MORE WEIGHT LOSS TALK

[Rinse & rePeat]

UPDATE:

Yesterday I felt fantastic! I started with my day with the butter coffee and avoided all grains. I was surprised I wasn’t constantly hungry like usual, and my mood was on top of the world! I always eat liver and I go grain free often and don’t feel quite like yesterday, so I think the butter in my coffee had something to do with it and/or the summer squash. Last night my son ordered our favorite Domino’s thin crust jalapeño, bell pepper, mushroom and olive pizza, and it torture resisting it, but I did! I just didn’t want to mess up my energetic good mood and possibly ruin my sleep eating too late, and I knew there was always tomorrow to have pizza if I want. So I had a big glass of my raspberry, blueberry, orange peel and white honey juice instead, and had a good night sleep. Today that pizza was calling to me, so I pulled the cheese and topping off some pieces of that pizza and melted them on top of butter sautéed and salted summer squash and boy was that ever good! Here are pics below of what I did and DIDN’T eat, and I feel beautiful!

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

“Also known as summer squash, yellow varieties of squash provide numerous health benefits. The vegetable is high in vitamins A, B6, and C, folate, magnesium, fiber, riboflavin, phosphorus, and potassium. That’s a serious nutritional power-packed veggie.

Yellow squash is also rich in manganese. This mineral helps to boost bone strength and helps the body’s ability to process fats and carbohydrates.”

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

“These minerals are essential for many bodily functions, such as muscle contractions and blood pressure regulation.

Yellow squash contains good amounts of potassium and magnesium. Magnesium may play a role in regulating blood sugar levels, by helping improve insulin sensitivity (9). If you have diabetes or impaired glucose tolerance, you should definitely add more yellow squash to your meals to help control your condition properly!“

Benefits Of Yellow Squash: 7 Reasons Why You Should Eat This Veggie

★ WHAT ARE THE BENEFITS OF YELLOW SQUASH? ➤ Read this to know why and how to incorporate these colorful summer veggies into your diet.

betterme.world

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

“In the resting state, muscles consume mainly fats, so maintaining relatively large muscles is important for preventing the accumulation of fats.” -Ray Peat

 

[PeskyPeater]

Here is some easy math to remember:

Sugar + Fat = Fat (remember starches get converted to sugar so this equals baked potato with butter)

Seems great, I like how simple you put it, only thing is , when looking at the Randle effect, this statement is not quite correct.

For the sugar from the diet can be taken up by cells than prefer that type of fuel. While the fats with a meal, let's assume those are saturated, can be taken up by big muscles from the same meal. There is no competition between sugar/fats in that sense.

And the sugar has the additional quality to stop the PUFA triglycerides (that are released in the bloodstream while fasting or stressed) from activating the Randle effect that blocks glucose uptake as fuel. While the saturated fats (in reasonable low amounts) also can displace the PUFA sources of fuel.

“The antagonism between fat and sugar that Randle described can involve the suppression of sugar oxidation when the concentration of fats in the bloodstream is increased by eating fatty food, or by releasing fats from the tissues by lipolysis, but it can also involve the suppression of fat oxidation by inhibiting the release of fatty acids from the tissues, when a sufficient amount of sugar is eaten.” R.Peat phd

Sugar + Starch = Fat (this is sugar on top of sugar, aka cupcakes, and how diabetes happens)

Seems to make sense, but this is not the case when looking at the studies below.

And a rise in insuline is not bad per sé, insulin actually helps lowering lipolysis in fat cells / the release of PUFA as FFA, so in a sense it is protective in the Randle effect to help prevent block of sugar uptake.

“Stress, even emotional stress, decreases the barrier function of the intestine, allowing bacterial endotoxin to be absorbed. Endotoxin activates a variety of enzymes, including those that liberate free fatty acids from the tissues. This is associated with systemic inflammation, and conditions including liver cirrhosis, Parkinson’s disease, and nerve inflammation (Garate, et al., 2013). This immediate direct effect of endotoxin, the lipolytic increase of free fatty acids in the circulation blocks insulin-stimulated glucose uptake (Buhl, et al, 2013; Wellhoener 2011). Despite this now well established role of stress and endotoxin in the production of hyperglycemia, the medical diagnosis of “diabetes” is universally made without measuring either cortisol or endotoxin.” R.Peat phd

A little bit of fructose before a starchy meal can lower the rise in blood glucose in normal and diabetic type 2.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...m_body_weight_and_glucose_tolerance_in_humans

... the addition of small catalytic
amounts of fructose to a glucose load improves
glucose tolerance in both healthy and diabetic
subjects. Similarly, a small dose of fructose
consumed 60 and 30 min before starchy food with
a high glycaemic index decreased the glycaemic
response compared with food without fructose. It
seems that in physiological circumstances the fruc-
tose could be consumed before the carbohydrate
load. Therefore, a snack containing a small amount
of fructose, e.g. a piece of fruit, 30 60 min before a
meal may be beneficial, especially for people with
impaired glucose tolerance or type 2 diabetes. ...

