las

Welcome all seeking refuge from low carb dogma!

“To kill an error is as good a service as, and sometimes even better than, the establishing of a new truth or fact”
~ Charles Darwin (it's evolutionary baybeee!)

Friday, January 27, 2012

A perfect example of why I post what I do about LC personalities

I frequently read folks wondering out loud why I spend (waste?) the time that I do to post on various low carb gurus and personalities.  It doesn't seem like a worthwhile endeavor at times ... and I must admit I occasionally wonder if it's worth the flack and time either.  And then along comes another LC'er "helping others" with their wisdom.  Some of the people I've written about don't "get me" ... after all they are just every day folks sharing their experiences trying to (selflessly) help others.   That "selflessly" is often silent, sometimes strongly implied in their repeated reminders that this is their goal, and sometimes shouted straight out, lest you not notice the generous benevolence in their actions.  They may even go so far as to remind you of the expense they've endured to bring you the free service you're using .....

For all the touting of how any day now the Insurgency will persevere, of how the low carb message is spreading, etc., the LC community remains a small niche in the wide wide world of dietary lifestyles and weight loss strategies.  It seems to me that, because there are so relatively few, the internet presence is all the more inflated compared to other approaches.  In real life, many who follow more traditional or popular approaches have buddies or support groups they can attend.  Or there are TV shows they can tune into, etc.  Low carbers don't have nearly the options, and in many ways these have dwindled rather than increased in the past five years or so.  Yes, despite the best efforts of Gary Taubes, the drop-off of the Atkins boom was mostly staved a bit but not halted.   It is because the community is so relatively small and intertwined, that the onus is all the more powerful to put out a truthful and realistic welcome mat.



At the same time, low carbers like to market themselves as health conscious and promoting a healthy diet.  There can also be no doubt that many of these low carbers are only known for their weight loss "success story".  For better or worse, folks just starting on their own path to LC (or encountering a hiccup along the way) look to others for what they can expect, and rely on those who have succeeded for advice on how they too can achieve said nirvana.  I realize it is human nature to want to shout from the rooftops when you find something -- in many cases a long path to *finally* finding something -- that works for you.  It's understandable to get a bit over-enthusiastic in promoting it.  You gotta try this!!  But the problems begin when enthusiasm turns to romanticizing.  Compound this with the air of scientific/medical righteousness that abounds in the LC community, and a dangerous mixture congeals.  Many seem to no longer see it as even possible that (a) LC might just not work for everyong, and/or (b) anything else might just work for others, even if it didn't for them ... and worst (c) LC isn't working too well for even them anymore.  

In any case, when a person turns to the internet to seek advice, because there's nobody in their circle of "real" friends and family that has any experience, chances are they use Google or some other other search engine.  Who are they likely to find?   Although it's not as popular as it once was, one site is About.com -- Laura Dolson.  Another, although no longer occupying the first several links, will be something from Jimmy Moore's Livin' la Vida Low Carb webpire.  This is how I found Jimmy's forum back in '09.  There are others of course.  When you're in this stage, you find a blog or a discussion group, etc. ... you poke around a bit, some don't even bother, but I go read the "about" and if there's time to poke around to find the person's deeper story (just a suggestion, link to this in your short profile!).  Obviously one can't be expected to go back through every blog post or discussion board journal entry to get to know the person or they'd never get around to doing what landed them there in the first place.

So this is why I feel so strongly about bloggers using waaaay outdated avatars and the same success story blurb that went with it.  This goes to the point I was making about the AWLR -- it's just another unaccountable success story registry.  Even if the pictures are provided, who knows when they came from and how closely a person resembles them now.  Which is not to say such are useless, but it is to say that they are of limited use to all of us ... and yes, I'm not exempt from such cautionary disclaimers.  Still, you look to those who have succeeded at least for possibilities as to how one might be able to follow in their path, and for inspiration that it *can* be done.  But the elusive holy grail is not weight loss.  Heck, Gary Taubes goes so far in a recent interview as to call losing 100 lbs "easy" (spoken as only someone who's never had anything close to 100 lbs to lose can ... offensive really).  But whatever the barriers and difficulties to losing weight, maintaining the weight loss IS the real prize so many seek but cannot seem to achieve.  After some period of time, your LCWLSSC needs to become a LCLWMSC -- from LC Weight Loss Success Story Celeb to LC Lost Weight Maintenance Story Celeb.  And if that's not the case, they need to be up front about their current state of affairs.  Because people who find you now, who read your columns and blogs and FB posts and tweets and emails, etc.etc., are only being treated to the LCWLSS that garnered you come degree of celebrity.  And even if the truth is there somewhere other than your current bio, it might as well not be there because you and I know folks ain't going looking.  

