High fat / moderate carb experiment

[stargazer1111]

Have you considered a low carb diet that is more than just a single type of meat and butter? It seems a bit strange to say you have tried a low carb diet and say its no good when you were eating 1 meat and a condiment basically. You can eat a low carb diet and varied diet.

I've done multiple versions of it. You're assuming that I haven't. I did strict Atkins for an extended period. It was awful.

 

[Maljam]

Yes it does. Patients got lean, reversed atherosclerosis, reversed type 2 diabetes, reversed severe hypertension, and reversed severe kidney disease. If the sugar was harmful, these metabolic conditions would not have reversed.

Him beating his patients is irrelevant to the efficacy of the diet. He beat them because the diet wasn't pallatable and they wouldn't stick to it.

Your statements about what would happen "for the rest of their lives" is just an assumption.

All of those things can happen by just getting lean, and the kemper rice diet was lower in calories than the average person was eating back then. Many of the benefits could just be from a lowering of calories and maybe to do with reduction in irritating foods, but I think the calories is an overlooked factor. People were eating near 3000 then. Carnivore sometimes works because it removes a lot of irritating foods and is an intervention, but people struggle long term. Kempner rice diet sometimes works because it removes a lot of irritating foods and is an intervention, but people struggle long term. Intervention diets dont need to be healthy to prove anything. Healthy is a completely different thing from doing an intervention diet and losing a ton of weight and thus improving a load of health markers.

Where did I theorise about what would happen for the rest of the lives? All I asked was, were the people on the kempner diet on the diet for the rest of their lives, or was it an intervention? That is a very different question to the one you acted like I asked. I also asked because it seems like you are going to keep up an intervention diet indefinitely and I am trying to stop you doing something stupid.

 

[Maljam]

I've done multiple versions of it. You're assuming that I haven't. I did strict Atkins for an extended period. It was awful.

Yes, of course I'm assuming you haven't because all you said is you ate beef and butter. I don't know you and can't read your mind, your first post mentioning atkins was telling me you did atkins and I shouldn't assume you didn't. Atkins is also too low carb IMO.

 

[Maljam]

Another example of what I am trying to say @stargazer1111

A Teacher Lost 56 Pounds Eating McDonald's & People are Pissed

A science teacher ate nothing but McDonald's for six months and lost 56 pounds, and people are pissed.

niashanks.com

A guy eats nothing but McDonalds for 3 months, keeping his calories at 2000 a day, same as Kempner. He lost a bunch of weight and improved health markers. Your logic would say he has proved Mcdonalds isn't harmful and now you are going to eat Mcdonalds every meal of every day. Intervention diets can make anything look great as long as they are low enough in calories to make the people lose weight. You aren't talking about an intervention though you are talking about a long term diet to make you healthy, which is an entirely different ball game.

 

[stargazer1111]

Another example of what I am trying to say @stargazer1111

A Teacher Lost 56 Pounds Eating McDonald's & People are Pissed

A science teacher ate nothing but McDonald's for six months and lost 56 pounds, and people are pissed.

niashanks.com

A guy eats nothing but McDonalds for 3 months, keeping his calories at 2000 a day, same as Kempner. He lost a bunch of weight and improved health markers. Your logic would say he has proved Mcdonalds isn't harmful and now you are going to eat Mcdonalds every meal of every day. Intervention diets can make anything look great as long as they are low enough in calories to make the people lose weight. You aren't talking about an intervention though you are talking about a long term diet to make you healthy, which is an entirely different ball game.

This is a silly anecdote. The Kempner diet was done for decades with many patients.

BTW, my fasting blood glucose was 78 today.

 

[stargazer1111]

Yes, of course I'm assuming you haven't because all you said is you ate beef and butter. I don't know you and can't read your mind, your first post mentioning atkins was telling me you did atkins and I shouldn't assume you didn't. Atkins is also too low carb IMO.

The better response would have been to ask if I had done other versions of the diet rather than assume I had not.

 

[Maljam]

This is a silly anecdote. The Kempner diet was done for decades with many patients.

BTW, my fasting blood glucose was 78 today.

There are things to be learned in the most silly of anecdotes, but I think you are ignoring the point behind it. Someone could lose weight eating nothing but soles of shoes, improve health markers through weight loss, it wouldn't make soles of shoes not harmful to eat.

Obesity is causing the health markers to be out of whack, fixing obesity, by whatever means, improves the markers, but doesn't mean the method of fixing obesity isn't harmful. This is pretty much what I am trying to say.

Good luck with the experiments though, I do genuinely hope it works for you, I have been where you are with the sugar consumption and it ended badly for me, so I was trying to prevent you going down that path.

