And we won't mention just how many nuts I've eaten in the past two post-Cure days...
What we will mention, are the lovely primal meals I have enjoyed today, including some more of the now-famous Primal Chicken Fingers, thanks to link love from Mark Sisson!
Porterhouse for breakfast! Ah, back to normality.
Bacon & egg smash for a late afternoon snack.
Then, fried chicken fingers for dinner! Yum! I made them extra flavourful - zing! ;)
Meanwhile, I am trialling probiotics - out with the old experiment, in with the new!
I cut out grains, sugar and starches at the beginning of 2009. I have been keeping a journal as I have progressively shed my bulges and my processed foods. I am aiming to live a clean, primal lifestyle, and I wish to share my eating habits with those who wish to clean up their lifestyle and live happily and healthfully. As the cliche states - if I can do it, so can everybody else.
8 comments:
Hi, i have a question. Do you think that the less carbohydrates we eat in the day, the easier it will be for us to burn fat? and to get more muscular? I mean can we burn fat more efficiently by ingesting 10 to 15 grams of carbohydrates a day compared to taking 60 grams of carbohydrates a day?
Because remember that some low-carb diets are divided into 2 kinds. A real low carb diet and a higher low-carb diet of around 50 to 70 grams of carbohydrates a day like the phase 1 of the Protein Power low-carb diet, and the South Beach low-carb diet.
Thanks and i would like to know what do you think
.
Carbohydrates are poison and absolutely unnecessary. Today is my 8 month zero carb anniversary, and I'll never go back.
Katelyn: Thanx for clearing that up !! The thing is that i thought that some amount of carbohydrates low in glycemic index such as green cabbage, brocoli and brussel sprouts was good in low-carb diets.
But i guess that we can get our glucose that the body needs for energies from the protein and fat we eat.
Thanks
.
I, too, agree that for me, carbohydrates are not essential, and I can happily live without them.
To burn fat: Too many carbs can interrupt the ease of my fat burning, since insulin works to prevent lipolysis.
The issue that 'divides' the low-carb diet programs is based on the fact that each individual is different - some people can sufficiently lower their insulin and allow fat burning while consuming amounts as high as 150g carb per day, whilst others may need to all but eliminate them completely. The designers of the program tend to specify amounts that have worked for them/their clients, but that doesn't make them right for everyone.
To gain muscle: carbs are not necessary at all when your aim is to gain mass. The presence or absence of carbs is usually deemed irrelevant. The important factor is protein intake. Adequate, frequent protein ingestion can maintain the body in an anabolic state, allowing muscle growth. You also need to be consuming excess calories.
Glucose is needed to feed particular cells within the body, i.e. the brain. This small amount is easily derived from protein (ideally dietary, rather than via catabolism). Most other organs get their fuel from fats.
All that said, I do know people who get sick if they eat too much meat, and find it difficult to consume adequate calories from fats. While it conflicts with my understandings of evolution, I know that for some people, carb-based diets are their method of survival, and they thrive upon them. Many plants do use toxins as self-defense mechanisms, and could be considered poison to us. However, many carbs (fruits) were designed to be eaten by animals who would then poop out the seeds in nice packages of fertiliser. Despite all the information detailing the potential harm of fructose, that fact is undeniable. So I don't paint ways of eating as wrong or right. As in all things, I endorse educated action and experimentation to find what works for you.
Good post, Jez. I think zero carbs is the best way to be lean and muscular. I'll post any bikini pic to prove it!
TAKE A LOOK AT THE ANTI-SCIENTIFIC MANNER OF DEBATING OF HIGH-CARBERS, LOW-CALORIE DIETERS IN MANY FORUMS
http://forums.lylemcdonald.com/showthread.php?p=66720&posted=1#post66720
My nick is dietwalker
and i was debating with BFLmichelle (A pro-high carb diets)
Today, 10:18 PM
dietwalker
Member Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 32
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you are generalizing a bit. I mean I acknolwedge that many low-carbers don't lose weight on low-carb diets, but so what, but many people on high-carb, low-calorie diets don't lose fat either. I think that people have to count food portions and calories and control themselves.