If you were only spouting off with your opinions and advocating LC to a larger audience, it would be less offensive.  But when you give out individual advice these days, that's where you cross a line.  Up at the plate:  Jimmy Moore as The Thinker circa 2005. (I'll squeeze down the spaced out format)
I need some help - ?????? - Yesterday 12:51 PM

Brand new to the forum
.  i have been low carbing since January 3rd.  Within a few days of starting my ketostix were showing purple and they have been permanantly purple since, i am thirsty etc

every day i have:

breakfast - plain 2 egg omelette - with a little whole milk

lunch - 3 rashers of bacon
dinner - good portion of steak/chicken breast/pork loin with either
salad ( 2 slices of tomato, 6 slices of cucumber and a small cup of lettuce) or
4 florets of cauliflower (sometimes with a little melted cheese)

i dont drink carbonated drinks but will have 2 cups of tea per day but drink water during the course of the day. 
in the evening i may have 45g of peanuts ( once in a while) or maybe a boiled egg
but i have not lost any weight at all   any advice?

RE: I need some help - Jimmy Moore - Yesterday 01:33 PM

Ketone production isn't the goal...fat loss is. Welcome to my forum Jen and I hope you find the support you need here from the good people who call this their low-carb home. Looking at your menus, here are some
suggested changes I'd make: switch out the milk with heavy cream and cook the eggs in butter or coconut oil, add some green leafy veggies and perhaps some cheese to your bacon at lunch, make sure you are cooking your meat in lots of fat at dinnertime. The calories seem low on this meal plan, so maybe increase your calories by adding in the extra fat as I've suggested. Remember, livin' la vida low-carb isn't a low-calorie plan where you are hungry. Hunger is a sign you should eat MORE and fat calories give you the best bang for your nutritional buck for satisfaction in your meal. YOU GOT THIS!

RE: I need some help - Jimmy Moore - Yesterday 01:34 PM

Oh, one more thing--ditch the peanuts for almonds or macadamia nuts instead.
The respondent goes on to say that they cook the meat in fat and use parmesan on the omelette, that they're not hungry and during the day and the peanuts are not a regular thing.  That's not really important, Jimmy's advice is.  First of all, I don't care that he's no longer 410 lbs.  His 280-290 lb weight and girth is only considered "acceptable" for a health advocate because he used to be more obese, but he is obese (and frankly should lay off criticizing the weights of the likes of Paula Deen or consider himself very lucky that his weight and diet hasn't yet impacted his health seriously).  But this person sees that "after" pic, reads Jimmy's inspiring 180 lb weight loss story and think he's in a position to offer advice.  

Funny, isn't it, (sad really) how calories only seem to matter to Jimmy when he thinks they are too low?  If this woman isn't losing weight eating (admittedly) what she is stating, adding fat -- "lots of fat" -- and thus calories ain't going to do it.  Indeed I think Jimmy's big wrong turn can be traced back to the summer of 2008 when he went to see Dr. Westman for his "reactive hypoglycemia" and had what he calls a glucose tolerance test done.  It wasn't an OGTT, it was taking the measurements common for an OGTT following a 5 eggs and a chicken breast breakfast.  It was after that when Jimmy took to ADDING fat to everything to keep the protein content down, and basically paid lip service to the advice on portion control he received from Westman.  (I plan to blog on this at some point because I believe serves as an important lesson of what not to do, and how even the low carb doctors aren't really saying the take-home message one Jimmy Moore seems to get and disseminates through his various outlets).  The only thing missing from this advice was to see if this person were falling prey to chronic cardio by walking daily or some such nutty enterprise. ;-)

Usually early on in LC, if a person is not losing weight, one can bet their bottom dollar that eating too much is the problem.  That does not seem to be the case here.  And yet somehow when you put people in metabolic wards, even those who would give you their last dollar rather than admit they might actually be eating more than 1000 cal/day invariably lose weight when put on supervised caloric restriction.    It's far too early in the game for this person to blame or be worried about metabolic compensation in the face of "starvation".  If someone is not losing weight, it's not ever because they're not eating enough.  Their body may be temporarily checking up, shuffling fluids around, etc., but all the insulin and cortisol in the world cannot override the energy deficit for long ... and this person stated matter of factly that hunger was not an issue.

