Probably, from the look of that target. But sadly, I still trust them more than any individual countries' guidelines that I've seen so far. Mainly for their relative independence from industry influence.

CKinnard wrote:I am firming up on this view:
some people who have a more intact locus of control are capable of losing weight without State intervention. The glazed eyed won't change until popular culture changes, similar to how regulation worked to reduce drink driving and smoking in many public spaces.

Yeah, I agree. It has got a lot to do with personality traits in general. Some you could force to sit though hours of lectures on how bad the current food is and what they need to do about it. Then they'd be straight down to KFC for a bucket, because they're starving. :roll:

CKinnard wrote:In this respect, I think some regulation is in order:
- of fast food
- of supermarket ploys to entice people to buy junky impulse lines
- of a tax on unhealthy fast food and supermarket produce, similar to tobacco taxes.
Those taxes can go to subsidizing fruit and vege.
Not easily implemented though.

Stuff like this may happen eventually. But we know it will be too little, too late and AU will probably be one of the last to do it.

CKinnard wrote:I spent Sunday with a friend and his wife...his diet is heavy on refined carbs and light on the good stuff.

It also may have been their healthiest version of eating, being put on show for you.

CKinnard wrote:I was disappointed, for both of them. A lot of suffering and heart ache is ahead. And I sensed it is time for me to channel my time and energy more where it is wanted!

Which is probably < 5% of the population. Of which only a fraction of a percent with fully implement the direction. Well at least currently. In 30 years the numbers might be higher. Once the science about diet becomes more ubiquitously known. At the moment the food industries have made sure doubt rules (as per cigarette companies did). So most use a combination of that doubt, "the illusion of knowledge" and the appeal to futility fallacy - probably among other forms of self deception - to allow themselves to continue on their current addictive dietary course. It's interesting how the mind works...or doesn't. Yet almost all will probably claim that marketing doesn't affect them. The reality is we've all been affected by marketing.

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Thu Sep 20, 2018 7:25 pm

Nobody wrote:It also may have been their healthiest version of eating, being put on show for you.

Which is probably < 5% of the population. Of which only a fraction of a percent with fully implement the direction. Well at least currently. In 30 years the numbers might be higher. Once the science about diet becomes more ubiquitously known. At the moment the food industries have made sure doubt rules (as per cigarette companies did). So most use a combination of that doubt, "the illusion of knowledge" and the appeal to futility fallacy - probably among other forms of self deception - to allow themselves to continue on their current addictive dietary course. It's interesting how the mind works...or doesn't. Yet almost all will probably claim that marketing doesn't affect them. The reality is we've all been affected by marketing.


yes from the token salad they prepared, I think they weren't used to eating that way.
There was two types of bread, home made muffins and cake though! :lol:
Horses and water came to mind.
Anyway, since getting back to Brisbane, I've been feeling more strongly for the sake of myself and clients, I have to target my clinic service more to an appropriate target audience. I just cannot pander to people's health delusions.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:16 pm

I started watching this video thinking it was going to be much the same as the previous one I posted on Kim Williams. But much of it didn't turn out to be the same IMO. As it's a longish video, I've added a breakdown of what is covered in case you only want to see that section.



00:45 - Whether saturated fat is healthy or not.
03:15 - Dietary cholesterol and effect on serum cholesterol (His 170 mg/dL converts to 4.4 mmol/L and 90 converts to 2.3).
06:25 - Omega-3, fish oils & CVD.
08:41 - Heme iron & CVD.
10:21 - Whole plant fats & CVD risk. (I found the answer Interesting and fairly diplomatic.)
11:50 - His famous quotes. One quote being, “There are two kinds of cardiologists: vegans and those who haven’t read the data.” which is quoted as it wasn't mentioned in the video.
15:13 - What would he change about the medical system. He talks about both food subsidies and the medical system in the US.
20:32 - Secondary prevention care.
22:26 - Commentary on the role of plant based nutritionists.
23:19 - He mentions doing 300 minutes (5 hours) a week of exercise.
There may be positive CVD risk outcomes from studies, but I doubt you'll find many in blue zones doing - or were doing - that much high intensity exercise consistently and I'd question it for longevity benefit.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Mon Sep 24, 2018 10:25 pm

Hugh's Fat Fight - SBS doco
https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/1312052803553/hughs-fat-fight
https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/1316882499622/hughs-fat-fight
You need to register to view.

They mean well and tried hard, but both episodes so far have appeared to be more like Hugh's sugar fight. Misinformed infotainment in some respects. Especially in regard to a blanket following of GP's dietary advice in Johnny's dealing with his newly diagnosed T2D. He's cutting back on the carbs, which can lead to eating more calories from fat. So for a normal style of diet, the causative process of fat compromising the function of the pancreas and liver may get worse. They said that 1 in 6 hospital beds are occupied with people that have T2D for various reasons. You'd think with such a big problem they'd at least try to get the message correct. Which is probably a factor in why they have such a large problem.

