Gary Taubes' Newest Book

[Katsmeow]

I've been very interested in the Taubes point of view and did a lot of reading to try to come to terms with what the research really shows. While I do think Taubes has made some good points, I don't have a lot of respect for what I feel is often cherry picked data and a lot of ignoring of data he doesn't like. I also think he tended to cherry pick quotes from people to make it seem like they supported his views when they don't.

From all the research I've read I do think that, in general, lower carb eating is better for most people. For some people who want to lose weight, low carb eating may be the best way to lose weight.

I also believe that protein is generally more satiating than carbs and that more calories are burned when eating protein than carbs (indeed, this is the foundation of the new WW program).

I also think that recent studies have shown that low carb eating can be effective for weight loss and that it isn't unhealthy.

But....

It is also clear that any of the main weight loss program -- low calorie or low fat for example -- are also effective for weight loss and low carb programs are not more effective than the other programs.

For the individual it may matter a great deal. I will likely never lose much weight on a low fat program as I won't stay on it. For another person, low fat might work better than low carb. Other people may feel that low carb eating works well for them and will be more successful and for that person it may be.

The research -- when looked at broadly and not with an agenda -- just doesn't support the notion that low carb eating results in significantly better weight loss. It would nice if it did, but it doesn't.

[HFWR]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katsmeow I've been very interested in the Taubes point of view and did a lot of reading to try to come to terms with what the research really shows. While I do think Taubes has made some good points, I don't have a lot of respect for what I feel is often cherry picked data and a lot of ignoring of data he doesn't like. I also think he tended to cherry pick quotes from people to make it seem like they supported his views when they don't. From all the research I've read I do think that, in general, lower carb eating is better for most people. For some people who want to lose weight, low carb eating may be the best way to lose weight. I also believe that protein is generally more satiating than carbs and that more calories are burned when eating protein than carbs (indeed, this is the foundation of the new WW program). I also think that recent studies have shown that low carb eating can be effective for weight loss and that it isn't unhealthy. But.... It is also clear that any of the main weight loss program -- low calorie or low fat for example -- are also effective for weight loss and low carb programs are not more effective than the other programs. For the individual it may matter a great deal. I will likely never lose much weight on a low fat program as I won't stay on it. For another person, low fat might work better than low carb. Other people may feel that low carb eating works well for them and will be more successful and for that person it may be. The research -- when looked at broadly and not with an agenda -- just doesn't support the notion that low carb eating results in significantly better weight loss. It would nice if it did, but it doesn't.

Much of this is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin...

The SAD (standard American diet) is so bad that nearly anything would be an improvement, and the "food pyramid" touted by government and industry is misleading at best. The anti-fat mantra is arguably wrong-headed, and the crap we've chosen to replace fats in the diet are likely causing more harm than good. Excess omega-6, transfats, and polyunsaturated fats all contribute to inflammation, which is a major marker, if not contributor, to arterial disease. Thus, lard or butter are better than the margarine or canola oil used as "healthier" replacements.

No doubt that calories in/out is a/the major factor in weight gain/loss. The types of food eaten, however, affect weight maintenance, or lack thereof, though to a lesser degree. But "paleo" type foods also affect lipids and blood sugar levels differently (positively?).

Anyway, since the evidence is good for "eat real foods, not too much", I'll attempt to follow it, and won't fret it I can't/won't follow a strict "anything" diet. I'm mindful of the big three of sugar, seed oils, and wheat, but sometimes you just gotta have a pizza or a slice of pie!

[tmm99]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonBoyd So what do you suggest for a no-Carb Sweetner?

I'm sorry to say I don't have any suggestions for a good tasting no-carb sweetner. If you don't mind splenda, Carbquik would probably be something you want to try. If you are not doing something like Atkin's induction diet, you could probably try making your own bisquik kind of mix using almond flour or coconut flour and some real wheat flour, ricotta cheese, eggs, birch sugar (xylitol) or even a little bit of real sugar.

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tmm99 I'm sorry to say I don't have any suggestions for a good tasting no-carb sweetner. If you don't mind splenda...

I was just curious. I don't have a problem with the taste of Splenda or Erythritol -- wet finger dipped in bowl. However, I do prefer Splenda in Hot Cocoa rather than Erythritol -- and I can't explain it -- so there must be something afoot.

On the other hand, I do not like the effects of other artificial Sweetners -- Aspartame, for instance.

[kyounge1956]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonBoyd So what do you suggest for a no-Carb Sweetner?

What about Stevia extract? It's plant-based, and many times sweeter than sugar. You can probably find it at your local health food store, and I have also seen it in some "regular" grocery stores. My bottle doesn't have any nutritional info on it, but the serving size is so small (1/64th of a teaspoon) that even if it were pure carbohydrate, the amount would be insignificant. I don't think there are many prepared foods that use Stevia rather than aspartame or other artificial sweeteners.