So, the next time you find yourself wondering why this CarbSane chick, who achieved considerable success eating a VLC diet herself, seems to motivated to expose the truth behind low carbers, come back to this post.  Jimmy provides a perfect example of why. 

49 comments:

bentleyj74 said...

She may have even gained weight honestly. Ketosis is dehydrating and people usually have at least early success with several pounds of water. No weight change at all despite water loss = ?

Clearly she needs more cals.

JG said...

But for your newer readers, like myself, all you do is seem to emote. I wish you would spend more time on the science and logic and less on the snark and insults. We get it. You don't like many of these people. I came here looking to find out where the GT/paleo world gets it wrong, and it's as though you've moved on from all of that, and now just stick to gossip and insults. Maybe it's a gender thing. I wish it were otherwise. I'm sure you have a lot to offer (I'm inferring this from your confidence). I'm sure your older readers know that. But I've been visiting your blog daily for 2 weeks and although you're prolific, a significant % of the stuff you write is tabloid gossip, e.g., "look who's making money off advertising!" ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Swede said...

I enjoy these kinds of hit pieces. The LC world is a sad place - the tactics to which they resort to "get the message out" are not helpful for newbies.

People looking for weight loss advice need honesty from those who stake their claim as a low carb weight loss success story.

There are plenty of diet gurus out there who are forthcoming about how different diet strategies have affected them, both positively and negatively. For some reason, this is not the case on the prominent low carb blogs.

cwaiand said...

jg ,have you tried the archives?i,m sure there,s more than enough science in there to satisfy you.

i think you need to re-read this post first.what carb sane is doing in exposing these people is VERY IMPORTANT.i wasted a year on low carb because of so much false crap.i fell for the"as long as your carbs are low you can eat all the fat you want" crap.

people who tell you to eat more fat(while not reducing your overall calories)are not your friend.CALORIES ALWAYS COUNT.this should be the first thing out of any diet advice persons mouth.CALORIES COUNT trumps everything under it.people saying otherwise need to be constantly exposed.

Tonus said...

The more "tabloid-ish" pieces do draw more attention and commentary, but there are quite a few posts on the science of diets and weight loss. It seems to me that a lot of people are drawn to the site by the more controversial posts, and one of the first complaints is that "all" she does is write these kinds of posts. But there are lots of posts that are science/research-based. If it was just a lot of melodramatic finger-pointing, I think this blog would've faded away by now, or at least fallen off the LC community's radar.

river rance said...

Keep up the excellent writings! I look forward to you beacon of light. I found Anthony Copolo via your blog, THANKS! Talk about taking Eades and Jimmy Moore to school!! Momma, now that was some excellent writing. Don't stop,period.

bentleyj74 said...

Don't they just wish :)

Sarah Barracuda said...

JG, as of this writing, there are posts under the following labels (number of them):

Acylation Stimulating Protein (ASP) (22)
Adipokines (11)
Chylomicrons (20)
Diacylglycerol (10)
DNL/de novo lipogenesis (16)
Glucagon like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) (9)
Intramyocellular Lipids/Triglycerides (IMCL (15)
[and the LC personalities posts are more often than not co-labelled with science]

I could keep going, but mildly desire a molecule-names detox by now.

Sarah Barracuda said...

@Tonus - Yes, which is why she irritates LC'ers more than the likes of Durianrider, whom they sometimes poke fun at but mostly ignore (all the while secretly coveting his leanness).

RC said...

"One can expect the dieter's paradox to be more pronounced for those following diets classifying foods according to a good/bad dichotomy and less pronounced for those who pay more attention to the actual quantity consumed" -> http://www.myscp.org/pdf/short%20articles/JCPS_10-00088_180.pdf

river rance said...

Sorry to mis-spell Anthony's name, don't know what happened! Anyway, this a link, to a great example of Anthony's sensible writing...I found it here...thanks again!
rr

http://anthonycolpo.com/?p=1929

Sue said...

Anthony well known in the LC community as started off as low carber himself.

eulerandothers said...

Most of the labels listed to the right (yep, right there===>)
have to do with the science.

