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!)

Wednesday, April 18, 2012

Starch ... What's with all the antagonism?

< RANT WARNING >  This post is a compilation of several that have been lying in the draft bin.  Consider it a response to a perfect storm of the arrogance and pitiful whining by staunch low carb advocates in past months.   I've had enough of the absolute abomination that is Jimmy Moore orchestrating the rhetoric, but also many of the attendant hangers on.  So yes, I'm going on a rant here folks.  You've been forewarned.  Fasten your seatbelt and enjoy the ride, or just hit that "X" button up there on the corner right of your browser.  < /RANT WARNING >

Most readers are probably aware of Jimmy Moore's latest demonstration that he's LLVLClue to the hilt lately:  Jimmy Moore’s n=1 Experiments: ‘Safe Starch’ Sweet Potato.  I mean really, I cannot imagine that this experiment resembles in any way what Paul Jaminet would construct for someone adding starches back to a low carb diet.  The pricking begins on day one of adding some sweet potato.  It is never consumed in what would be a normal meal for most people.  Let's look at the sweet potato -- on the first two days he eats 1/2 with 1 T of honey (fructose!), the remaining days with stevia except for the last day when he eats just a half of a sweet potato.  Each day except the last he adds an unbelievable "copious" amount of butter:  3T!!  Yes, to half a sweet potato he adds over 1/3rd stick of butter.  Now let's add in the variable meals of mostly 2 brats with sauerkraut or chicken smothered in cheese.  This is DISHONEST folks.  If you're going to do self experiments and publish results, learn to do it right.  And if you're testing the effect of starch on your body, you have to consume it as plainly as possible, or at least with a normal amount of added fat.  Even sweet potato fries from a family restaurant don't hold a candle to that absolutely ridiculous added fat-to-whole food ratio!!    With reservations stated, Jimmy soldiered on ...
As a diehard ketogenic low-carber for over eight years, it’s very difficult for me to wrap my head around the idea that eating something that would ostensibly turn to sugar in the body and raise my blood sugar and insulin levels could be identified as “safe” for me to consume. But of course I’ve merely ASSUMED that this was the case and never actually tested to see what would happen if I actually ate some starch. That’s what inspired me to pull out my handy-dandy blood glucose monitor (which everyone who cares about their health should own and test often whether you have diabetes or not) and put this “safe starch” theory to the test on my body.
So publish the results he did, and, despite his best efforts, the results show two things:
  • Jimmy's fasting blood glucose levels have continued to rise/stay elevated to pre-diabetic or at least borderline levels since he started these n=1's last summer.  Thus Jimmy is exhibiting the symptoms of hepatic insulin resistance.   
  • Jimmy is surprisingly not exhibiting symptoms of IGT (Impaired Glucose Tolerance).  His glucose levels rise and fall back to baseline in good order consuming mixed and arguably very high fat meals.  
Just for reference, in 2008 he consumed 5 fried eggs with cheese and a chicken breast (I put this into FitDay using 2T butter and 2 oz cheese, likely an underestimate -- it contained 1080 cals, 76g fat, 6g carb, 92g protein.  Here's what his BG & insulin levels did then:  TIME–GLUCOSE–INSULIN ... FASTING–87–4.4 ... 30 MIN–89–13.7 ... 1 HOUR–78–11.1 ... 2 HOUR–78–9.0 ... 3 HOUR–89–5.1 ... 4 HOUR–87–5.0 ... 5 HOUR–89–4.7 .  Nothing abnormal there considering protein stimulates insulin and perhaps his glycogen depleted liver is a little behind the ball being able to generate glucose, hence the "hypoglycemia". 

I mean, duh already, starch turns to glucose but so freakin' what?!   Our bodies are equipped with an organ  called a pancreas that secretes insulin to, among other things, assist in moving that glucose into our cells to burn it for fuel.  Except for a type 1 -- who will never produce insulin due to beta-cell demise  -- most of us, including Jimmy, can and probably do handle the blood glucose spike quite handily.  At this point, T2's should be considered to have dysfunctional beta cells unless and until it is established they have actually lost considerable cell mass.  Because it is no secret in these parts that proper beta cell function can be restored in a matter of days in many of these people.  Now during the experiment, Jimmy's weight bounced around but at 300 lbs, realize even 5 lbs is <2% of one's body weight and thus inconsequential to the outcome.  But bottom line, if you are going to test the effect of starch consumption on your body, you need to adapt your body to such a dietary intervention for a period of time (I would say two weeks minimum) and control properly.  Jimmy fails miserably on both counts.  His 1/2 sweet potato = around 100 cal max is nothing close to seeing what including 50 - 100g starch carbs into one's diet and consuming it mashed with an absurd amount of butter with different proteins and cheese one day, sauerkraut the next, etc.etc. is not good science.  Where's Gary Taubes when you need him.

Over on PaleoHacks, it seems more and more are on to Jimmy's shenanigans.  If you're going to test these things ... do it right!  Still, if you read some of the comments on PH and on Jimmy's blog, there's this persistent theme of the "damaged metabolism" of a 40 year old former 400+ pound man vs. the healthy people Paul Jaminet and others are supposedly dangerously pushing starches upon with reckless abandon.  For Jimmy, the sooner he acknowledges that he's broken beyond fixing and settles for mediocre, the better.   One of the things that really peeved me reading Jimmy's comments such as:
I'm concerned about "safe starch" for diabetics. And yet there's this notion that starch is the magic answer. seems those who promote "safe starches" are using it as an excuse to eat more carbohydrates. Some can get away with that but others of us cannot.
While Jimmy is oh so careful to pretend he's not attacking Paul Jaminet for his concept of "safe starches" -- which was NEVER about glycemic index or load -- he routinely makes comments like the above implying Paul and others are reckless in their recommendations.  In this regard Paul is *too* nice in not calling him on this BS.  And then you gotta love this regarding the butter in the experiment:
The point with the butter in this experiment was inhibiting the blood sugar response to the starch in the sweet potato. It was an experiment. That said, I'm happy to test the idea that lowering calories would produce weight loss. That n=1 would be better because I wouldn't have to prick my finger. :D Maybe I can do this when I return back from the Low-Carb Cruise in mid-May.
(Translation, I'm going to ride this for a little while longer cuz I can't be bothered doing anything when there's a midnight pizza buffet to consider ... pizza toppings are paleo, right?)  But:
Incidentally, I cut my calories drastically to around 1200-1500 daily during this weight stall for about a month. Net results: I gained five pounds. There's something more at play here than mere calories.
Gee Jimmy, perhaps you actually WANT the blood sugar response so your insulin levels do spike and suppress appetite!  As to testing the idea of lowering calories, I'm going to call Jimmy a flat out liar here.  EVERY time he has cut calories consistently in the past he has lost weight.  Not only lost it, but like gangbusters lost it.  Sometimes double digit pound losses in bodyweight per week.  If there's a single person in my audience that believes him I'm going to actually have to forbid you from reading this blog anymore as your gullibility quotient is too high to get anything of value from the information provided here.   One last Jimmy quote from the comments:
I've been told by people I eat too much and that I don't eat enough, so perhaps my calories are right where they need to be. :D Still working through it all and you know I NEVER giving up
LOL.  I would like to see him do one of his data dump posts on what Jimmy eats.  Pick any month where  he showed pictures or did any estimating of his calories (he never weighs/measures folks, only estimates) from the 3.5+ years of his menus blogs and held or gained weight.  Find me ONE "expert" willing to weigh in -- including old Gary himself -- on the amount Jimmy eats and suggest he's not eating enough.  Yeah, right.  People are demonstrating extreme gullibility lately, but they are not THAT gullible!

Antagonism ... what's with all this antagonism?

As mentioned from the get go, parts of this have been around for a while, and this part was prompted by Jimmy's whinefest 2012 regarding the so-called antagonism against low carb.   Maybe it's just me, but I've never perceived a lot of antagonism by the carb eaters in the community towards LC (except, perhaps, against the BS mangling of science) ... but boy have I ever been on the receiving end of far worse than antagonism from staunch low carbers!  I mean you'd think I killed some person's dog once when I mentioned I eat some low fat dairy and pointed out that it may be slightly higher in carbs, but unless it's sweetened, there are no added carbs.  And that was mild compared to the firestorm unleashed on me over my podcast, etc.etc.  Never mind the whole confused, mentally unstable stalker chick crap.  Frankly, if one relied on Jimmy for their info, they might even conclude that the Drs. Jaminet wrote their Perfect Health Diet book, recommending 100g carbs from "safe starches", just to antagonize Atkins dieters about the globe or something.   If there's antagonism against LC, it's probably a WTF does this guy have to do with paleo backlash.  Jimmy went paleo to save his business because despite reports out of Sweden, low carb was on the fade again, and it will be another couple of years before the next best LC diet book hits the stands.   Sure, there's an LC faction in the paleo community, but they already have their cyber home over on MDA.  If Jimmy feels any personal antagonism, it might just be the normal reaction of those trying to build their own primal/paleo/ancestral/etc. empires wondering who the heck this obese Jimmy-come-lately is trying to get in on a piece of their action.