 

[stargazer1111]

All of those things can happen by just getting lean, and the kemper rice diet was lower in calories than the average person was eating back then. Many of the benefits could just be from a lowering of calories and maybe to do with reduction in irritating foods, but I think the calories is an overlooked factor. People were eating near 3000 then. Carnivore sometimes works because it removes a lot of irritating foods and is an intervention, but people struggle long term. Kempner rice diet sometimes works because it removes a lot of irritating foods and is an intervention, but people struggle long term. Intervention diets dont need to be healthy to prove anything. Healthy is a completely different thing from doing an intervention diet and losing a ton of weight and thus improving a load of health markers.

Where did I theorise about what would happen for the rest of the lives? All I asked was, were the people on the kempner diet on the diet for the rest of their lives, or was it an intervention? That is a very different question to the one you acted like I asked. I also asked because it seems like you are going to keep up an intervention diet indefinitely and I am trying to stop you doing something stupid.

Calling my way of eating "stupid" is, well, stupid considering you only know a fraction of the details of my life.

Just because a diet is an "intervention," does not mean it is unhealthy.

The bottom line is this:

I cannot tolerate starch or fiber in any form. This eliminates pretty much every food you and the other conventional folks out there consider healthy. My gastrointestinal system rejects all of these foods in a severe manner. No doctor has ever been able to diagnose this and I have specifically been told by my gastroenterologist to eat whatever I can that causes the least damage.

That leaves me with meat, fat, and sugar. If I eliminate the sugar, I get sick. If I eliminate the meat and fat I get sick. If I eat anything other than meat, fat, and sugar, I get sick.

That's the end of the story for me. No more dietary experiments. No more experts. No more outside advice. I'm done.

 

[stargazer1111]

There are things to be learned in the most silly of anecdotes, but I think you are ignoring the point behind it. Someone could lose weight eating nothing but soles of shoes, improve health markers through weight loss, it wouldn't make soles of shoes not harmful to eat.

Obesity is causing the health markers to be out of whack, fixing obesity, by whatever means, improves the markers, but doesn't mean the method of fixing obesity isn't harmful. This is pretty much what I am trying to say.

Good luck with the experiments though, I do genuinely hope it works for you, I have been where you are with the sugar consumption and it ended badly for me, so I was trying to prevent you going down that path.

The reason we do not rely on single anecdotes in science is because they could be statistical outliers that are not representative of the population.

Stick a large sample of people from different genetic backgrounds and genders on the same diet and then get back to me with the results.

 

[Maljam]

The reason we do not rely on single anecdotes in science is because they could statistical outliers that are not representative of the population.

Stick a large sample of people from different genetic backgrounds and genders on the same diet and then get back to me with the results.

People lose weight and improve markers on the keto forums, people lose weight and improve markers on the fasting forums, people lose weight and improve markers on the exercise forums, people lose weight and improve markers eating Mcdonalds. Losing weight is the common denominator, there is nothing magical about Kempners rice diet. As I say, good luck with it all.

 

[Maljam]

Calling my way of eating "stupid" is, well, stupid considering you only know a fraction of the details of my life.

Just because a diet is an "intervention," does not mean it is unhealthy.

The bottom line is this:

I cannot tolerate starch or fiber in any form. This eliminates pretty much every food you and the other conventional folks out there consider healthy. My gastrointestinal system rejects all of these foods in a severe manner. No doctor has ever been able to diagnose this and I have specifically been told by my gastroenterologist to eat whatever I can that causes the least damage.

That leaves me with meat, fat, and sugar. If I eliminate the sugar, I get sick. If I eliminate the meat and fat I get sick. If I eat anything other than meat, fat, and sugar, I get sick.

That's the end of the story for me. No more dietary experiments. No more experts. No more outside advice. I'm done.

Read Edward Edmonds post about fructose and the GI tract. I would bet the sugar is damaging your GI tract and making you sensitive to other foods. I had this exact same issue.

 

[stargazer1111]

People lose weight and improve markers on the keto forums, people lose weight and improve markers on the fasting forums, people lose weight and improve markers on the exercise forums, people lose weight and improve markers eating Mcdonalds. Losing weight is the common denominator, there is nothing magical about Kempners rice diet. As I say, good luck with it all.

Where did I claim that Kempner's diet was "magical?"

It's supported by a vast amount of science on diabetes. For instance, a recent meta analysis showed that switching any other calories source (fat, protein, starch) with a fructose-containing calorie source (sucrose or fructose directly), reduces HbA1c and is associated with a reduced risk of developing type 2 diabetes, after controlling for the calories consumed.

Also, no, weight loss is not the common denominator. Many skinny people die of atherosclerosis and skinny, ketogenic people sometimes have egregiously high LDL cholesterol numbers. Being skinny does not equate to being healthy and being overweight does not equate to being unhealthy.

In fact, another recent meta analysis showed that the weight bracket that leads to the lowest all-cause mortality is actually the overweight bracket. Those in the "normal weight" bracket had the same rate of death as those in the obese one.

 

[stargazer1111]

Read Edward Edmonds post about fructose and the GI tract. I would bet the sugar is damaging your GI tract and making you sensitive to other foods. I had this exact same issue.