So, does Carbsane 'emote' much? Ummm, for that, I'd go to the Eades blog for a steady diet of ranting. In his case, in his most recent blog entry, he rants loud and long about statin use. Then, in the midst of his anti-statin manifesto, he states, 'Note: The comments on this video made by me are my opinions based on my reading of the medical literature. They are no substitute for consultation with your own physician, and should in no way be construed as medical advice. The decision to start, continue or discontinue any drug regimen is a serious one and should be a decision made after careful discussion with your own physician.'

LOL!
Maybe it's a gender thing, but I found that hilarious!

LeonRover said...

Wonderful - there's nowt as queer as folks.

The negative calorie illusion of sticks of celery. Doncha just luv it.

I wonder what is the calorie illusion value of The Optimal Diet or A Perfect Diet.

Slainte

Leila said...

Evelyn, I'm sure you'll correct me if I get it wrong, but JG, it's not just that she doesn't like them. It's that she feels that they've set themselves up as experts providing advice to others on weight loss & nutrition and therefore have a responsibility or obligation to make very sure that the advice they give won't hurt anyone who follows it, at the very least, and at best, is actually correct and helpful.

I found VLC in Sept of 2010 & lost some weight right away so I thought it was the greatest thing I ever heard of & read everything I could find. I read WWGF when it came out, among other things, and it was a real eye-opener to then find this blog & learn that some of what was presented as fact in that book was actually not. I'd offer you the book but that would be just so, so wrong!

This is a place where you can get the truth. The whole answer to the question of how the bleep do I get rid of this other 60 lbs is not yet known. But some very smart people are working on it & this is where I betcha the answer will be once they find it. I don't have a science background & I don't comprehend a lot of what Evelyn writes (to be honest, when it gets to the molecular level I snooze out!), but I get enough to be able to decide whether someone's blowing smoke, and that's more than I get from a lot of blogs out there.

I'd recommend you stick with it for awhile and certainly go take a look at the labels over to the right, particularly if you're looking for more/better information on a topic. Really, it's like any other site you visit - it can't all be gold, take what you can use & ignore that which doesn't interest you.

Sanjeev said...

thanks for the link RC ... a book by the study's author

http://www.amazon.com/Dieters-Paradox-Why-Dieting-Makes/dp/1936572109/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1327683692&sr=8-1

Lyle discussed that paper and OMG ... that paper and Lyle hit the nail on end with the flat round part.[0]
click or copy and paste:

http://www.bodyrecomposition.com/research-review/the-dieters-paradox-research-review.html

He's talking about Jimmy all through this.
“All that separates man from the animals is our ability to rationalize.”

Lyle's talking about LOW FAT here, but see for yourself:
"the general public sort of got the message that so long as they kept fat intake low, nothing else really mattered. Caloric intake and portions went out the window."


And of course something kind of unrelated; in Jimmy's case there's slavish adherence the old bodybuilder supplements dictum: if a little is good, way too much will be perfect. All made much worse because Jimmy actually loves the supplements (butter, coconut oil ... is he using goose liver pate as a condiment and main course yet?)

[0] thath's me, as pithy as pith can geth

Fleur said...

I like what carbsane is doing. There is definitely a need for critical thinking in the food blogosphere. I don't think one has to always like or agree with everything she says, but I think there needs to be a counterbalance to some of the groupthink out there.

arus said...

hi carbsane...honestly i wonder at times why you put so much energy in debunking LC personalities. it has defenitely some value for the helpseeking souls which are easily pulled in by a quick fix solution.

but dont you think you could stay in a equally or even stronger position by provide of your weight loss/maintaining advises. it's not like theses articles couldnt be found here. maybe you put more energy in them instead of personalities..
just my opinion ;)

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome JG! I sure do hope you'll stick around and look through the labels (or use the search function) and judge this blog on more than just the past two weeks. There are certainly waves of subject matter here at the Asylum, and if there's one thing I can't waste time over, it's whether it gets too sciency or too gossipy at times. When something presents itself, should I put it in the hopper just because I've done too many LC persona stories, for example? Wouldn't it be silly for me to blog on this particular episode a month from now when I come up for air discussing endoplasmic reticulum stress?? I believe it is more important when handled in a timely fashion -- and some of these things are important -- e.g. Paula Deen's health & diet vs. that of Dana Carpender.