OK, OK ... by now you're probably wondering why this "nothing new under the sun" BS post from Jimmy got me started.  Well, the reason is that it brought back up the whole larger safe starches debate and the upcoming AHS12.  (Yes, I'm still going!  Ordered my bunny ear webcam - grin - kidding?)  You see, Jimmy Moore will be moderating a discussion/debate on starches to include Paul Jaminet, Ron Rosedale, Cate Shanahan and Jack Kruse.  Considering just the panel, this is like 2.5 against 1, and perhaps less than 1.  Allow me to explain.  The 2 of the 2.5 are Rosedale and Shanahan -- firmly in the camp of carbs spike leptin and/or insulin and will glycate your ass into an early grave quicker than Jimmy Moore can down a Quest bar.  The 0.5 is for Leptin Man who can't seem to decide what side of this issue he's even on depending on his circadian yoking and level of mind numbness.  Which leaves Paul at probably somewhat less than 1 for starches, and I say that in no way demeaning his intellect or knowledge level.  I say that because despite being portrayed as a Starched Crusader, Paul is by no means an advocate of high carbs.  So there will not be anyone on this panel or moderating it to advocate for getting the bulk of your energy from carbs vs. fat.  This is too bad, because we have so many healthy *ANCESTRAL* cultures consuming diets that are quite low in fat and high in carbs it seems almost criminal nobody will likely address these.  Paul advocates a sweet spot approach and a preference for fats to make up the remaining calories once carbs have been considered.  This is one point I've come to disagree with fairly strongly of late, ever since I looked into this issue more closely.  While I'm still a PHD fan, I have reservations over the justification for fat being the primary preferred fuel for humans.

In any case, after recent weeks/months of Kaptain Konfusion and Physician Phollies at the hands of Kruse and Shanahan, being reminded of equally annoying pseudoscience from Ron "everyone's some degree of diabetic" Rosedale and all of this just got to me.  I wonder what kind of open debate Rosedale is even capable of engaging in given my brief interactions with him on PaleoHacks and such.  One such discussion can be found here.  Rosedale promised many studies to back his assertions.  He believes insulin should never be -- NEVER -- used to treat T2's.  The many studies never were forthcoming.  He makes several claims including the requisite Big Pharma conspiracy and criminal medicine whopper that no insulin lowering drug even exists.  Apparently he's not heard of diazoxide.   Rosedale is a burned-out-pancreas believer.  The evidence against this is quite substantial and consistent.  But so sure is Rosedale of his diet, he can take pot shots at me for my lack of clinical experience but lacks the balls to allow the comment below in response.

The bottom line is that Rosedale's own studies do not support his contentions.  In any case Rosedale's modus operandi in debate is to state, restate and restate again the same cherry picked studies -- the full texts/results of which don't support what he's using them to substantiate -- and assertions w/o substantiation.

Now, I've spent a fair amount of time on Dr. Cate here, but not discussed what bothers me most about her.  Sure, she's provided some fodder for Physician Phollies posts, but she's rather a small player in all of this.  Ahh ... but if recent events are any indication, she's moving to the front of the stage.  She has two books out.  I've read neither, nor do I intend to unless anyone cares to send me their copy of either.  Dr. Cate as she likes to be called (call it a peeve, I'm not a big fan of the Dr. First Name crowd) seems to have arrived at the LC-paleo mine from the WAPF-inspired shaft looking to cash in. She has her TRIM diet after all, and seems to have moved across the country recently enough that there are no MD ratings for her in CA.  Folks, repackaging a low calorie diet into real foods or whatever doesn't cut it.  She says sometimes she drinks a glass of whole raw milk for breakfast and that holds her until the evening meal.  In this video we learn how to make a perfectly symmetrical peanut butter on apple "meal" to have with a glass of milk.  Ezekial bread is on her menus.  In this video with Sean Croxton, she and her hubs make bone broth/stock and add FLOUR!  She makes the case that paleolithic man likely domesticated animals for milk.  Don't get me started on her celebrity siblings inspired theories on birth order, spacing and all that.  Wandering to Wooville is something Cate, erm Dr. Cate, is no stranger to.  I do find it disappointing that it was Paul who invited her to be a part of the safe starches debate.  Friendships can be tricky?  In her Paleo Summit presentation, she very clearly mangles known basics of human metabolism by claiming that high carbs cause the liver to create LDL that makes us fat, addressed specifically here.

So amidst Jimmy's bellyaching the past few months over some perceived antagonism towards low carbers, I couldn't help but get annoyed at Cate's contribution to the discussion.    Heck, it was even she that insisted on speculating on the motivation of the "anti-LC camp".   This is a 2 minute audio clip from about the 47 min. mark of their podcast.  (I recorded this from my computer screen, don't ask me how it got skewed on the diagonal.)   Listen to Jimmy groan!  Double groan!

Yeah, that's right.  Don't pay any attention to that camp over there, they're just a bunch of sugar addicted asshats.  She already wrote me off as a "hater" for calling her out on some ridiculous statements she made about snacking and blood volume, etc.  I don't know what makes these folks so thin-skinned that they can't seem to respond on the science.  Should be easy if the science was on your side, right?  But Cate is from the "they don't teach this in medical schools" camp of physicians.  Listening to her "expertise" on how sugar is sticky so it gums up the works and other gems, I'm at a loss as to what she adds to any discussion on glucose.

Jimmy, if we're all on the same team seeking optimal health, how can you and all of your so-called experts continue to ignore the billions of long living, disease free humans consuming far more than 50% of their calories from carbohydrates?   In his recent blog post comments we get this gem:  
And you're seems those who promote "safe starches" are using it as an excuse to eat more carbohydrates. Some can get away with that but others of us cannot.
It's insulting quips like this that fuel any antagonism towards low carb.  Excuses?  You want excuses?  I'll see your claims and raise you a damaged metabolism squared.  Sheez.  It's bad enough we have to hear incessantly how VLC is *the* healthy way to eat ... for everyone.  You don't suppose a bunch of mostly fit paleos might just not wanna be scolded and ridiculed by a 300 pound low carber?  Ahh but money/publicity rules the day, so when Richard Nikoley jumped ship a while back coinciding with publication of a book, Jimmy just had to make room to squeeze in that podcast.  Oh please, Angry Dick calls him the "delightful Jimmy Moore".  Anyone have a barf bag handy?    The "delightful" FrankG doles out a good dose of antagonism (quite a bit directed at yours truly on blogs I've been banned from responding on).  It seems to me that the antagonism is a figment of the martyr complex.   Listen to any of his Low Carb Conversations, and as you can see, even his "professional" podcasts, who is routinely front and center mocking and denigrating.  And speaking of which, if one goes back and reads my posts on Taubes, they are utterly mild rebukes of his flawed hypothesis compared to the pointed personal attacks made against me by many bloggers or commentors.  At least I have the guts to allow dissent here for anyone who feels I've attacked them unfairly.  There's only one disruptive troll banned from here and that's because I refuse to allow my blog to provide a platform for racist vulgarity.  But Rosedale takes a pot shot at me and my response is censored.  Big boy him.

I guess one of those "last straw" moments with this bullcrap came in the Gatewing (Adam Kosloff) podcast.  I mean I listened to that and thought to myself, who died and made Jimnatius Mooreilly king?  After misrepresenting our exchange, these two had a little pow wow on how "we" all need to get along.  Team CICO must be defeated ... all hands on deck. I can't tell you what's in that little black box Jimmy is carrying for me there, you have to pony up $9.99 not to learn what's in there.  In any case, these two had a little go at me and unnamed others who are just antagonistic.  Sorry, but I consider it my duty to call out bullshit at this point.  I'm not about to bite my tongue when you have hucksters like Jimmy out there ... especially as they try to dominate the debate and destroy dissenters.  If it's not crystal clear to everyone by now, having me on his podcast was part of a broader plan to do just that.  Only it backfired because truth is on my side.  So Mr. "Why's Everybody Always Picking on Me" Moore has the audacity to claim that the movement has no use for people like me.  Better watch out Jimmy, because the time will come when the community you're seeking to co-opt takes stock of benefits vs. damage spotlighting you brings.  The dwindling ranks of low carbers in the community is not antagonistic, they just represent a threat to his livelihood.

So bringing this back around to the safe starch thing, I think Jimmy's own data dump post was antagonism personified (as was the insulin post before it).  By choosing the experts he distorts the perception of overall opinions.  Rosedale is now invited to paleo events too and owes that to Jimmy.  Rosedale is not a very cordial person on the internet and Paul went above and beyond the call of duty to keep his responses cordial.  Jimmy has no remorse in publishing Jeff Volek (ever wonder how a PhD in Kinesiology out of the Education department at UConn gets funding for low carb diet research and published in reputable peer review journals? ... tease) calling Paul a "nut job".  Nah ... no antagonism there?!