This is ridiculous considering that sugar/fructose is the substance most tolerated by my gut while starch is the least tolerated.

Also, these gut issues started years ago when I was consuming zero sugar.

 

[Maljam]

Where did I claim that Kempner's diet was "magical?"

It's supported by a vast amount of science on diabetes. For instance, a recent meta analysis showed that switching any other calories source (fat, protein, starch) with a fructose-containing calorie source (sucrose or fructose directly), reduces HbA1c and is associated with a reduced risk of developing type 2 diabetes.

Also, no, weight loss is not the common denominator. Many skinny people die of atherosclerosis and skinny, ketogenic people sometimes have egregiously high LDL cholesterol numbers. Being skinny does not equate to being healthy and being overweight does not equate to being unhealthy.

In fact, another recent meta analysis showed that the weight bracket that leads to the lowest all-cause mortality is actually the overweight bracket. Those in the "normal weight" bracket had the same rate of death as those in the obese one.

We are getting nowhere with this and you keep making me argue with points I haven't made. I also seem like im agitating you at this point which is never my intention.

You seem to have all of the answers, but none of the health, which is a common trend in health forums.

I never said skinny people don't die from atherosclerosis, I said that reducing obesity improves health markers. These are very different things. Yes sometimes keto have high cholesterol numbers, because it is an **intervention diet** and I don't think it is a wise long term plan. I never recommended keto. You are almost agreeing with me at this point but seem to want an argument more than fixing your issues or finding an answer.

I agree with you being skinny isn't healthy and being obese isn't always unhealthy and I've never made the point to the opposite. What I am saying is someone that is obese, with bad health markers, will improve their health markers by losing weight. That doesn't mean the diet that has made them lose weight is healthy. That is the only point I am trying to make. I haven't said anything about skinny being better than being fat, or that skinny people live to 1000. Obese people losing weight will improve health markers usually regardless of the diet.

This is ridiculous considering that sugar/fructose is the substance most tolerated by my gut while starch is the least tolerated.

Also, these gut issues started years ago when I was consuming zero sugar.

Once again, I never said anything about starch, I said sugar might be damaging your GI tract, that is all I said.

Also, alcoholics "tolerate" alcohol better than no alcohol, that doesn't mean that alcohol is doing them any good.

 

[michael94]

wow old thread!

 

[Amazoniac]

Wally's diet is sometimes viewed as purified, yet it's more nutritious than people assume. For example, how many persons you know that don't rely on supplements consume 2 mg of thiamine a day?
- Dietary intake of the water-soluble vitamins B1, B2, B6, B12 and C in 10 countries in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition

- Treatment of Hypertensive Vascular Disease with Rice Diet

"Supplementary vitamins are added in the following amounts: poison A 5,000 units, venom D 1,000 units, thiamine chloride 5 mg., riboflavin 5 mg., niacinamide 25 mg., calcium pantothenate 2 mg."​

Also, refinement of rice doesn't eliminate everything, it's better than sugar:
- White sugar | SELF Nutrition Data (1 ounce)
- White rice | SELF Nutrition Data (100 g)

- Selenium and manganese in depression – preclinical and clinical studies

 

[Blossom]

I cannot tolerate starch or fiber in any form. This eliminates pretty much every food you and the other conventional folks out there consider healthy. My gastrointestinal system rejects all of these foods in a severe manner. No doctor has ever been able to diagnose this and I have specifically been told by my gastroenterologist to eat whatever I can that causes the least damage.

That leaves me with meat, fat, and sugar. If I eliminate the sugar, I get sick. If I eliminate the meat and fat I get sick. If I eat anything other than meat, fat, and sugar, I get sick.

That's the end of the story for me. No more dietary experiments. No more experts. No more outside advice. I'm done.

I’m in the same situation and can completely relate. Best wishes @stargazer1111.

 

[Jam]

Also, no, weight loss is not the common denominator. Many skinny people die of atherosclerosis and skinny, ketogenic people sometimes have egregiously high LDL cholesterol numbers. Being skinny does not equate to being healthy and being overweight does not equate to being unhealthy.

Sorry, but just wanted to comment on this one statement. I hope you don't buy into the ignorant mainstream belief that high LDL is bad. Just sayin'...

 

[Braveheart]

I’m in the same situation and can completely relate. Best wishes @stargazer1111.

Hi Blossom...What are your percentages or calories from proteins, carbs and fats roughly...if you don't mind sharing...Cheers!

 

[Amazoniac]

Sorry, but just wanted to comment on this one statement. I hope you don't buy into the ignorant mainstream belief that high LDL is bad. Just sayin'...

Sorry, but just wanted to add one detail. I hope you don't buy water-logged rice, composition of his diet was based on dry weight. Just addin'..
- White rice (raw) | SELF Nutrition Data (1 cup, which is less than the minimum of 250 g/d)

I guess there's no selenium this time: still depressed.