Funny, just around a month ago someone announced that they had unsubscribed from my blog because everyone supposedly got that Taubes insulin theory is flawed ... what else do I have to talk about? So ... I guess I can't win. If the Taubes fact check labels are too much, try the search function on GCBC Reference Check, "Critical Conclusions" or "toothpick".

As others have eluded to, there's plenty of what you're looking for here. Over 700 posts the vast majority of which are not about LC personas.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome to the Asylum Leila! I'd say you have it about right, and thank you. One small quibble -- I do not dislike most of the people I call out. I don't even know them and haven't had any interaction with them. Many are very nice people, one of the reasons it has been difficult, but I think important, to call out Amy Dungan for her hypocrisy. There are a few that I do dislike based on personal interactions, some that are not privy to my audience, such as the entire Jimmy Moore podcast episode. Let's just say that comments on blogs, emails, etc. have formed my unfavorable opinions of a number of personalities, but certainly not even a majority of them. Jimmy, Fred, Tom N and Gary are not on my list of favorite people based on interactions I've had with them. Nuff said.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

The focus of this blog is not weight loss/maintenance per se. Inasmuch as I give advice I do share what worked for me, but more importantly, I try to stress the degree to which it worked and the limitations. This is sorely lacking in the LC community. When I did used to give out such advice on Jimmy's forum I was frequently treated with the shoutdowns about how "I can't cheat", "I really do gain 7 pounds overnight if I eat a low carb wrap", "one cheat day will undo weeks of low carbing", "you have no idea what you're talking about you just need to improve your vitamin D status, get your inflammation under control, go zero carb and shovel coconut oil into your pie hole".

This blog is mostly about science, and where LC'ers try to hijack that in promoting long term VLC/VHF eating as optimal and healthy, they'll get called on it. And when their own ducks aren't in a row, I'm going to point it out.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome RC! Holy crap that's a great find!! Definitely blogworthy :)

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

To all those who contributed positive/supportive comments ... THANK YOU!!

bentleyj74 said...

[low whistles]

Stepped on toes lately, huh? :)

Karen said...

I know there is going to be some head.to.desk. feeling from some of you scientific folk but I just had an epiphany. Sanjeev gave a reference to a person saying "Lyle's talking about LOW FAT here, but see for yourself:
"the general public sort of got the message that so long as they kept fat intake low, nothing else really mattered. Caloric intake and portions went out the window."
Hummm so we went low carb OR low fat and threw everything else out the window. We are a greedy bunch. Just give up one thing and eat all the rest in abundance. The Paleo's need to think back farther and realize that maybe our "ancestors" ate the way they are saying but they sure didnt sit down and have 3 meals and 2 snacks daily. The low-fat and low carb er's need to realize we are just flat gluttonous. Now before I get in trouble Im not calling anyone that!! Im saying we and Im saying our country is so prosperous and we think we deserve it all and the more the better we who want to be slim have a hard time. I also know there are physical problems that can cause overweight. (Im trying to dig myself out of a hole but really want to put this out there because it really was a OMG moment for me)

Fleur said...

Not sure if this comment will appear where I want it to..but this is in response to arus.

I think there is a huge need to monitor any sort of food celebrity who promotes him/herself as an expert...whether they be in the low carb world or not.

I think those making money off the low carb world(or any other dietary approach) should expect to be held to a rigorous standard.

I'm dismayed when people have almost a godlike belief in some food/diet celebrities, especially when their message has flaws(as i see them) in it.

Jim Purdy said...

"But the elusive holy grail is not weight loss ... maintaining the weight loss IS the real prize so many seek but cannot seem to achieve."

Even highly motivated (highly paid) celebrity diet spokespersons tend to lose weight and then regain it. I've lost weight slowly on many different diets, and I've usually regained it quickly. I wish I had the answer. But very low carb does seem to help me.

Galina L. said...

It is funny, but often I learn about news GT blog post or an article from your blog. I think your job of collecting the data about people who follow LC diets is important. The data is available, somebody has to do it.
I appreciate your blog mostly because it is not an echo-chamber, and people who attend it use different approaches to solve the same problem - weight loss and maintenance.
I recently was accused by some swallow-minded individual(FrancG) of spending some time here, when I dared to ask Gary a question why the only strategy he recommended within the Insulin theory of a weight-loss was only limiting the amount of carbs, while there were other things to do within that theory:

"I wonder if you are not spending too much time over at that harpy Carbsanes blog? Perhaps her simplistic straw-man arguments against Gary Taubes and her acid nature is starting to make you think she might be have a point after all?