Spoiler: long version:

Fructose and oral glucose tolerance
The glycaemic benefits of fructose as a substitute for
other carbohydrates have been reported in several
studies. Reiser et al. (8) studied 10 hyperinsulinae-
mic and 11 non-hyperinsulinaemic control men
consuming a typical American diet containing
20E% either as fructose or as high-amylose corn-
starch for 5 weeks in a cross-over design to
determine their effects on indices of glucose toler-
ance. Glucose responses were significantly lower 60
and 120 min after the meals containing fructose (8).
Similarly, the day-long glucose profile was lower
after meals containing fructose (8). Insulin response
was also significantly lower 60 min after the meals
containing fructose, as was the day-long insulin
response on the fructose-containing diet (8)

The glycaemic benefits of fructose, together with
results from animal studies, raised the hypothesis
that a small catalytic dose of fructose administrated
with glucose may decrease the glycaemic response to
the glucose load (30).
Moore et al. (30) examined
the effect of fructose on glucose tolerance by an oral
glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in healthy human
volunteers (five men and six women). Each subject
underwent OGTT on two separate occasions, at
least 1 week apart. Each OGTT consisted of 75 g
glucose with or without 7.5 g fructose, in a random
order. The area under the curve (AUC) of the
change in plasma glucose was 19% less in the OGTT
with fructose than in the OGTT without fructose
(pB/0.05). The OGTT was improved by fructose in
nine subjects and worsened in two. All subjects with
the largest glucose AUC during OGTT without
fructose had a decreased response during OGTT
with fructose (mean decrease of 31%). There were
no differences between the OGTTs in serum insulin
AUC, glucagon, non-esterified fatty acid or trigly-
ceride concentrations. The authors concluded that
low-dose fructose improves the glycaemic response
to an oral glucose load in normal adults without
significantly enhancing the insulin or triglyceride
response. Importantly, fructose appeared to be most
effective in those normal individuals who had the
poorest glucose tolerance (30).

The above-mentioned results inspired the same
group to repeat the study with type 2 diabetic
subjects. Five diabetic subjects underwent an OGTT
on two occasions at least 1 week apart (31). As in
the earlier study, OGTT consisted of 75 g glucose
with or without the addition of 7.5 g fructose, in a
random order. The AUC of the plasma glucose
response was reduced by fructose administration in
all subjects, and the mean AUC during the OGTT
with fructose was 14% less than during the OGTT
without fructose (pB/0.05). In contrast to the
earlier study with normal adults, the insulin AUC
was decreased by 21% with fructose administration.
Neither non-esterified fatty acids nor triglyceride
concentrations differed between the two trials,
which is in line with the earlier study with healthy
subjects (30).

Another group also studied the catalytic effect on
postprandial glycaemic response of a small dose of
fructose administrated before or simultaneously
with a high glycaemic index starchy food (32).
They gave 31 non-diabetic healthy adults a portion
of instant mashed potato containing 50 g available
carbohydrate alone or with 10 g fructose. The effect
of timing of fructose ingestion was evaluated by
asking the subjects to consume the 10 g fructose at
60 or 30 min before, or immediately (0 min) before
the instant mashed potato meal. Compared with the
control meal without fructose, the positive incre-
mental AUC of blood glucose was reduced by 25%
and 27% (pB/0.01) when fructose was fed 60 or 30
min before the meal, respectively. However, in
contrast to the previous studies (30, 31), Heacock
et al. (32) did not find any decreased glycaemic
response when fructose was consumed simulta-
neously with instant mashed potato. The differences
in the type and the amount of carbohydrate
consumed in these three studies may explain that
discrepancy. Moore et al. (30, 31) used glucose,
which requires no hydrolysis for absorption, as
opposed to the starch consumed in the other study
(32). The greater amount of carbohydrate (75 versus
50 g) in the studies by Moore et al. (30, 31)
compared with the study by Heacock et al. (32)
may have enhanced the sensitivity for detecting
changes in the glycaemic response when fructose
was given simultaneously with the carbohydrate.
Another possible mechanism may be related to
the absorption of fructose. It is known that the
absorption of fructose from the intestine is greatly
facilitated by the presence of free glucose (4), while
the hydrolysis of starch by amylase will result in
mainly disaccharides, trisaccharides and oligosac-
charides in the lumen. Therefore, the absorption of
fructose in the presence of disaccharides, trisacchar-
ides and oligosaccharides from starch hydrolysis
may have been slower than it would have been in the
presence of free glucose.