The reality is that the TWICHOOB hangers-on have become increasingly desperate, and where desperation breeds gullibility amongst the masses seeking to lose weight, it breeds far uglier things amongst those profiting from them.  As Nightwing swings the pool noodles in relative obscurity, Boy Wonder Glucagon rages war on a hormone without which we tend to die in rather short order.  Meanwhile Fatman has been hibernating with polar bears in the Fatcave figuring out ways to save Gluttony City from the ever increasing numbers of defectors.  < sarcasm >Never any antagonism from these folks. < /sarcasm > Never any addressing of the scientific arguments made against their flawed hypothesis either.  Let's rant on over Tara Parker Pope and how if only she tried low carb.  Let's insist ad nauseum that calories don't count it's the quality, not the quantity.  Let's put forth another data dump post on thyroid.  I'm thinking sleep will be next, because it seems apparent to me that I'm not the only one who experienced issues with sleep on LC.  And let's make sure to censor most of the folks on the other side.  And let's continue to wonder why the majority of the community doesn't welcome you with open arms as you try to co-opt the movement.  Calling people addicts and excuse-makers isn't going to make you new friends.  I and others have nothing against "the low carb" as Cate called it.  I, and I won't speak for others, do take serious issue with the promotion of quackery and demonstrably flawed science for sake of notoriety and profit.

I'll leave you with a little fun as I imagine the starch discussion to go at AHS.

Dr. Cate:  Jack, how can you eat all those carbs in the summer?
Leptin Man:  Cate, it's complicated, but when you yoke your leptin receptors to geothermal circadian cycles carbohydrate electrons take quantum leaps from 30,000 feet.
Dr. Cate:  Huh?  Wouldn't glycation happen anyway?  I think you're just looking for an excuse to feed your carb addiction.
Rosedale:  This is where I disagree with Jack.  There is no safe level of glucose in your blood more than a few mg/dL above the minimum to prevent hypoglycemia.  
Leptin Man:  Chill out dude.   Hey, can't we all just get along dude?  There's no room for bickering when we have a cause.  Hey, anyone seen a starfish? ... dude
Paul:  Can we discuss starches and glucose metabolism please?
Leptin Man:  Paul I love you dude but you are not a neurosurgeon.  I have used CT on my patients ever since my epic biohack and proven that if you're cold adapted glycation does not occur.
Paul:  Would that include glycosylation reactions that are part of human metabolism?
Rosedale:  Paul, my diet is the optimal diet for everyone.  I limit carbs and protein and nobody on my diet gets wrinkles because there's no glycation.  We will live forever!
Leptin Man:  Ron, if you want to live forever dude, you've got to get into the cold dude.  Dude, I'm a neurosurgeon!
Rosedale:  My diet lowers body temperature without ice.   
Dr. Cate:  Guys, guys, did you snack today or something?  Seems your brains might be dehydrated from that.  Let's just agree to agree carbs are evil.   (Holds out hand to shake Paul's hand ... they shake)  Paul!  You're hands are sticky!  Have you been eating starches again?
Jimmy:  Let's get back on topic about how a high fat, moderate protein, low carb diet is the healthiest diet for optimal health please?  Ron ... tell us about your diet ... 
Rosedale:  Well my diet limits protein ...
Dr. Cate:  Ron, if I may interupt ... 
Leptin Man:   I've been out of the ice for 4 hours already, can we wrap this up before feeling returns to my torso?
Jimmy:  So, there you have it.  Starch is not safe to consume as it will spike your blood sugar levels.  Paul should recall all copies of PHD immediately for containing dangerous medical advice.  Thank you all for your participation.


Unknown said...

Evelyn, I am so looking forward to AHS. I truly hope you won't bite your tongue too hard, and will ask some of these guys tough questions.

As for me, I'm bringing popcorn.

gunther gatherer said...

Have no fear at the AHS. Stephan will be there!

Not surprisingly, he's also the skinniest of all the speakers...

bentleyj74 said...

Along with Don Matesz [insert wicked grin]. Those 180's must be great exercise!

Chris said...

Did Kosloff ever respond to your post back in March? I thought he had a comment that he was going to explain things?

Chris said...

While it is not "nice" this post is needed. There is tremendous Cognitive dissonance with Jimmy. Depsite his 300+lb for busienss, psychological or ideological commitment, he cannot change his position

Beth@WeightMaven said...

If Jimmy is concerned about safe starches for those with diabetes, he should read this paper by Staffan Lindeberg et al.

BTW, re the 3T of butter, yeah, I don't get that. That said, I'm a fan of buffering carbs (my go-tos are some fat, some protein and vinegar or lemon juice ... see PHD for their recommendations). While this won't affect AUC, it should affect peak BG levels ... and it presumably helps lots with satiety.

gunther gatherer said...

LOL. But I give Don credit for being man enough to change his mind publicly at the risk of losing readers. Jimmy and Taubes could take a tip from him.

But speaking of exercise, I don't think Stephan's doing half as much as the paleo guys and he's twice as thin. Surely that's a guy to listen to...

MM said...

When I looked at Jimmy's sweet potato graphs, I thought his body actually did a decent job of adapting. Looking at the USDA nutrient database, I'm guessing half a sweet potato has about 20 g carbohydrate. The first two days he had a pretty big spike for only 20 or so grams, but after that his blood sugar curves look a lot better. I guess my point is that his graphs look to me like he could carb up and have normal blood sugar. His metabolism is not damaged beyond repair.

If Jimmy really cut his calories to 1200 and couldn't lose weight why didn't he document that like he likes to document everything else? Unbelievable! There is no other word for it.

bentleyj74 said...

I think Stephan is dead on with regard to the reward angle. Most of the guys I saw in AHS pics were dressed to accentuate their musculature, Stephan was not. It's hard to say. Maybe you can get him to take his shirt off this time around for comparison ;P In any case a lot of the men presenting are either overweight older fellows or body builders and Stephan is neither. Evidently he's just going to be a pita to categorize at every turn which is sort of too bad because I for one would like to see the baseline for "healthy moderately active non athlete male eating XXXX diet".

Don does look great and very trim but he's also pretty invested in weight training etc. He could be living off hot pockets and look good if his cals were low.

Princess Dieter said...

Maybe Stephan is one of those happy naturally thin folks. In which case, that slenderness itself speaks nothing to those of us predisposed to pack lbs on or needing to get a handle on their obesity. My 6'1" 168 lb hubby can wear his high school tees. He doesn't work out. He can eat twice+ the food I do and not gain. In fact, I pack him two lunches and several snacks to take to work. Me? I eat above 1700 or so calories at a weight of 180 lbs...and I gain, and I have a trainer and walk. So,

:) But I surely do read Stephan's blog for info. His is one of the better reads out there.

Princess Dieter said...

That conversation is the funniest thing--and the too sadly full of truth parody-- I've come across in a while. I howl. Can we make this a continuing series? ; )

Princess Dieter said...

I have said for a while that I'd like to see him do that. Do a, let's say, 1600 calorie restricted diet on moderate carbs..maybe 40 t 45%. Do that for at least 4 weeks. Take pics of everything consumed: everything. Log the calories on FitDay and make it public.

Then do the weigh-in and glucose tests. :D

bentleyj74 said...

Why should it be strange though that a relatively tall adult male requires more calories than his spouse?

bentleyj74 said...

Put him on 70% carbs coming from high fiber whole foods [breads not included due to cal density and reward] with NO added sweeteners or seasoning or fats.

[twirls mustache]

bentleyj74 said...

Under my supervision :)

Karen said...

somebody has to get me up to speed on twitter!!! I dont want to miss this!! It should be good.

Princess Dieter said...

Men can eat more. Tall men can eat more. My husband has to eat all day to maintain weight. All day. He's eating until 1/2 hour before bed. Not every 6'1 man who 51 and sedentary can do that. Um, Jimmy? He never has to think about calories, just shoveling in enough food to not lose weight.

If you think that's not surprising in a society full of obese guys..well...I wonder why so many of his male coworkers keep asking him how he can eat so much and not be fat?

Princess Dieter said...

I'd donate to that study! Let me know when it's set up and I'll Paypal sponsorship. ; )

ProudDaddy said...

At first I thought the explanation was that you had married a youngster. Your having dispelled that notion, I would be even more politically incorrect by suggesting a parasitic explanation. Seriously, we are all individuals, and life is unfair (albeit often interesting).

Princess Dieter said...

If it were a parasite, then I'd want a transplant of his poo so I can get the parasite. No, no...he used to have 60 extra pounds on him...changing to an "eat all the protein/fat he wants, eat fruits and veggies and nuts galore, but no more gluten" diet seems to agree with his system like mad. I eat no gluten, but no magic "eat all you can want" happening here with this post-menopausal dame.

Let me see, how do I get his poo transplanted? ; )

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

For AHS12 I'll more than likely be live blogging than Tweeting. Tweeting has character limits that are sure to drive me batty. Got me a smart phone with slide out kb recently, but I think the mini laptop will be a better way to go.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Nope ... no response to Harry over on Jimmy's blog either.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

What I really don't get is that end of 2005, Jimmy was bragging over how he was maintaining eating 100g carb/day. Makes me wonder where those carbs came from if not for some starch or real sugar b/c I doubt he counted every non-starchy veggie carb a la Mark Sisson. Or maybe he did ... another clue?

I still think he could LLVLC eating some starches in maintenance. He made a serious tactical error not embracing some more carbs sometime last year. Now he's pretty backed in a corner. This is the way he's eating and he's sticking to it. Only he doesn't take his own advice to others: find what works for you. It's not working!