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kyounge1956 What about Stevia extract? It's plant-based, and many times sweeter than sugar. You can probably find it at your local health food store, and I have also seen it in some "regular" grocery stores.

You know, I think I seen that in WalMart today -- not sure though since I didn't buy anything in that aisle. I will pick up some the next time (if so). Thank you.

[DeborahB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR The SAD (standard American diet) is so bad that nearly anything would be an improvement, and the "food pyramid" touted by government and industry is misleading at best. The anti-fat mantra is arguably wrong-headed, and the crap we've chosen to replace fats in the diet are likely causing more harm than good. Excess omega-6, transfats, and polyunsaturated fats all contribute to inflammation, which is a major marker, if not contributor, to arterial disease. Thus, lard or butter are better than the margarine or canola oil used as "healthier" replacements.

I think the reason I didn't do well on weight watchers (haven't tried it since 2001 or so) was that I didn't eat a standard American diet - I eat no fast food, no regular sodas, a lot of vegetables, mostly whole wheat bread. And yes, sugar & salt - but not in the quantities in the SAD. The minute I go both low fat and low calorie, I am starving all the time. As I got older the weight loss on WW was so slow that I gave up.

The low carb diet works for me, I just don't stay on it for life. One funny thing - I would salivate in the pastry/bakery department of the grocery store when I hadn't had any of that for a while. Marvelous what our bodies can do...

I did find - in the past - that the minute I added any low carb "bread substitutes" to my diet, I stopped losing weight. After a while, I just did Atkins induction level to lose weight. No attempt to have fake anything.

OTOH I never tried CarbQuik.

I have friends who turned me onto a carb blocker pill that works for them. It worked for me, I think - it's worth trying. It's some kind of bean derivative. No sugar substitute in it - supposedly it neutralizes carbs you eat. They almost always have it (and everything else) on sale...

Swanson Ultra Ultimate Carb Control C-120X 2 mg 90 Tabs - Swanson Health Products

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thinker25 I have friends who turned me onto a carb blocker pill that works for them.

I am intrigued by the Dreamfields' Pasta products. They claim that some 30-40 Carbs per serving of their products are "non-digestible" leaving only 5 net Carbs per serving. I don't have any "hungers" for Pasta but I may check this out. (As ya all suspect, I do miss bread -- although absolutely nothing else.)

[ERD50]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katsmeow I've been very interested in the Taubes point of view and did a lot of reading to try to come to terms with what the research really shows. While I do think Taubes has made some good points, I don't have a lot of respect for what I feel is often cherry picked data and a lot of ignoring of data he doesn't like. I also think he tended to cherry pick quotes from people to make it seem like they supported his views when they don't.

Yes, from what I recall, this is exactly what bothered me about his writings.


-ERD50

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katsmeow I've been very interested in the Taubes point of view and did a lot of reading to try to come to terms with what the research really shows. While I do think Taubes has made some good points, I don't have a lot of respect for what I feel is often cherry picked data and a lot of ignoring of data he doesn't like. I also think he tended to cherry pick quotes from people to make it seem like they supported his views when they don't.

Yeah, like I said earlier, I hope his new book is easier (less work) to read.

[TromboneAl]

Yes, netrition.com for CarbQuik. Netrition seems to be a good company. They have a flat rate $4.95 shipping charge, so if you order a lot at once, it's a good deal.

I have to say that low carbing has not worked as well for Lena as for me. In spite of the fact that we eat the same stuff, she's had a lot more fluctuations in weight, and not as much loss. She just doesn't get the same hunger suppression that I do.

So, results certainly are different for different people, and it's a complicated issue.

I like the liquid splenda and erythritol. Many people report that one only notices the aftertaste in splenda when you first start using it.

I did some experimenting with eating different foods, and measuring changes in blood sugar, but got inconsistent results, which I chalked up to meter and general variability. It's not worth all the finger pricks.

BTW you can get a free glucose meter here. They make their money on the test strips, so the meters are generally free.

The consensus on the lowcarbfriends forum is that Dreamfields works very well. I find that it tastes great.

[TromboneAl]

Here are the tests I made:

The waffles breakfast was: 3 ounces of CarbQuik waffles (recipe on box but with liquid sucralose), 2 TBS of Walden Farms syrup, 1 TBS of butter, and decaf coffee with 1 TBS HWC

The bacon and eggs breakfast was: 4 strips of bacon, 2 large scrambled eggs, one small fried cherry tomato, 5 oz of caffeinated diet orange soda mixed with 5 oz water.

The bacon and hamburger breakfast was: 7 strips of bacon and 3 oz of ground beef and water



Same data with absolute values:



The results don't make much sense to me without assuming variability. But I like the colorful graphs.

[HFWR]

An interesting blog: Perfect Health Diet

Quote:

The main problem is that the main sources of carbohydrates in western diets – grains and sugar – contain food toxins such as gluten and fructose. So any benefits from reducing carbs could be the result of reduced toxin intake, not reduced carbohydrate calories.