To keep excess fat away, you want to stick to this formula.

Sugar + LEAN Protein = Fat Loss (this is the pairing fats with nonfats idea, example: nonfat milk with honey, fish or cheese with fruit, lean steak with Coke)

yeah I like this very much :)

edit - added source

edit - highlights

 

[PeskyPeater]

Weight loss is easy. You just have to breathe more.

I suspect what you mean by this is improving the exhaling of CO2 from burning more fats.

Did you mean this:


But this thread seems to focus on NOT burning fat, but slowly letting it be eliminated via the liver, right @Rinse & rePeat ...

edit - added media

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

Seems great, I like how simple you put it, only thing is , when looking at the Randle effect, this statement is not quite correct.

For the sugar from the diet can be taken up by cells than prefer that type of fuel. While the fats with a meal, let's assume those are saturated, can be taken up by big muscles from the same meal. There is no competition between sugar/fats in that sense.

And the sugar has the additional quality to stop the PUFA triglycerides (that are released in the bloodstream while fasting or stressed) from activating the Randle effect that blocks glucose uptake as fuel. While the saturated fats (in reasonable low amounts) also can displace the PUFA sources of fuel.




Seems to make sense, but this is not the case when looking at the studies below.

And a rise in insuline is not bad per sé, insulin actually helps lowering lipolysis in fat cells / the release of PUFA as FFA, so in a sense it is protective in the Randle effect to help prevent block of sugar uptake.



A little bit of fructose before a meal can lower the rise in blood glucose in normal and diabetic type 2.
https://www.researchgate.net/public...m_body_weight_and_glucose_tolerance_in_humans

Spoiler: long version:

Fructose and oral glucose tolerance
The glycaemic benefits of fructose as a substitute for
other carbohydrates have been reported in several
studies. Reiser et al. (8) studied 10 hyperinsulinae-
mic and 11 non-hyperinsulinaemic control men
consuming a typical American diet containing
20E% either as fructose or as high-amylose corn-
starch for 5 weeks in a cross-over design to
determine their effects on indices of glucose toler-
ance. Glucose responses were significantly lower 60
and 120 min after the meals containing fructose (8).
Similarly, the day-long glucose profile was lower
after meals containing fructose (8). Insulin response
was also significantly lower 60 min after the meals
containing fructose, as was the day-long insulin
response on the fructose-containing diet (8)

The glycaemic benefits of fructose, together with
results from animal studies, raised the hypothesis
that a small catalytic dose of fructose administrated
with glucose may decrease the glycaemic response to
the glucose load (30).
Moore et al. (30) examined
the effect of fructose on glucose tolerance by an oral
glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in healthy human
volunteers (five men and six women). Each subject
underwent OGTT on two separate occasions, at
least 1 week apart. Each OGTT consisted of 75 g
glucose with or without 7.5 g fructose, in a random
order. The area under the curve (AUC) of the
change in plasma glucose was 19% less in the OGTT
with fructose than in the OGTT without fructose
(pB/0.05). The OGTT was improved by fructose in
nine subjects and worsened in two. All subjects with
the largest glucose AUC during OGTT without
fructose had a decreased response during OGTT
with fructose (mean decrease of 31%). There were
no differences between the OGTTs in serum insulin
AUC, glucagon, non-esterified fatty acid or trigly-
ceride concentrations. The authors concluded that
low-dose fructose improves the glycaemic response
to an oral glucose load in normal adults without
significantly enhancing the insulin or triglyceride
response. Importantly, fructose appeared to be most
effective in those normal individuals who had the
poorest glucose tolerance (30).

The above-mentioned results inspired the same
group to repeat the study with type 2 diabetic
subjects. Five diabetic subjects underwent an OGTT
on two occasions at least 1 week apart (31). As in
the earlier study, OGTT consisted of 75 g glucose
with or without the addition of 7.5 g fructose, in a
random order. The AUC of the plasma glucose
response was reduced by fructose administration in
all subjects, and the mean AUC during the OGTT
with fructose was 14% less than during the OGTT
without fructose (pB/0.05). In contrast to the
earlier study with normal adults, the insulin AUC
was decreased by 21% with fructose administration.
Neither non-esterified fatty acids nor triglyceride
concentrations differed between the two trials,
which is in line with the earlier study with healthy
subjects (30).