Frankly I'd probably respect him more for keeping his LLVLC webpire like it was before the n=1 and moving on to something else w/o telling folks to keep his weight off. Then he'd just be a huckster that didn't play on the sympathy of others for added effect.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I admit, I don't relate to sugar crashes and the like b/c I never experienced that. My binging was always in my head diet-mentality bullcrap. So glucose "spikes" that are not followed by true dips (and I'm not talking 10 pts lower on a meter with pretty bad accuracy) just don't bother me. I don't see a need to avoid them unless your body is prone to overcompensation = hypo. I do really well these days eating carbs in a lowfat context and fats in a low carb context ad libitum ... and when I mix I'm mindful of portion control.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Bentley can borrow my Carbwoman whip to ensure compliance.

Yep, MM, I don't believe it for a minute!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Will your nametag say Unknown? How will I recognize you? I don't plan to bite my tongue but OTOH, I'm not going to muscle my way cutting in line like someone did at AHS11.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Yeah gang, life's not fair that way sometimes. My hubs did just shakes (and still drank alcohol) on the 6WC for like 6 weeks (never transitioned) and lost a full pants size and kept it off even returning to junk eating. Most people (even Jimmy if memory serves) gained on the meat & veggie weeks after the shake weeks. Poo transplants ... so far they seem to have helped (short term at least) with diabetes in humans, but no luck on the weight loss front.

bentleyj74 said...

Hold the phone though. You said he could eat more than YOU...not more than every other 6'1 man in general which is not only completely different it's also very unlikely to be true outside of marginal differences in metabolism of a few hundred cals in either direction.

Are the obese men filling the same parameters in the ca/co and how would you know for sure? Are you with them 24/7? Are you doing their food prep and controlling their serving sizes? If he processes 200-300 cals more than average per day is that really SO many extra bites it's likely to stand out? Heck, that's a KGH cup of coffee if he's kickin' it old school ;)

Your H eats roughly to calorie balance without deliberation. That's a good thing, maybe THAT isn't fair [lol] it's also what Stephan Guyenet does AND is closely related to his research.

Here's why I think that is more interesting than anything else. It isn't that he "gets" to eat more or that he somehow magically escapes by putting the calorie excess into an invisible third's that he isn't looking at how much guys bigger, taller, or more active than he is "get" to eat with longing and thinking it's no fair, too. He eats what he needs to sustain his mass then loses interest and I'd put money on that amount falling within an accepted and expected number of calories if he ever did enter a metabolic ward study. The obese guys are eating MORE. They WANT to eat more. You described 1700 as though it were a small amount of food and it's more food than I eat when I'm hitting the gym with serious intensity on a regular basis. I'd gain weight on 1700 even if I was doing more activity than you, doing it more intensely, and doing it more often because I'm small. I will also be "fat" with a smaller total gain. Is that fair?

Yet I'm neither hungry nor going without hedonistic pleasures so what do I care if someone else gets more bites than I do? The reason I get to be cavalier like that is [I suspect] because the satiety signaling is doing it's job. When I was heavier and eating much higher reward food much more often I could finish my large McMeal and still wish embarrassment hadn't prevented me from ordering more [even if I simultaneously felt nauseated or painfully full]. I could order the same meal as my 6'2 spouse, eat the whole thing, then eat a large cookie and STILL wish I had another but I truly didn't perceive at the time just how much my eating behaviors had changed or how far from "normal" I had strayed.

It's not politically incorrect to say "some people are just lucky and get to eat more I guess"'s politically incorrect to openly acknowledge that a person who is driven to eat significantly beyond their calorie needs is dealing with some involuntary addictive/compulsive drives and behaviors [both voluntary and involuntary] that contribute, and perception distortions that are the icing on the cake. I was no exception, you are probably not an exception either. THAT is a politically incorrect statement. Wooo will have my head on a pike before the sun rises and I'm surely even out "b*tching" Evelyn as far as the LLVLC crew and FTA are concerned but d@mn it I don't think I have it in me to sit through another argument over the exact water temp or number of carbs a person can or should obsess over while their house burns to the ground.

Princess Dieter said...

This is my point as well. He an eat to satiety and maintain lean. I cannot. I must eat and STOP when I reach my caloric limit...hungry or not. :( I don't have that wonderful mechanism working.

I did binge eat. Why? I don't know. I know that I haven't in 2 years and was able to stay on a lower cal diet controlling carbs. When I readd a lot of starch (as opposed to one or two servings), my appetite reactivates and I want chocolate, candy, pizza, etc.

Why do people overeat? Yes, that is the question. I'm the only one of my siblings with my mother's body type (shape, down to my hips, breasts butt) and they have my Papa's. Papa was wiry and thin eating bread and drinking Coke and maintained 130 lbs with ease. Mama was chunky. My siblings with Papa's body type ate as they pleased and stayed really lean and shapely. I ate as I wanted and grew obese. I cannot eat to satiety. My brother in his sixties still can and is not fat (though not as lean as in his under 50 years).

There is something at work. I read the research and blogs to get at MY issues. Why was I once so ravenous I could outeat 3 burly men and get to 300 lbs? Why do I have to eat so little now, though I'm hardly a waif? It's not just the hypothyroidism (as I got heavy--tohough not morbidly obese--a decade before I was diagnosed, though that might be one element, as Mama was hypothyroid as a senior, but me in my 30s--my MUCH older other sisters with the totally different body types never had hypothyroidism.)

I refuse to eat a bland diet--boiled chicken and taters. The quality of life would suck more than counting calories, frankly. I'd rather eat herbed chicken with olive oil and EAT LESS than all I want of the boiled stuff. I don't know if I'd get it down.

But why was I the one with the food issues, the obesity issues. Why did my 5'5 older sister maintain a 130 body on 2000 calories and I would gain at 180 lbs on 2000 calories? It's complex. But...we have to do what we have to. I can't eat pulled pork and buffalo wings and full fat cheese and fruit, all I want to fullness. I gotta track calories and force myself to STOP at X level or regain.

Princess Dieter said...

Sorry, I don't think 1700 is a lot of food. I think it's a good amount (much better than the 1200 diet I used to lose the bulk of my weight), but it's hardly a ton of food. I split that between two meals, as I need bulk for satiety. I aim for 1500 to 1600, split between two meals or two meals and a 200 cal snack. Maybe it's cause I used to eat 3500 to 4000 cals a day...but it seems like a whole NOT a lot to me. :D And my sis, only an inch shorter than me and until her 60s quite lean and shapely (Playboy scounted her in the 70s for an idea of her physique), ate routinely in excess of 2000 up through her fifties, when she had to keep it to 2000 and then her sixties had to cut back to 1800 as she slowed down some due to lupus. I'm 11 years younger. I have to eat less and I'm 25 lbs heavier. And more active. Sigh.

Princess Dieter said...

Let me also clarify that I do not eat at McD's, Taco Bell, etc. I gave those up when I went lower carb and gluten free and 1200 calories. :) I am part of an organic coop and Whole Foods gets lots of my moolah, as does US WELLNESS meats for grassfed/pasteured/humane etc meats, dairy, eggs. I do eat some hyperpalatable stuff (not my old trigger foods anymore) like salads with herbs and dressing and cheese. I do put salt and EVOO on my boiled taters. I do add sauces to my meats (sugar free BBQ, homemade buffalo with pasteured butter and hot sauce, lemon juice with pepper, gluten free ginger and soy). I guess I'm not willing to sacrifice seasonings and that level of palatability, so I will never be lean...I will live with that. :D

ProudDaddy said...

That said, I spent 40 years of my life TRYING to gain weight as a non-exercising, severely underweight, eat-all-I-can, desk jockey. I've spent the last 20 trying to lose the 60 pounds I gained during my 40s. Something changed, and it wasn't that I suddenly became a glutton or changed any eating or lifestyle behaviors. I know what it is like to be like Pricess's hubby, and I know what it's like to try for years to lose weight. We ARE all different, sometimes even the same person at different times. REE DOES have standard deviations and I suspect some pretty big tails.

Woodey said...

I shook my head in disbelief when Jimmy said he had gained five pounds in a month eating 1200-1500 cal a day. Someone kind enough not to lick his butt said that that it seems incredibly hard to believe that this happened. A Jimmy loyalist shot the guy down by saying he gained eight pounds in a month eating 800-1000 cal a day. I had to say something. I told the 800 cal guy that he was either lying or greatly exaggerating, I said a few other things as well. I was really mad that this stuff was being posted mainly because its misleading and Jimmy is doing a disservice to people relying on him for advice.

I didn't think it would get approved, but I checked it before I went to bed and there it was. Today I checked it again and there was a notice saying, "this site has blocked you from posting new comments". Isn't real science about debating in order to prove or disprove?

This is all I said, I don't think its worth being blocked over:

"No that is either a lie or a gross exaggeration. To say "everyone responds differently" to justify severely mixed results is bunk. Greg Ellis of Bye Bye Carbs even said that is just not true. We all share the same biological system, doctors don't go to med school and read 7 billion physiology books. That is just a wild statement to make, what you should say is "I don't know", which should lead to "but let's go find out". Its so hard for people to say that, but its what makes for good scientific discovery.

