Cirion
Member
One problem today which our inner hunter gatherer likely havent adopted to is also that we are very sedentart in our modern society compared to our ancestors who walked, ran and hunted all day and did manual labour. Just these last hundred years people are likely not moving as much. I think our biological expectation is to want to eat a lot because thats what our ancestors did both because they likely starved inbetween but if they killed a big animal or ate fruits, berries they probably ate as much as they could so it would give energy, not spoil or other animals would eat it before they ate it all. I don’t think the hormones that sends signals about our hunger has had the time to adapt to us chilling all day not expending any calories. So it sends the wrong message that we should ”over eat” well if you move a lot your not over eating anymore since you burn it and you can eaisly eat 3000+ cals without gaining weight probably more
Yeah I mean there is truth to this, but we should also be careful not to invoke the "appeal to naturalism" argument.
However, I've experimentally proven that carbohydrates/sugar is not fattening even in very large amounts of calories which validates what Ray said when he said sugar is 50% less fattening than starch, I believe was the % he gave. It's my experience through experimental data tracking since March of this year that it is in fact the more heavy "solid" foods like meat, starch, fats that tend to promote weight gain and so you absolutely should restrict these. I've been able to invoke weight gain on 3,000 calories or less emphasizing protein, fat, and starch and invoke weight loss on over 5,000 calories by focusing mostly on sugar.