No doubt that if she were reading this she’d be thrilled to see “LC’ers” fighting amongst ourselves — I suspect that is is indeed her role… destroy the low carb message (or maybe just Gary Taubes) by spreading dissent."

So some people rather swipe issues under the carpet in order to convince "The establishment" that to present the realistic picture. I am interested mostly in finding the working solution(s) and I always feel the urge to jump for help when somebody crays "help", so I find the attitude of hiding issues to be disgusting. People have to know what kind of trouble they would face.

Sanjeev said...

What Stephan didn't write is that this is also a (SMALL)[0] nail in Taubes' fall-back position, "fructose causes insulin resistance, so chronically elevates insulin"

How many times have I written "insulin's good at stopping fat use in vitro ... in vivo, not so much"? seems like a lot.

the spinning and illogic and tortured gyrations have begun ...

click here or copy and paste for assured work safety:

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2012/01/insulin-and-obesity-another-nail-in.html

too, too bad they're both rodent studies.

James Krieger should do one-eighth[0] of a victory lap, for all the time he spent explaining these things in the forums for his "insulin myths" series.

So how many nails in the coffin lid is that?
How many screws?
How much duct tape?
How much crazy glue?
How much epoxy?
How many fat folks (former-me included) lying down on top of it?

[0] because they're rodent studies

bentleyj74 said...

[Makes mental note to get SG a nail gun for Christmas :)]

@Galina ...They are using words like dissent? Seriously?!

[Makes mental note to get Evelyn a tazer for Christmas]

bentleyj74 said...

I may want to be Sanjeev when I grow up :)

Galina L. said...

@ bentley,
I wouldn't call just some nut "they". I disagree with the assumption that one half-wit represents masses. I was astonished that he thought all LCarbers should be united for the sake of looking united just because Carbsane may read comments. Unfortunately, the weight loss is more difficult to be sorted out by "just (insert any remedy)". Yes, I think that LC approach is step #1, but nothing guarantees a smooth success with any approach.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Galina, I admire you're search for answers for you no matter where that may lead you. What you are experiencing at GT's forum is not isolated, however. I don't know how many times (long before the blog) I was asked why I was on Jimmy's forum if I didn't believe the Taubes-line. At that time, I could never even have envisioned myself eating some starch daily. This is a problem with the low carb community. If you don't *believe*, you don't belong, and STFU and go away if you don't like it. And then every now and then Jimmy or some low carber reminds you that they are all about everyone finding what works for them. Just don't share it unless it's LC.

I think you and I have a lot more in common than you may think vis a vis LC. Because it was through low carb that I learned to listen to my body and reestablish as normal an appetite/homeostasis as is probably possible for someone who's been as overweight as I've been.

I doubt highly that most obese will ever get truly lean without some sort of conscious effort and diligence.

LeonRover said...

Hey Sanjeev

But . . . but . . . . how can they ignore Rodent Studies ??

Has not dear old Gary T waxed eloquent about La Magnen's Rodents in "The Diet Delusion" - as titled on this side of the Atlantic - Nota Bene, "Delusion", whose??

The only explanation is that La Magnen's Rats are the unwitting objects of yet another "French Paradox", maybe they were given a Rat Mediterranean Diet!!

Slainte

P S
I have never been able to understand how Protein Insulin Secretion is "not bad", while CHO Insulin Secretion is "bad" - another Paradox.

Sanjeev said...

I won't object, as long as I don't get hit on the end with the flat round part.
oh, you DO know about the nipple free moob situation, right?

Sanjeev said...

There's a spectrum ... from what I've read of some folks (Todd Becker, maybe Eades?(I'm not 100% sure there)) there seems little reluctance to apply rodent results to humans. Further along the spectrum there's those who put in cautionary qualifications - Stephan's here. At the far end are a couple of others.

the ONLY criticism I have of Stephan is I wish he were more toward (Lyle/Alan)'s end of the spectrum - those who won't reference rodent studies even when those studies support their stance. I believe Anthony Colpo and James Krieger are there too, but not 100% sure.

Sanjeev said...