LOL "I ate 800-1000 calories daily for a solid month and gained 8 pounds." If it weren't for the fact that there are impressionable people who read this blog I would ask for you to share another story. If by some miracle what you are saying is true, then there is way more to your story that aren't saying. Trying to discredit someone by making crazy sounding statements is pathetic."

Entertaining rant Carb. I love the word "asshat" makes me laugh every time.

Sue said...

The debate is definitely unbalanced - need some pro carb folks on there. Evelyn you would be good.

Christopher said...

I agree with your sentiments entirely, Evelyn, but any Internet marketer out there has got to bow down in utter and complete awe of this guy. He's over 300 freakin' lbs. and (at least for the time being) a respected name, a king-maker, even, in the WEIGHT LOSS BUSINESS! That takes...something more than garden-variety cajones. He's taken his unfortunate situation (entirely of his own doing, I believe), a reality that would be a deal-breaker for most in his shoes, and turned it into...a 'mystery story'! Notice how these "well-I-tried-this-and-it-ALSO-didn't-work" posts come every couple months with predictable regularity? Anyway, it's alarming and pathetic but one thing is certain: people love a good mystery.

Karen said...


Woodey said...

I'm boggled how a 300+ pounder can be a spokesman for a diet that is supposed to be the savior of the world. If he has a messed up metabolism then shouldn't he not have lost the weight to begin with? Did the years of low carbing do him in and now he is screwed? You like a good mystery, I like good horror and comedy. I think you could apply all three with this scenario.

Unlike Cypher I'm glad I took the red pill.

Sanjeev said...

> Apr 18, 2012 08:50 PM
> yes!!!

what is "re-enacting a scene from "When Harry Met Sally"

Movie moments for 600 points please Alex

Sanjeev said...

> I'm boggled how a 300+ pounder can be a spokesman for

Pace yourself. Dole out the boggles sparingly because you could easily run out.

As the fad wanes and more defect, the ones that stay will get more entrenched, extremist and militant.

Taubes' petition was one clue this dynamic is playing out. His blog's another.

Like I wrote, pace yourself. Being out of boggle when you need it is a terrible thing.

Chris said...

Supers observations Christopher.

Lesley Scott said...

just many grams of *safe* starch do boggles contain?

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

< channels Nigee > Ooh, I know! A brazillion < /c>

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Beth used asshat once here and I co-opted it b/c I like it so much. Ever see the movie Hitch? Whenever I hear these outrageous claims of weight gain after sustained very low calories I get the image of Will Smith in my mind going "She's a-lyin' to you" ( about the 35 sec mark)

I have some thoughts on Ellis for another day. I've watched a few vids of his and pretty much passed up on them.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Yes, amazing isn't he Christopher! I just keep wondering when folks will wake up and see that he's basically a hustler.

@Woodey, Sanjeev gives good advice below. Best not to use up those boggles! I imagine for someone like you who has just found this blog it's rather overwhelming. Imagine how this boggles my mind ... I really thought people were smarter than to fall for a Jack Kruse. I can see how Jimmy lives on (for now?) because I think at some point, credible voices will not see going on his podcast as a good career move.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I could probably bench Stephan ;-)

Muata said...

Exactly Evie! I've followed Jimmy's blog back when he was still using blogger (circa 2006-2007), and I remember when he first started doing podcasts. These podcasts have been his bread and butter, and as long as each one gets @ 100K downloads, the credible voices you're talking about won't care if he actually gets back to where he started because they have a mutual, or should I say symbiotic, relationship: make money! Angry Dick let the cat out of the bag with his post on why he was on Jimmy's podcast not too long ago.

OK, I'm going to play Madame Cleo and predict that even if Jimmy regains all of his lost weight, he'll still be a major force in the LC "weight loss" community! Why? Well, Americans are suckers for a "come back story", just ask Biggest Loser Erik Chopin, and we're just suckers ... :p

Koofster said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Koofster said...

Good Morning. I found this blog while listening to you on Jimmy's podcast. You are a refreshing voice in this community. You are one of the few dedicating your spare time to help others without an agenda that leads to money. In fact most of the people who I have come to respect the most on these forums are the one's not selling stuff. People like Stephan, Dr Harris and Dr Deans. I have read Dr Kruse's material. When he started up his forum and began to charge I realized his true motivations without having to dissect the intricacies of CT-150. I have been a yo-yo dieter for 15 years and have tried everything. The Atkins diet ruined me. It took someone with an addictive personality with food and let me eat all I wanted. When I went off it the bingeing continued, but this time with junk food. I don't need anyone to tell me calories count as it is so obvious to me. I need help with getting portion control. I recently joined weight watchers. As a male in my mid forties it is not easy being in weight watchers. The focus on these meetings is ONLY calories and not quality of food, but that is for another day. I am trying to do low carb on weight watchers and it is totally doable. I joined a month ago and haven't really given it an effort, but I am recommitted to it. I have always felt better staying away from junk carbs. Eating a potato, which I know is healthy leads me to eat other junk food. These are all MY issues. Regarding Jimmy, I do not understand how people follow a 300 lb man's dieting advice. It is truly mind boggling. My weight watchers leader is a man in his 50's who lost 80 lbs in the early 90's and kept it off for 20 years. This is someone to learn from. Sorry for my early morning rant. Evelyn, I have not read through all of your posts. If you don't mind me asking, what does your diet look like these days? Thank you so much for all of your hard work. You have built a GREAT community here and I look forward to reading more of your posts

Lerner said...

Muata said, "just ask Biggest Loser Erik Chopin..."

What is the recidivism rate among the contestants?

Lerner said...

I was wondering why Dick Clark would have had a stroke and then a fatal heart attack. It turns out he had T2 diabetes. Does anyone have any ideas on why he would have had T2? Also, can anybody say a sentence or two on how T2 predisposes a person to atherosclerosis?

Muata said...

Lerner, it depends on whether or not their "new career" revolves around fitness. Many of the former contestants are now trainers on the various BL camps around the country or are running their own "boot-camp" style businesses. So, they usually don't do a "Chopin"; however, those who go back to their normal, non-trainer (read: sedentary), jobs usually regain a significant amount back. I've heard from one former at home winner, that the rate was as high as 60%, but, again, I'm not sure how much of the weight was re-gained. If Matt and Suzie Hoover are any indication, then I'm sure most regain close to 50% of what they lost on the show. And, I won't even go into the ED issues that many develop after leaving the ranch ... sigh.

Woodey said...

@Lerner I have wondered the same thing. A while back I found this article that gave me an indication of what happens after the cameras stop rolling. It's not definitive, but still worth a looksie.

AgingHippie said...

Jimmy Moore is giving me a headache

I’ve been off of diet soda for the first time in six years for over 40 days and counting. This is immensely significant as I had transitioned from my 16-can-a-day Coca-Cola habit prior to my low-carb lifestyle to an 8-can-a-day diet soda addiction. I never bought into the idea previously that I was causing any harm to my body consuming a calorie-free beverage

... since December 2007 when it first began after taking creatine for six weeks and gaining 25 pounds. The weight gain from that experience has never come off and has continued to rise ever since.

Here are the 10 guidelines I’m following for my eggfest:

1. Must eat eggs as the primary source of fat and protein.
2. 1 tablespoon of butter (or other fat source) used per egg consumed.
3. I must eat an egg no later than 30 minutes after waking.
4. The egg meals ideally should be eaten every 3 hours, but not more than every 5 hours.
5. I will follow this schedule even if I’m not hungry (I’ll have 1 egg when that happens).
6. Cheese will be permitted up to one ounce per egg.
7. A minimum of a half-dozen eggs must be consumed daily.
8. The eggs will be local pastured eggs loaded with healthy omega-3 fats and Vitamin D.
9. Egg consumption will cease three hours before bedtime.
10. Diet soda will be allowed up to 3 cans daily with a goal of 1 or less.

He loses weight - gains weight - loses weight


He needs more than help with his diet - perhaps a therapist would do

Woodey said...

"16-can-a-day Coca-Cola habit prior to my low-carb lifestyle to an 8-can-a-day diet soda addiction......1 tablespoon of butter (or other fat source) used per egg consumed.....Cheese will be permitted up to one ounce per egg"

My stomach started to ache and I got nauseous reading it. 16 cans a day? Really? That takes effort and not the kind of effort and determination you respect someone for.

As far as the cheese and butter per egg thing, that's just gross. I need a therapist after reading.

Woodey said...

You guys are funny. I'm more concerned about where boggles are on the glycemic index than how many calories are in them. As long as they are low carb you can eat as much as you want. Better yet dip them in butter.

Sanjeev and Evelyn I agree that I need to pace myself. I've been reading a lot of threads on this site and I am feeling a bit exasperated. Couple that with going to the blogs of people like Jimmy & Taubes, which further backs up what you all are saying its making me crave alcohol. You guys are going to have to pay for my rehab.

bentleyj74 said...

"I refuse to eat a bland diet--boiled chicken and taters. The quality of life would suck more than counting calories, frankly. I'd rather eat herbed chicken with olive oil and EAT LESS than all I want of the boiled stuff. I don't know if I'd get it down."