Quote:

Much research will be needed to disentangle the relative contributions of plant toxins and carbohydrate calories to health. It looks from early evidence that intake of plant toxins may be much more consequential for health than the overall carbohydrate level. This is good news, since selection of low-toxicity foods and preparation methods that detoxify foods may enable big improvements in human health. Nevertheless, even if most toxins can be removed, there are reasons to believe that a low- to moderate-carb (10% to 30% of calories as carbs) diet will be optimal for human health. Such a diet seems to work well for nearly everyone, even the metabolically damaged; and it produces a tasty diet that is a pleasure to eat. It therefore seems the most prudent recommendation for diet book authors to make. And we stand by it!

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TromboneAl Chocolate, Chocolate made with artificial sweetener or Chocoperfection

Yeah, I found that Chocolate was something that I missed. Here is a Recipe that I developed that tastes as good it gets. There are 140 calories and, if that is a concern, you could leave out the Oil -- it doesn't really add to the taste but changes the Texture to match that of added Dairy. It, also, works well with Hershey's "Natural" but I find the "Special Dark" to be more chocolatey (and fewer calories?). NOTE: There are only 2 Net Carbs and thus a very rich source of Fiber.

Cocoa.JPG

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TromboneAl Here are the tests I made:

I am struggling with how to maintain a proper nutrition balance without taking a multi-vitamin. Here is my total average food intake for the month of December without any pills other than Fish Oil and Vitamin D. Notice the imbalance in the Vitamin/Mineral intake. The "Goals" are (for the most part) those set by the Government's DRI standards -- the "General" goals are my own customized ones.

Goal.JPG

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TromboneAl I did some experimenting with eating different foods, and measuring changes in blood sugar, but got inconsistent results, which I chalked up to meter and general variability. It's not worth all the finger pricks. BTW you can get a free glucose meter here. They make their money on the test strips, so the meters are generally free.

Oh! I am unsure if I am up to giving blood for this experiment. I, truly, hope I don't get that involved.

[RAE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HFWR Much of this is like asking how many angels can dance on the head of a pin... The SAD (standard American diet) is so bad that nearly anything would be an improvement, and the "food pyramid" touted by government and industry is misleading at best. The anti-fat mantra is arguably wrong-headed, and the crap we've chosen to replace fats in the diet are likely causing more harm than good. Excess omega-6, transfats, and polyunsaturated fats all contribute to inflammation, which is a major marker, if not contributor, to arterial disease. Thus, lard or butter are better than the margarine or canola oil used as "healthier" replacements.

Agreed. I walk through the grocery store now, and it's actually fairly difficult to find something I want to buy and eat - it's mostly processed crap ("food-like substances", as Michael Pollan says). But of course, that's what sells. It's no wonder we have an epidemic of obesity and diabetes in this country, considering the diet of the average American. And I'm not even including fast food here, so if you throw that in the mix, the diet gets even worse. There is probably no one ideal diet that fits everyone, because we are all slightly different. I can consume more carbs than my wife can, for example, without gaining any weight. However, I think it's safe to say that consuming large amounts of highly processed foods (like a lot of Americans are) is not good for anyone.

[CoolChange]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RonBoyd I am struggling with how to maintain a proper nutrition balance without taking a multi-vitamin....

I am in the same boat (similar daily calorie intake and nutritional targets).

Some of the things that help me reach my goals on a daily basis:

• I drink a lot of skim milk (1-3 quarts per day) which has a surprising amount of potassium and B vitamins and trace minerals in addition to the calcium you would expect. It is also my primary source of Vitamin D; but, frankly, I consider this little better than taking a supplement.
• Sunflower seeds and almonds for Vitamin E and several trace minerals.
• Tea brewed with tap water for fluoride.
• Spinach for Vitamin K.

Things that I am still working on:

• Getting more fiber in my diet.
• More natural (non-fortified) sources of Vitamin D and Omega-3's by adding more fish to my diet.

Hope you find some useful tidbits in this.

[RonBoyd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CoolChange Some of the things that help me reach my goals on a daily basis: I drink a lot of skim milk (1-3 quarts per day) which has a surprising amount of potassium and B vitamins and trace minerals in addition to the calcium you would expect. It is also my primary source of Vitamin D; but, frankly, I consider this little better than taking a supplement. Sunflower seeds and almonds for Vitamin E and several trace minerals. Tea brewed with tap water for fluoride. Spinach for Vitamin K. Hope you find some useful tidbits in this.

Thank you. There are one or two helpful things in there. However, Dairy Products are an interesting subject in a LC regimen -- hard cheese & cream, for example, are acceptable... milk not so much (and particularly the low-fat kind).

As you can see what only a cup (8 oz) gives you:

Skim Milk.JPG

Another mystery is: How do you get Iodine into your body without Table Salt?

[happy2bretired]

Kelp