At least the AU ABC managed to interview someone who understood the problem.
ABC Health wrote:The role of fat
Most people with type 2 diabetes are overweight or obese.

Normally, calories you consume over your daily requirements are stored as fat. These fat cells tend to be located under your skin, in your buttocks, thighs and breasts.

Just as your pantry fills up with food you're not using, so too do your fat cells with energy you're not burning.

Eventually, your body reaches a tipping point: faced with nowhere left to put excess energy, it starts to dump fat outside of where it's normally stored. This is known as ectopic fat.

"This really is the problem for most people with type 2 diabetes," Professor Thomas says.

"The liver, pancreas and other organs become fat-dumping sites, so they can't do their job as well as they need to."


Not only does excess fat damage your body's ability to make insulin, it also stops other cells in your body responding to what insulin you do produce (insulin resistance).

"On the one hand, you're not making enough insulin because the insulin-producing cells of the pancreas are fat-comatose," Professor Thomas says.

"On the other hand, any insulin that is made isn't working as well as it should because the cells that would normally respond to the insulin — in the liver, muscles and other places — are also fat-inundated."

When that happens, the pancreas works doubly hard to produce more insulin to keep your blood glucose levels within normal range.

"Eventually, as a result of the extra work demanded of it and the less ability to do that work, the pancreas burns out," Professor Thomas says.

"Over time, your sugar levels rise and rise, and when they rise above a certain level … you're said to have diabetes."

http://www.abc.net.au/news/health/2018-09-04/understanding-type-2-diabetes/10160234?section=health

User avatar
mikesbytes
Super Mod
Super Mod
Posts: 19124
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2005 11:42 pm
Location: Tempe, Sydney
Contact:

Re: Diet Thread

Postby mikesbytes » Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:11 am

Haven't had a chance to look at the video's, will do later.

Agree that cutting back on refined carbs isn't going to work if the calories are replaced from another source

Was chatting with a plant based lady and she said something along the lines that insulin resistance is the body fighting against the excess calories that are ending up as stored fat and people who reach massive proportions, like 400kg somehow their body doesn't come insulin resistant allowing them to continue putting on weight. Appologies if I'm slightly misquoting her
If the R-1 rule is broken, what happens to N+1?

CKinnard
Posts: 2993
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 10:23 am

Re: Diet Thread

Postby CKinnard » Tue Sep 25, 2018 8:50 am

Nobody wrote:At least the AU ABC managed to interview someone who understood the problem.


The professor offered a reasonable explanation, but could have done better.
- Visceral fat has the lion's share effect on insulin sensitivity, not subcutaneous.
- His explanation of how fat compromises insulin management of blood glucose doesn't accurately account for why T2D's BG decreases to normal within days of either
1. gastric bypass surgery
2. starting a plant based diet
3. starting a fast.

Nobody
Posts: 8911
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Diet Thread

Postby Nobody » Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:46 am

mikesbytes wrote:Agree that cutting back on refined carbs isn't going to work if the calories are replaced from another source

True.
I'll add the following to clarify, since due to many reasons, it's not as simple as just too many calories.
The standard GP advice is to cut back on sugars and sometimes most/all carbs. Fair enough. It sounds logical and intuitive, like most low-carb logic. But because the advice is reductionist and simplistic, the patient ends up cutting most carbs instead of replacing them with lower GI, high fibre, low calorie density, whole plant foods. This can leave a diet of mainly of animal products and fats by calories. As many animal products are also insulin spiking and fat is added as body fat easier, they now have an uphill battle to lose weight while trying to fend off all the often debilitating complications of advancing T2D. All because they either (most likely) weren't given the correct information and/or didn't apply it. Sad and expensive for all involved.

mikesbytes wrote:Was chatting with a plant based lady and she said something along the lines that insulin resistance is the body fighting against the excess calories that are ending up as stored fat and people who reach massive proportions, like 400kg somehow their body doesn't come insulin resistant allowing them to continue putting on weight.

I heard McDougall mentioned this in one of his talks IIRC. IMO just because a dysfunction caused by certain genetics and dietary abuse has a single beneficial side effect, doesn't make it by_design. Especially considering all the complications of T2D. Therefore I believe it's speculation.

CKinnard wrote:
Nobody wrote:At least the AU ABC managed to interview someone who understood the problem.


The professor offered a reasonable explanation, but could have done better.
- Visceral fat has the lion's share effect on insulin sensitivity, not subcutaneous.
- His explanation of how fat compromises insulin management of blood glucose doesn't accurately account for why T2D's BG decreases to normal within days of either
1. gastric bypass surgery
2. starting a plant based diet
3. starting a fast.

Yes. They are probably either (most likely) new to the professor, or not something he wants to speculate on until proven further. Fortunately, you and I don't have to wait for the conclusive causative analysis before posting interesting findings based on observations, or associations. As you know, the true cause might not be proven for another 20 years.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users