I'll admit it's kind of harder for him to do than all the others on that list, since he's partly an experimenter, not a non-experimenting writer, and his own research uses rodents.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Hi guys! From a scientists POV, ideally all experiments would be performed on humans. But this is simply not possible. While rodent studies are far from perfect, they do provide us with the ability to isolate specific processes and determine how things work. There will never be a human longevity experiment (I hope) like an animal one, because that would entail imprisoning said human being from birth to death feeding it consistently every day of his/her life. There will be no knockout humans, and even experimentation with naturally occuring human mutations is dicey at best. While there is no human equivalent if the FIRKO and the LIRKO, of my furry friend C3KO, these mice are useful in isolating ONE thing and seeing how it effects the whole organism. Does this mean this is exactly what would occur in humans? No. But quite often enough of the same metabolic pathways can be established to make meaningful inferences even if they are not perfect.

I forget which rats were LaMagnen's -- are those the poor fatties that were overectomized? What got me labeled a mentally unstable stalker by Fat Head was asking him in comments on a post about mice on calorie restriction when rodent studies are applicable. I'm confused about the rules here. Speaking of those ovarectomized rats, I'm overdue for an installment of Gary Debunks Taubes ... Last time I checked carbs don't stimulate insulin secretion from ovaries.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

This is why I do the occasional hypothetical post here. Because many are predisposed to discount anything I say because I'm just some disgruntled anti-lowcarber. They don't see in themselves how the mindset they decry permeates the mainstream seems to be even more deeply entrenched in their midst.

There's someone on PH right now wondering if 4-8 lbs of beef per day is too much. An active 22 yo. Huh?? I do remember my beanpole male friends in college eating a LOT. But 8 pounds of meat in a day? Try a week maybe. Even the Inuit only eat 2-3 lbs. Something wrong there!!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Hey ... I can save you a few bucks! I have a spare nail gun I'll trade ya for the tazer. Whoa boy ... I'm thinking after AHS12 there will be YouTube videos of LC'ers crying "Don't taze me sis!" ROFL

Sanjeev said...

All true, and how do you feel about folks who appear completely sanguine about extrapolating rodent results to humans, occasionally not even paying lip service ... something like

"treat this study as 20% as applicable as a human study"

bentleyj74 said...

Bwa ha ha ha [wipes away tears]

Look out AHS 2012, this girl is locked and loaded. 110 pounds of hell and vengeance if you rub me the wrong way. Think of the you tube hits if I do it in a leather catsuit and a mask ;P

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Speaking of Eades, in the blog post before that one, the review of the Volek & Phinney book, Eades claims his wife reads his blog posts before he hits the publish button. HOW on earth did she not catch the creepiness of the moist eyed chick post??? LOL It's not blogworthy on its own, but tucked in my mental file for the next time we're in need of an Eades Fact Check post.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Whoa boy ... you're psychic or something bentley, you just scooped my next Lego superhero parodies :)

bentleyj74 said...

If it was a team effort we could do the black ops version.

Galina L. said...

Hey, the Reply button works! The are some similarities in our experiences, for sure. There is also something different. I don't know it with certainty, but I think you are a naturally thin person who somehow got into binge eating and gained weight because of it. Probably, the fast food availability contributed to the situation. I have never been naturally thin, just in different degree of chubbiness. Probably, for me LC works differently because I have different underlying condition. For somebody with my experience FR sounds like a molehill passing for a mountain. May be in your case you would be thin if the fast-food industry didn't exist. I agree with you when you criticize LC personalities for encouraging people eat more and who exaggerate benefits and hide issues, while LC doctors treating obesity didn't give an advice to eat an unlimited amount of the food. Sure, some dieters may be misled by it.I know that you aware of certain benefits of LCarbing, it just sounds like total "LC sucks" sometimes, while you underlying message is more complex. I disagree with the negative tilt of comments on LC as a diet approach while I don't think it is what everybody should do. Nothing is black or white. Whatever I write doesn't meant to be taken as a criticism. Our personal experience unavoidably makes us bias.

janeandchris said...

Hello
Just landed
What I want to know, exactly what is this blog advocating in terms of diet? Can't find it anywhere .

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome to the Asylum janeandchris! I don't advocate a diet per se. Many folks here eat different ways. Personally I eat PHD-ish in terms of types of foods, but considerably lower fat, higher protein, and at my caloric level these days my macro percents work out sort-of zonish.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the auspicious writeup. It in reality was once a amusement
account it. Glance complicated to far delivered agreeable from you!
However, how could we communicate?

my web-site: diets that really work

Post a Comment

Moderation is currently on. Thanks in advance for your patience.