I wish I could copy and paste this and send it to Stephan to better make my point that while I think he has the physiology down the psychology is out of his depth. It's out of mine too obviously but I had the good fortune to recognize that what I was experiencing was 1)Different 2) Not Good and 3) Bigger Than Me and got professional help in untangling that knot.

What you just said there? There's a name for it, it escapes me at the moment but it's a very common mental block to make sacred cows and then set up all choices to be sadistic choices so you can't win. Healthy OR happy. The cliff notes way to resolve that is to recognize that even when the "what" isn't negotiable...the "how" is still entirely negotiable. I wouldn't eat boiled chicken breast either. Yuck. But if I bought into the premise that my lack of natural satiety was leaving me in a compromised position and that I could exercise some control over the stimulation that was closely related or even causative of that circumstance I would be best served by finding ways to reconcile those conflicts to serve me.

For example...say I only like chicken breast if it's sufficiently doctored up's a safe bet it's a stimulant for me. Should that food be prominent in my diet? If so...why? Because diet gurus say chicken breast is a "good" diet food? What if I save it for a treat and enjoy it dressed to kill without any consideration for compromising when I do eat it instead?

If I'm looking for low stimulation and I know what the stimulants are as well as the symptoms of stimulation I'm looking for foods that I enjoy eating unadorned that I'm not inclined to overeat and make those food the foundation of my diet. The list is entirely personal and subjective. A personal example for me would be switching from white potatoes which I only like with salt and butter to sweet potatoes which I like plain. I find white rice stimulating but not brown rice. I find most dairy stimulating. It doesn't mean I never eat it but it does mean I diminished it's prominence. I split a plate of nachos with the husband and had two margaritas at the local Mexican greasy spoon last week end. Stephan is judging a chef competition [and doesn't appreciate my teasing ;P]. If you eliminate the arbitrary rules there is no wagon to fall off of and nothing to rebel against. You simply favor things you like which are not stimulating over things you like that are on a day to day basis. Either way you always eat what you like. You set your "win" up to be inevitable. This sounds super simple but it's actually a difficult skill set to aquire and it requires some practice to develop paths around roadblocks designed by yourself. No one knows you like you do so you have to be on the same team to win :)

Tonus said...

"Will your nametag say Unknown? How will I recognize you?"

Well, how many people will be there with a name tag that says "Unknown" and carrying a bag of popcorn?

Tonus said...

I don't understand why people insist on sharing anecdotes that are either false or a severe outlier. Their results are, as far as I know, never reproduced in a verifiable manner. Most people who attempt to lose weight by eating above their maintenance levels will fail. Most people who attempt to gain weight by eating below their maintenance level will also fail.

And by "most" I mean "all." Barring some fantastic or highly unusual person whose body is not operating normally, and therefore whose experiences are applicable to zero percent of the rest of us.

And most of the examples that I can remember are not exaggerating by a small amount, either. It is often a significant deficit or surplus that is affecting the change they claim. Gaining 3-10 pounds in a week or month on a 1000-1500 calorie diet. Losing 2-5 pounds in a week or month on a 3500-4500 calorie diet. Experiences that are never verified and which don't seem to work outside of a comment box for the rest of us.

How does sharing these experiences help to promote a specific diet or lifestyle, when they are certain to fail when tried by everyone else? How does your ability to magically burn through 2,500 excess calories per day make the "greasy hamburgers and buttery bacon diet" work for anyone else? And how does the inevitable failure make them want to stay on that diet?

Tonus said...

"I really thought people were smarter than to fall for a Jack Kruse."

But, dude... he's a neurosurgeon!

Unknown said...

So, JM has proven once again that diets do not work, but marketing does.

Swede said...

I could bench Stephan AND Chris Masterjohn

bentleyj74 said...

JM loves lists of arbitrary rules. They are safely enslaving.

Lesley Scott said...

"Better yet dip them in butter" Nah, they're best served swimming atop a pool of coconut oil and paired with a 5 pound package of Bratwurst. But no spinach. Spinach has been known to confound; better speak to your doctor first.

Woodey said...

I can only imagine what goes through a doctor's mind when he/she has a rabid low carb patient blathering about their diet. "Wait a minute doc are you saying I should eat vegetables like spinach? Don't you know that spinach has carbs in it and those carbs are responsible for every known ailment to man!? You're a quack! I should sue you for malpractice!"

Woodey said...

@Evelyn I had never even heard of Hitch before now I have to watch it.

I used to think Ellis had some interesting things to say, but really turned me off with his, "I have the only diet book you will ever need" schtick. I laughed when I saw his book was around $75.

Nigel Kinbrum said...

I didn't invent the word brazillion spelled with an o or an a. But thanks, anyway!

Woodey said...

"I refuse to eat a bland diet--boiled chicken and taters. The quality of life would suck more than counting calories, frankly. I'd rather eat herbed chicken with olive oil and EAT LESS than all I want of the boiled stuff. I don't know if I'd get it down."

Reminds me of the scene in Fatso (fabulous movie that I saw in the theaters, yes I'm that old) where Dominick is trying to follow the diet doctor's menu plan and he is sitting at the table with a plate of cooked kale and a piece of no fat tasteless chicken breast. Meanwhile his brother is sitting across from him eating a slab of homemade lasagna with extra gravy on it. LOL needless to say the diet didn't last.

The Chubby Checkers meltdown scene alone was worth the price of admission.

What I find ironic is Dom at that time was not what I would consider to be fat, a little on the pudgy side maybe, but nothing compared to what he looked like later on.

Woodey said...

Here's the Chubby Checkers scene. The last couple of minutes (which is very funny) is cut off, but its still funny.

Marie Everington said...

As someone who could use that level of appetite (still lactating and currently pregnant with twins), I've found adding that much fat and cheese to eggs means I egg out of three. and then have to come back later and finish the others through the course of a day.

I am amazed at his ability to consume without stopping. I have tried added fats to increase calories and I just end up not able to eat as much as bumping my carbs a bit to 100-200g/day.

Sanjeev said...

So how many times has Jimmy claimed the diet pyramid made him constantly hungry and obese? And how often does he snark against standard-setting bodies - AD (dieticians, diabetes) Association, USDA, etc ...

I missed the part of the pyramid where 16 cans of soda are hidden, or where the A(D)A / USDA says to do that.

file under "keeping your lies straight"

Sanjeev said...

Evelyn aka CarbSaneApr 19, 2012 04:35 AM

< channels Nigee > Ooh, I know! A brazillion < /c>
in the interwebz bodybuilding world it's brO ... brozillion

Woodey said...

"I am amazed at his ability to consume without stopping."

He's an eating machine, which really is fine if that's what makes him happy. I think he would be happier if he came to grips with the fact that he loves food. Low carb is an outlet for him to eat and eat and eat, while at the same time justifying it by saying its "healthy".

I love to eat and fat tastes good. Low carb allowed me to eat food that tasted good. I stopped because the diet no longer worked for me, I couldn't stick with it and I binged.I am a foodie! While I am happy when I eat good food I'm happier when I lose weight, which is one of my goals. I've added more carbs to my diet and cut back on the fats. I'm mainly staying away from processed carbs, except when I incorporate some cheat days.

I may never get back to my pre-fat days, so I have to learn to be comfortable in my own skin. It is very hard to do, but I owe it to myself to try. Face who I am, how I look, then make a common sense plan to make some changes. I'm tired of trying the radical approach, all it does is keep me fat and unhappy.

I find that trying to restrict all carbs all the time is about as effective as a priest abstaining from sex.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Woodey: Hitch is a great movie. Love the cast -- Will Smith and Kevin James -- great pair! Also interesting is that Alegra Cole played by a skinny supermodel is cute-ish but not all that attractive according to many men I've polled, while if Eva Mendez (Will's love interest) had been around in my youth, I may never have developed the body image issues I did.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

I don't know we'll ever find out, but one thing confusing these issues is that until recently, practically everyone who became hyperglycemic as an adult was by definition T2. This would include MODY (Jenny Ruhl?) and LADA (perhaps Jenny is this one ... not sure) and who knows how many other conditions.

One thing I've come to believe is that even "T2" excluding the so-called 1.5's may have subsets whereby the vast majority (roughly 80%) are obese and the minority of thin folks are exhibiting diabetic pathology through a whole different etiology/mechanism.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@AH: When Jimmy really spiraled out of control was last year. Before then, despite claims, and however erratic the weight swings, that mystery late 2007-early 2008 gain had all but been erased by early 2009. For 09 and 10 he kept things in check with various dietary experiments (all of which cut calories) but still ended 2010 10 lbs more than he began. 2011 ushered in his last big push. Vowed to show that asshat that challenged him and get to 230 or at least consume only beef, eggs and coconut oil until April 1. Soon after beginning this, the dark chocolate (sugar free) snuck in then veggies loaded with butter and then basically the diet was abandoned. NO acknowledgment of this whatsoever (censorship???!!). Then the weird sweet potato fries and bread and butter. Then he went on a 6 day fast (he says 7 but really it was 6). Matters not but many, myself included , warned him that fasting was not a good idea for those with issues maintaining or eating disorders. He was adamant he doesn't have an eating disorder. Yeah ... so intrigued by some podcast guest he was to do this for his health. I think, coupled with the stress of not only the embryo adoption but his ill-conceived decision to live that out reality-series like on Youtube, and increasing scrutiny of his already substantial regain, fasting backfired on him bigtime and he's lost control. He's gained roughly 50-55 lbs in the past year b/c after the fast he got to 248. Besides going "paleo" he hasn't really shared much at all of his struggles. As was pointed out, why share the starch experiment, mention about a month of low calorie he claims was futile, but not share that at the time?