However i do think that protein and fats are more satisfyng and control hunger a lot better than carbohydrates, because of the insulin spike produced by a diet high on carbohydrates even if its low in calories.
Another bad thing about carbohydrates is that the more carbohydrates people eat the more fat they store.
So beware of those cakes, pastas, and nice pancakes because they are indeed fattening
But like Lyle Mcdonalds said, at the end of the day, what counts is calories, but the good thing about high protein, low carb diets is that protein controls cravings and hunger a lot more efficient than those evil starchy carbohydrates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BFLMichelle
I have come across two very over weight women in the last two months doing low carb plans.
One flat told me I didn't know what I was talking about (calories in versus calories out) because there was science behind low carb allowing those doing low carb to eat as many calories as they wanted and still lose weight.
She doesn't exercise.
I told her to catch up with me in about a month and let me know how much BF she's lost and where she was th her plan.
Second lady has been dieting and working out for 4 weeks now and has not lost an ounce....but she counts her carbs. I suggested she also count calories for at least a few days just to see where she was and possibly reduce them a bit. She pretty much just looked right through me and re-stated that she had to count carbs because she is diabetic. Ok, I asked how much protein she was getting and how much fat. She didn't know.
This lady could still have the woosh effect and she might be ok.....but somehow I doubt it.
This has been my experience with almost everyone I've come across doing low carb, they think they can eat unlimted calories and still lose weight because they eat low carb.
.
Katelyn: Hi, how are you? I guess u are right. I look more muscular when i eat very little carbohydrates or no carbohydrates at all in a day. And when i go back to my eating about 30 to 40 grams of carbohydrates a day i would look more bloated.
By the way there is a scientific study which says that people can eat more calories on zero-carb diets compared to diets that have carbohydrates in them.
Advertisers want people to eat Duncan Hines cakes, Digiornos, Pillsbury cakes, Pizza Hut and fig bars. But nutrition scientists did an experiment in which they found that on a carb-containing diet of 2,000 calories per day, subjects did not lose at all, but that they did lose weight eating as much as 2,600 calories per day when the carbs were omitted
.
Yep, I love ZC-ing, I have the flattest gut ever - my Thailand bikini pic is right after my second stint of all-meat - I weigh less than I did in that photo right now, but no way would I get into a bikini! Blobby belly... So now that I'm back to the meaty bandwagon, I'm feeling much better and hopefully sending the jiggles away as well. Just had to finish off some organic haloumi this morning, and now it's meat and eggs all the way!
M-S, I can testify to the truth of ZC = not bothering to count calories. My first all-meat diet, I didn't count calories at all, I just ate meat until I was full. Ended up averaging a good 2200kcal per day, more than I had been eating at any other point all year. I lost fat so easily, felt great, was never hungry, and saw improvements in all sorts of other bio-markers as well, such as my hair. Add in 10-20g net carb, and I gain and don't feel great.
The problem with some low-carb plans is that they just ask people to count carbs, without really telling them to exclude grains and sugars. You end up with people still eating toast in the morning, or using low-carb wraps made with corn and grain and soy - ew! So their insulin is still out of whack. Low-carb as a term has been bandied about so often and misunderstood that people assume their ideas are correct and never consult the original publications such as the early Atkins books. Those who do their reading succeed, because they know what will hinder them. And they understand that (if you're still including some carbs) the line "you don't have to worry about calories" is because the other half of the line reads "because eating more protein and fat fills you up so you tend to drop caloric intake spontaneously". It's been proven time and time again in studies - subjects eat less on a low-carb diet, at least initially.
It's a shame that the low-carb proponents in that forum post had the message backwards - it's not that we can eat as many calories as we want and still lose weight, it's that we can eat as much as we want (until we are sated) and still consume fewer calories (usually), and therefore lose weight. The flaw in calories in/calories out is much more complicated than that anyway - some people waste excess calories, some people's hormonal levels mean every single calorie is ushered into storage (high insulin) and is stuck there while other cells starve. The 'magic' of low-carb, as we know, is the fact that it helps bring our hormones into balance so that we can burn our stored fat and don't prioritise the storage of calories - we leave them available to our other cells.
Damn shame that people are still getting this wrong.
Post a Comment