Another group also studied the catalytic effect on
postprandial glycaemic response of a small dose of
fructose administrated before or simultaneously
with a high glycaemic index starchy food (32).
They gave 31 non-diabetic healthy adults a portion
of instant mashed potato containing 50 g available
carbohydrate alone or with 10 g fructose. The effect
of timing of fructose ingestion was evaluated by
asking the subjects to consume the 10 g fructose at
60 or 30 min before, or immediately (0 min) before
the instant mashed potato meal. Compared with the
control meal without fructose, the positive incre-
mental AUC of blood glucose was reduced by 25%
and 27% (pB/0.01) when fructose was fed 60 or 30
min before the meal, respectively. However, in
contrast to the previous studies (30, 31), Heacock
et al. (32) did not find any decreased glycaemic
response when fructose was consumed simulta-
neously with instant mashed potato. The differences
in the type and the amount of carbohydrate
consumed in these three studies may explain that
discrepancy. Moore et al. (30, 31) used glucose,
which requires no hydrolysis for absorption, as
opposed to the starch consumed in the other study
(32). The greater amount of carbohydrate (75 versus
50 g) in the studies by Moore et al. (30, 31)
compared with the study by Heacock et al. (32)
may have enhanced the sensitivity for detecting
changes in the glycaemic response when fructose
was given simultaneously with the carbohydrate.
Another possible mechanism may be related to
the absorption of fructose. It is known that the
absorption of fructose from the intestine is greatly
facilitated by the presence of free glucose (4), while
the hydrolysis of starch by amylase will result in
mainly disaccharides, trisaccharides and oligosac-
charides in the lumen. Therefore, the absorption of
fructose in the presence of disaccharides, trisacchar-
ides and oligosaccharides from starch hydrolysis
may have been slower than it would have been in the
presence of free glucose.

yeah I like this very much :)

edit - added source

I have had my own study going and it is what has been consistently working for me….

“STARCH and GLUCOSE efficiently stimulate insulin secretion, and that accelerates the disposition of glucose, activating its conversion to glycogen and fat, as well as its oxidation. Fructose inhibits the stimulation of insulin by glucose, so this means that eating ordinary sugar, sucrose (a disaccharide, consisting of glucose and fructose), in place of starch, will reduce the tendency to store fat. Eating “complex carbohydrates,” rather than sugars, is a reasonable way to promote obesity. Eating starch, by increasing insulin and lowering the blood sugar, stimulates the appetite, causing a person to eat more, so the effect on fat" -Ray Peat

 

[PeskyPeater]

I have had my own study going and it is what has been consistently working for me….

“STARCH and GLUCOSE efficiently stimulate insulin secretion, and that accelerates the disposition of glucose, activating its conversion to glycogen and fat, as well as its oxidation. Fructose inhibits the stimulation of insulin by glucose, so this means that eating ordinary sugar, sucrose (a disaccharide, consisting of glucose and fructose), in place of starch, will reduce the tendency to store fat. Eating “complex carbohydrates,” rather than sugars, is a reasonable way to promote obesity. Eating starch, by increasing insulin and lowering the blood sugar, stimulates the appetite, causing a person to eat more, so the effect on fat" -Ray Peat

yes and I support that part, that is in my eyes similar to your last statement

"Sugar + LEAN Protein = Fat Loss (this is the pairing fats with nonfats idea, example: nonfat milk with honey, fish or cheese with fruit, lean steak with Coke) "

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

I suspect what you mean by this is improving the exhaling of CO2 from burning more fats.

Did you mean this:


But this thread seems to focus on NOT burning fat, but slowly letting it be eliminated via the liver, right @Rinse & rePeat ...

edit - added media

By not eating a high fat diet my body is forced to burn some of it’s own fat, and upping my sugar without starches gets my energy up to make the process easier. Not complicating the digestive process, slowing it down with starches keeps my energy up too. So yea I would say this thread is about “eliminating” stored fat, not burning fat that is eaten.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

yes and I support that part, that is in my eyes similar to your last statement

"Sugar + LEAN Protein = Fat Loss (this is the pairing fats with nonfats idea, example: nonfat milk with honey, fish or cheese with fruit, lean steak with Coke) "

I am only addressing weight loss per Ray Peat’s advice. Sugar gets paired with protein. If an EXCESS of sugar/starches are combined with fats the excess is going to be stored as fat. I am not addressing blood sugar/diabetic issues, just the basic idea of how fat goes on and fat comes off. I agree that a cookie made with starch, sugar and butter is very satiating, and balances blood sugars, but it certainly isn’t a good strategy for weight loss. Low-fat, adequate protein, calcium and sugars have been key for me. I have great success losing as much weight as I want on potato fasts and the lemonade diet, but none of it is sustainable. Keeping weight off has to be a lifestyle change with some basic principles. With that being said I enjoy my oat chocolate chip macadamia cookies when I make them as well as other “splurges”, like the fresh clams and linguine I am looking forward to tomorrow night, I just don’t make it a usual like having toast for breakfast every morning and rice or potatoes every night for dinner. I probably rambled huh?