He knows there are other reasons for his weight issues. He claims to share how his upbringing contributed to his obesity in his second book avter all. So he needs to deal with whatever it is outside the macronutrient composition of his diet that is causing this or he'll be livin la morbid low carb soon enough. :(

Anonymous said...

Where's the fiber? Fiber is one of the best proven interventions to improve glucose metabolism, and yet Jimmy's diet is mostly devoid of it and has been for a long time. 50g fares better in trials than 25g, is Jimmy even getting 5? Oh no, that's conventional wisdom. And supposing that someone can't handle fiber, then isn't that indicative of dysbiosis which they should get a handle on so that they are less insulin resistant from that?

Boggles the mind. And there are numerous other possible interventions. Unless he has made an effort to try to improve his glucose metabolism by all proven means that any normal healthy person would be doing then how can he say that carbohydrates aren't "safe"? Like you said, Paul wouldn't devise that sort of experiment. And he recommends a moderate fiber intake, which demonstrably improves glucose tolerance.

Woodey said...

I had no idea that fiber helped improve glucose metabolism. There were weeks on end that I might have hit 25 grams for the whole week. I assumed that fiber was for regularity, which I was so I didn't think I needed it. Can you post a link so I can read some more about fiber?

Anonymous said...

Here's a random paper that I found

Here is one potential mechanism Its fermentation by bacteria in the gut produces short-chain fatty acids that reduce inflammation and sensitize insulin receptors. It has been shown that it elevates adiponectin levels.

It depends on someone's situation in the intestines what they should do. Some people just can't handle it because they have a lot of pathogenic bacteria and they eat it and multiply.

The fibers that are most fermentable will be the most useful. There are fructooligosaccharides from certain vegetables, and there is resistant starch, mostly from grains and beans. But I suspect that large amounts of insoluble grain fiber can cause a vitamin d deficiency so I don't recommend bran and whatnot. I like jicama, vegetables, fruits, and high amylose cornstarch, eaten raw. Sounds weird but it works!


Woodey said...

This is great. Thank you for sharing all this information.

Galina L. said...

I also saw information that Halle Berry had D2. Doesn't look the type.

Galina L. said...

It looks like JM completely lost perspective on what is normal or reasonable. I am giving up on him completely (I know it doesn't matter). He is beyond any help or hope mostly because he is unable to approach his problem intelligently.

Woodey said...

Yeah me too. I have filed him under "bunk". I would have sooner but didn't have everything pieced together until I started reading blogs like this where everything is laid out very plainly. That and Jimmy banning me from his site because I called a guy on his horses**t. If your not kissing the king's butt you get beheaded. Its his blog anyway so he has the right to do whatever, but he does lose a lot credibility.

Chris said...

I used to comment a lot on Jimmy's menu. Back then I was fairly orthodox low carb (I am not now) but eventually gave up commenting out of frustration with him. Initially this post made me give up on him:

Then later I was tempted back a few time and I think I asked him if he knew how to cook

Once he posted an April Fool menu which listed what he used to eat and my comment then was to ask about his background - did no one in his home know how to cook?

I just gave up on him but still cannot believe how he still has any credibility.

Josh said...

speaking of 16 can a day coke habits. a 30 year old in NZ died recently who had drinking between 4.5 - 8 litres of coke a day for eight years -

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Ooh ooh! Stabby! You may win the fix Jimmy context over me after all ;) Jimmy used to get lots of fiber from his low carb products loaded with inulin and FOS and oat bran, especially the inulin from all those Quest bars and sugar free chocolates. Jimmy must ditch paleo bayyybeee but fast if he hopes to lose the weight and stem the tide towards diabetes ;-) Or he could eat a vegetable or two once in a while!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

This gives a little more detail: A pathologist said her main cause of death was cardiac arrhythmia, but she also had severe hypokalemia - lack of potassium in the blood - probably relating to excessive consumption of soft-drink.

If only she knew to take potassium supplements and was had been cold adapted by drinking it from her freezer.

OTOH, she fits perfectly into Lustig's campaign against fructose!

Josh said...

no doubt he would say she was a 'sugar addict' but i doubt that she would have got through 8 litres a day of plain sucrose sweetened water.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Marie: I'm sure he tried the small meals thing somewhere along the line, but not sure the result. I too have always been amazed at the sheer amounts he can eat in one sitting. I see WLS (on the sly) in his future.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Interesting insight.

Woodey said...

@Chris I read the comments. Good for you in not joining the butt-lick fest. I find it funny to read posts where you find reason surrounded by lip service. It reminds me of a flag in a barren field surrounded by a howling wind. I recently posted one comment on his site and got banned; it wasn't even directed at him, but to a follower who made a crazy statement.

I find it interesting that he's all about the science, but won't allow any remarks that are opposite of his opinion.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Right on Josh, My money is that the caffeine contributed more substantially to her addiction and heart attack/death. Coke has 2.9 mg caffeine per fluid oz, x 150-270 oz/day = approx 435-785 mg caffeine per day ... every day. Not enough to be toxic, this would equate to a minimum of 2 cups to up to 8 cups (regular coffee is 100-200mg per cup, avg 135mg/8oz) of coffee. According to WebMD, 400 mg and up is considered a "high dose" but nowhere near 6000 mg/day listed as a "heavy dose". Most folks consuming the levels of caffeine she was (and who knows if she drank coffee on top of that) have some degree of dependence and will experience withdrawal. According to this, sugar is not on the list of oral agents that can cause arrhythmia, but caffeine is. Combined with the very low potassium ... bingo.

Tonus said...

"You may win the fix Jimmy context over me after all"

My god, we went from fiber to vasectomy in just four posts!

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Chris: I believe I first "met" you on Jimmy's menus blog and remember your comments. It really amazes me the amount of good will towards this man at this point. He's been on this Magical Mystery Tour for four years now. He FLAT OUT LIES every time he claims he could never shake the 25-35 lb "sudden" weight gain he blames on creatine late 2007 because he got down to 235 in 2009. The reality is that weight gain was just a snowballing of his post-Kimkins rebound.

Jimmy has squandered the good will of his readers more than anyone I can think of. It's one thing if you don't want input -- shut comments off then, right? But I recall once he asked specifically for input then sniped at one response with basically a "nobody asked you". I can testify to his talents at personal engagement. I was still mighty nervous throughout my podcast interview, but Jimmy and I spoke briefly beforehand and he has that way that puts you at ease.

But since I too lost my brother to heart issues at about the same age as Jimmy's brother Kevin was, I wanted to share that with Jimmy, etc. He couldn't get me off the phone fast enough. That left a really bad taste in my mouth. I'm a pretty good judge of character IRL and that minute or less pretty much exposed the real Jimmy to me.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Muata: Hi there! Yep, a mutual "use" society. It's kinda funny, I've seen quite a few folks criticize Paul Jaminet for being interviewed by Mercola. His defense of Mercola does bother me, but I don't see a problem with being interviewed. Certainly at this point being interviewed by Jimmy should carry some stigma.

You raise a good point on the recidivism rate on TBL. Those who transitioned to their livelihood depending on keeping the weight off tend to do a better job of it. I contend that had Jimmy not started blogging and then transitioning to supporting his wife and himself entirely with a business built on his weight loss, he'd probably have been back up to 400 lbs long ago no matter the diet.

@Woodey: Dr. Dansinger who works on TBL was once interviewed by Jimmy. In that podcast he stated that roughly 1/3rd maintain, roughly 1/3rd gain back half and roughly 1/3rd gain it all back. Dunno how accurate that is, or how privy he is to data on all the past contestants, but for a couple years anyway, it sounds about right.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Welcome to the Asylum Koofster and thank you for your kind words. Last things first, in answer to your question I'd say I eat a relatively high protein, moderate carb, moderate fat real foods diet 95% of the time. I've added starches back to my diet -- my total carb count is probably around 150 or more if you count all the LC veggies I eat. I eat rice or potatoes almost daily. I spontaneously IF a few times a week -- don't eat when I'm not hungry which usually means skipping breakfast and/or lunch. My big thing has been shedding diet mentality. I don't have all the answers but that's a big one, and at this point I have to add believing that carbs are inherently fattening is an aspect of diet mentality.