 

[PeskyPeater]

@Rinse & rePeat

Yeah the simplicity in it's principles is what I like about this. Sugar plus protein, done. Weight management Doesnt need to be overcomplex, that would be counter productive.

And what is interesting to me is that how this tolerance of excess of fuels is directly related to the way you are increasing your metabolic rate with this approach. As lot's of people can get fat on much lower amount of foods bc or low thyroid function, that is directly inhibited through their PUFA/ starchy diet. So you are making a fine example of that here.

Awesome thread. Please ramble on.. and keep up the good work..

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

@Rinse & rePeat

Yeah the simplicity in it's principles is what I like about this. Sugar plus protein, done. Weight management Doesnt need to be overcomplex, that would be counter productive.

And what is interesting to me is that how this tolerance of excess of fuels is directly related to the way you are increasing your metabolic rate with this approach. As lot's of people can get fat on much lower amount of foods bc or low thyroid function, that is directly inhibited through their PUFA/ starchy diet. So you are making a fine example of that here.

Awesome thread. Please ramble on.. and keep up the good work..

Thanks for listening! In my Ray Peat approach consistency is key. In the past every time I would get somewhere with it all I would get lax and undo it all. Gaining momentum and constantly stopping doesn’t get the metabolism revved up. I stick to my formula now and don’t have as many splurges as I think I deserve. Good health is just as important as keeping myself fit.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

UPDATE:

For my second meal today I sautéed 2.5 ounces of braunschweiger, which is one ounce of liver and 12 grams of protein. I sautéed it in a little ghee and added some crush EPIC pork rinds which is really low in fat and high in protein, and then I moistened the pork rinds a little bit with my homemade chuck roast bone broth I made yesterday. Then I topped it off with a little grass-fed sour cream and hot sauce. This is going on my rotation for sure! I chased it with a half cup raw milk mixed with a teaspoon of organic instant coffee and raw white honey. Later I will probably have an egg with a big glass of my berry honey juice, or maybe a glass of milk instead of the egg. I could use some more calcium today. I had a glass of my berry juice after my pizza squash, sweetened with marmalade.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

Update:

I am noticing today how much better my legs look, than they did two months ago, and my weight hasn’t changed. A couple months ago I wasn’t eating liver and I was eating more grains.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

I am glad I have been eat my Ray Peat recommended 3 to 4 ounces of liver a week, one ounce at a time. I did not know it suppresses thyroid function….


“Liver is another rich source of the B vitamins as well as the oily vitamins, but it can suppress thyroid function, so usually one meal a week is enough.“ -Ray Oeat

 

[PeskyPeater]

I am glad I have been eat my Ray Peat recommended 3 to 4 ounces of liver a week, one ounce at a time. I did not know it suppresses thyroid function….


“Liver is another rich source of the B vitamins as well as the oily vitamins, but it can suppress thyroid function, so usually one meal a week is enough.“ -Ray Oeat

per 100gr there is 18.000 IU of vitamin A in beef liver, I think high amounts may suppress thyroid.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

per 100gr there is 18.000 IU of vitamin A in beef liver, I think high amounts may suppress thyroid.

Yeah maybe it is the vitamin A.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

My obsession this week has been chilled candy sweet watermelon paired with Camembert or fresh salted mozzarella. I am not hungry for hours afterwards!….


“Plantains are very proinflammatory, with a high serotonin content; commercial orange juice, especially if it doesn’t separate when standing for a few hours, can produce bowel irritation by supporting bacterial growth because of the suspended modified fiber, and watermelons that aren’t perfectly ripe have enough starch to cause problems, though very ripe watermelon is safe.” -Ray Peat, PhD

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

I am continually seeing improvements honing my diet, especially this past few months. I am happy that I can still get away with wearing copped tops, in this scorching heat this summer, and at almost sixty!

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

UPDATE:

I am faithfully eating my liver 3 to 4 times a week in one ounce increments. I am feeling and seeing a difference, compared to eating my liver once a week in a bigger portion like I use to, or not at all. I am eating it in a beef/liver braunschweiger blend. I cut the pound into six portions so each portion has roughly one ounce of liver and 1.5 ounces of grass fed beef, it is an excellent multivitamin!