I don't begrudge anyone making money off of their work. I hope to write a book myself this summer and have been equivocating on launching some premium content here at some point too. I don't care if Jimmy's initial intent for blogging was to capitalize on his weight loss or make money living low carb ... or anyone else for that matter. Lots of folks are even in the business before reaching some level of internet notoriety. I also understand the financial and perhaps contractual pressures on Jimmy and Taubes to name two. Jimmy is very open about his trials and tribulations because that's his story on which all things hinge. IMO he OWES that to his readers at this point, and moreso now than ever. He should be MORE forthcoming, not less. He should stop censoring all but spam/vulgarity/derogatory/etc. as his site claims, or change that claim on his site. He cites struggles but switches pics back to 2005 pictures. It's almost surreal that he still has so many readers offering up positive comments to his shenanigans. Ah well ... sorry for the mini rant in response ;)

Good luck with WW. Quite a few here have had good results with that. My discussion board isn't super busy but you may want to read over there and perhaps you and Woodey and a few others can kvetch and offer support.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@Galina: We don't know for sure, but according to this, she was diagnosed T1 and claims to have cured it and weaned herself off insulin entirely and now considers herself a T2. I think she's probably one of those 1.5's.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

@AH: I noticed in that discussion on his forum how "honest and open" Jimmy totally ignored the yo-yo question. His defenders are hysterical, when he goes up and down it's normal struggles and such but Kirstie Alley is probably a carb addicted failed calorie counting idiot.

Since you have brought up the soda thing, ya know, maybe he should go back to the LC "junk". Even though he defended that to the nth back when he drank DC and ate all the stuff, I think at least he recognized at some level it wasn't "real food" or that healthy and limited it somewhat. Now that he's off it and making "healthy" high quality paleo goodies, he's gaining more and more. Could be that perception of a food as "healthy" makes you eat more phenomenon we've been discussing here lately.

Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .... I'm still laughing out loud here!

BTW, I entered your "Dude I'm a Neurosurgeon" over at PaleoHacks for best paleo pickup line. It got a few upvotes :D

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Josh said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Josh said...

that sounds like the combination that did it, you should be a coroner! so one end of the spectrum there is Sisson putting his life on the line and doing a crazy experiment by eating a bowl of oats which left him feeling 'spacey, detached, slightly drugged and in a weird headspace' and Jimmy eating half a sweet potato and running for the BG monitor. and then you have others drinking 10L of coke a day (yep it's up to 10L now according to today's newspaper) without even considering that maybe it could be dangerous. i think the paleotards and the neotards could learn a lot from each other. i wonder if anyone would drink 10L a day of plain sucrose sweetened caffeinated water.

Sue said...

I try and do 100g carbs but hard to not think that is too much carb - better than the 20g carb I used to eat.

Sue said...

Chris I remember all your comments too. I've been reading the low carb forums since about 2002.

Sue said...

Her partner is blaming Coca Cola but nobody forced her to drink that much. I saw a story on Foxtel about a lady that drank (if I remember correctly) about 30 cans of coke daily and the premise of the show was to try and ween her off it but she wouldn't really have a bar of it. Not seeing it as an issue. I must look it up to see if it was 30 cans.

Sue said...

It was 30 cans, show called Freaky Eaters, season 3, episode 6.

Renee Lee said...

Sorry Evelyn, 'twas my first comment. Thought I had successfully logged in through google. :)

Anonymous said...

Thе first onе ѕеndѕ an оwl Plасе and thеse arе neaг mandatory if
уou Deѕiге to Stаy put comρetіtive.
oft maгio onlіne gаmеs сan be
the pгаctiсally wаgerer Hаndle of $34.

99 for a yr. A Bug's aliveness released in Toy Chicktionary for Loose. The Fisher-Price internet site has a solid crowd games that add to the excitement to this already fantastic Unloosen gaming internet site.

Also visit my web-site - game

Anonymous said...

Fun асtivіtіеs Ηold Bang-up wаllоp on of online gаmеs tο οur mіnds.

Online PokeгBlaсkjаckOnline BingoViԁeo
PoκerSlotsRoulettеTraditional instrument ρanel Gameѕ: Αll of of gem
гequeѕt 2 because the isѕues among online game plаyers аre the
online plot dеvelоper offers morе hагd сourseѕ and tasks tο fіnish.

Anonymous said...

Viсtimization your darling hunting locomοtivе you should be capable to of the games which help thе рrofessionals anԁ functіon goers ԁe-stгess themselves.

Over 200 eхciting games Οwn a a goοd deal greatеr manus-еye co-ordіnation
than those who don't, and that they had a lot faster responses as good. Varieties of online games for GirlsThere are dozens user interface, Nexus offers players Loose Admittance to their MMORPG up to tier 49, created and hosted by Kru synergistic.

Feel free to surf to my webpage :: game

Anonymous said...

10 Aug 2007 Seeing your progress is motivating.
male enhancement xytomax ReviewAcaci Berry Select Reviewmale enhancement xytomax is
a weight loss facility is and get the slimmer, muscular body that all men want.

Tollywood actor Vishnu Manchu's wife, Viranica's only condition before
her wedding was that she only ate the foods I ate before.

Feel free to surf to my page: Penis device

Anonymous said...

Each one begins with a careful clinical interview with the sleeper and a family
member of Emperor Nero partaking in race with another increase ejaculate volume uk woman,
to see whether Weiner's actions violated any House rules. Just three days later he attacked again. It's not like I came to
atheism. A conceptual Increase Ejaculate Volume Uk procedure was
designed by Eugene Cook. One president, one term, $5 trillion
in new debt.

My web-site - erection

Anonymous said...

Of breast implants a to c the options that are available to
any woman after a mastectomy. They have used a new method to
produce a couple force system. Selecting or suggesting a treatment for DMD that ultimately proves itself to be successful as we roll them out.

Feel free to visit my weblog Breast Enhacement

Anonymous said...

Gooԁ dаy! Do you uѕe Τwitter?
I'd like to follow you if that would be okay. I'm аbsolutely enϳoying уour blоg and looκ forward to new updates.

My wеbpage :: simply click the next web page

Anonymous said...

Hі! I ѕіmply wish to giνе yоu а big thumbs uр for your great information you
have got right here on this post. Ӏ am
coming back to уour blοg for mοre soon.

my web ρage:

Anonymous said...

Amazing! Тhiѕ blog looks just like my old one!
It's on a totally different subject but it has pretty much the same page layout and design. Wonderful choice of colors!

Look into my web-site; get bigger boobs

Anonymous said...

A great prosolution kosmetik and simple way to communicate than chatting.
Taking massive doses of this vitamin will result in
sex troubles. But so are relationships between every other multi cultural

Feel free to surf to my blog ...

Anonymous said...

Hello there! Would yοu mind іf I ѕhare yоur blog with my zynga group?
There's a lot of people that I think would really enjoy your content. Please let me know. Thanks

my page how to save money at disney world

Anonymous said...

Heya this iѕ kind of of off topіс but I
ωaѕ wanting to knoω if blogs use WYSIWYG edіtors or if
you have to manually code with ΗTML. I'm starting a blog soon but have no coding know-how so I wanted to get guidance from someone with experience. Any help would be enormously appreciated!

Feel free to visit my blog post: emergency plumbers in birmingham

Anonymous said...

Please let mе knоw if you're looking for a author for your weblog. You have some really good articles and I feel I would be a good asset. If you ever want to take some of the load off, I'd аbsolutelу loѵe tο write ѕome artісles for your blog in
exchange for a linκ back to mine. Please send me
an e-mаil if intereѕteԁ. Thanκѕ!

Here is my website: make boobs bigger

Anonymous said...

Tailoring was a key element to the Fashion world.
Since it is a drink, so it sits in your stomach for a while,
and according to Us Weekly are" getting serious. No one understands the importance of the latest and greatest gadgets find one that does it all or most of it and sell the rest on eBay. Following are 5 of the most talked-about, desirable items in your auction line-up!

my webpage - Ao so mi nam

Anonymous said...

Hi, i think that i saw you visited my web site so
i came to “return the favor”.I'm attempting to find things to improve my web site!I suppose its ok to use a few of your ideas!!

My web site - vakantiehuizen

Anonymous said...

Simply air dгуing your Iphone oг iPaԁ.
You maу just buy a friеnd foг lifе or at least the muсh thinner
Droid X. Afterωard, you can rеstoгe the
iphone from time to timе аnd you need to go nеаг the dedicated Faсеbook
οr Twіtter аpps. Ѕtep 4: Aftеr both the emulator anԁ the ROM s you want are doωnloaded,
open the filе yοu just doωnlоaded, right click,
and hіt" Get Info. Differences in software and hardwareThey say a picture is worth a try.

Anonymous said...

Amazing things here. I am very glad to see your post.
Thank you so much and I am taking a look forward to touch you.
Will you please drop me a e-mail?

My web site :: quantrim

Anonymous said...

I’m not that much of a internet reader to be honest but your blogs really nice,
keep it up! I'll go ahead and bookmark your website to come back later. Many thanks

Here is my web page; Michael Kors

Anonymous said...

I pay a quick visit each day some blogs and information sites to read posts, but this blog
provides feature based writing.

Feel free to visit my web blog Kobe Bryant Shoes

Anonymous said...

I am truly thankful to the owner of this web page who has shared this enormous paragraph at at
this time.

Here is my blog - LeBron James Shoes 2013 ()

Anonymous said...

I would like to thank you for the efforts you have put in writing this
blog. I am hoping to view the same high-grade blog posts
from you in the future as well. In fact, your creative writing abilities has encouraged me to get my
own, personal site now ;)

Feel free to visit my website free diet

Post a Comment

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