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!)

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Drama! Vegan v. LC

I can't help but weigh in on this this morning.  It seems a vegan  has come out with a new one:  Low Carb Guru of the Month.   



Yes, I'm aware that posting about this here puts me at risk for promoting such activity, but I'm going to take that risk.  Why?  Because Jimmy Moore has sought fit to respond and there are several things about this response that are worthy of being "called out".



First off, "the community" better be on alert.  It's not enough for Jimmy to attempt to co-opt the Paleo movement, he's trying to take a ride on the WAPF, primal and real food (also whole food) gravy trains.    This inclusion of WAPF, "real food" and primal is new.  Inclusion of primal means one thing folks, and it's not trying to scrounge page hits from Don Matesz' Primal Wisdom.  Jimmy's current diet is in no, let me repeat, NO way paleo, or even paleo-inspired.  It's "real food" but no way whole food and I'm sorry but that fact means his diet is chock full of PROCESSED food.  Paleolithic man did not have Philly cream cheese, Daisy sour cream, butter, coconut oil, etc.  NO, I repeat NO, human culture has eaten 85% fat or anything near that ... yes, even the Inuit.  It's "real food" but not whole food in the spirit of the real food movement.   Ahem, there are still paleo/primal types hanging on his coattails and or holding hands moving forward.  Wake up folks.  Back to the videos, but first another to embed, his NuttyK lecture at LCDU:


This is the infamous "chocolate cake" talk where Jimmy equates protein to chocolate cake -- might as well be because of gluconeogenesis.  This was so ridiculous it even caught the attention of his friend Regina Wilshire who wrote:  So Much for Cake, Let Them Eat Steak.  In it she chronicles Jimmy's weight woes through the years.  What got me annoyed was the 100% Honesty nonsense at the end of Jimmy's response video.  Really?  He's been lying to his readers for years, for example the many cases I outlined here:  Jimmy Moore: Unwavering Dishonesty, The Early Years.  Be forewarned that many of the menus blog links in that post are no longer around as in response to this exposure, Jimmy deleted the entire blog.   Bottom line:  his weight didn't just creep back on over the years while he was doing all the right and same things.  C'mon!

Jimmy seems to have taken a different tack lately -- highlight his critics (LOL, though he dare not respond to me with anything but T-shirts because I know the deal and have his number!).  The vegan video has some easy targets in it that he chose to respond to.  Here they are:


  • I’m certainly no “guru” on low-carb; I blog and do podcasts
  • My book is called 21 Life Lessons From Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb
  • Umm, unfortunately Jimmy Moore is the most prominent name associated with low carb and therefore whether he's qualified or not, he's a guru.  Vegan got the title wrong?  They showed the book so can you say nit and pick?


  • I didn’t lose my weight on low-carb/high-protein, it was high-fat
  • Actually I'm willing to bet that while all LC diets are fairly high fat, Jimmy did not lose the initial weight on anything resembling the diet he's eaten for the past four or more years.


  • My book never became a bestseller and has sold a few thousand
  • Nowhere in my book did I write “forget veggies, eat your meat”
  • It's good to hear not too many wasted money on his book.   I'll give him that last one.  Oh the dishonest horrors!


  • The “Jimmy In 2011″ pic was from April 2010 in Seattle, WA
  • The “Jimmy…Early 2012″ photo was from the March 2010 Low-Carb Cruise
  • The “Jimmy…Summer 2012″ photo was from March 2012 at PaleoFX
  • The “Jimmy…A Few Months Ago” photo was from Dana Carpender’s Meet and Greet in Bloomington, IL in August 2010
  • Oh, OK.  Yeah, I noticed the dates were wrong on the pictures too.  But really Jimmy?  Are you complaining he didn't use your true before pic from early 2012?  What you are inadvertently highlighting is that indeed for much of the past 3 years you've been in significantly regained state, to say nothing of the other weight regains in prior years, or the fact that you were never "sensationally skinny" as your first book subtitle exclaims.  I'm not sure if you realize this, but the pictures of "look at me now" in your rebuttal are far from exculpatory of how well low carb is working for you.  That just is.


  • It wasn’t a “low carb fail” but rather some simple mistakes I was making in doing it
  • Your simple mistakes include supposedly overeating protein.  Atkins was never NuttyK.  You may save your webpire with this stuff for a while, but you will sacrifice any of the hard fought-for legitimacy that reasonable and responsible low carb diets have gained.  And despite the perpetual martyrdom cries, Dr. Eric Westman is not exactly toiling away in anonymity at Podunk U (for example).  Jimmy's example is a very sobering example of what might be in store for you should LC work for any length of time.  And I'm not sure this is any sort of selling point even to the most desperate person who decides to try LC for the first time in hopes of being the next Jimmy Moore or Dana Carpender.  And the mainstream medical establishment will NEVER take you seriously.


  • I’m not “getting rich selling low-carb diet books” by any stretch of the imagination
  • Well, you are earning some sort of living.  Whether you are getting rich or not is immaterial.  Only you know whether it's an honest living or not....


  • I don’t mind being “fair game” but you gotta get your facts straight first
  • Oh ... like moi?!  LOL
    The truth eluded the VegSource people in their write-up about their video as well, including these untruths: 

  • I haven’t “sold millions of books” or “made a bleeping fortune” doing the work I do. It’s mostly a labor of love that barely pays my basic living expenses and not much else.
  • Cry me a river.  You may not have made a bleeping fortune because your product is faulty.  But you've raked in thousands from promoting sketchy diet plans (remember Kimkins everyone?!) that required no "labor", and unquestionably promoting questionably low carb products for years.


  • Most low-carbers aren’t “avoiding carbs and eating lots of meat!” That’s a mistaken and grossly ignorant stereotype.
  • My own case notwithstanding, I wouldn’t say that most low-carb leaders have a problem with their weight. Many have managed their weight just fine following a healthy high-fat, low-carb diet.
  • What I’m “selling” isn’t “very unhealthy” but rather for people to find what will work for them. If that’s a high-fat, low-carb, meat-based diet, then there’s nothing wrong with that. Unless you’re a rabid vegan apparently.
  • Well, I can think of a lot of low carbers, especially of the paleo bent, who do nothing but.  Heck, Gary Taubes jokes in interviews about how his wife calls him Meat Man.  Which LC leaders don't have a problem with their weight who previously did?  Do I really need to list these again?

    As to the longterm healthfulness of NuttyK, you can put all the disclaimers you like, as can Volek and Phinney and Attia.  There's no long term data to support it either way because NOBODY EATS THIS WAY LONG TERM except for the very (very) rare epileptic child and ....  

    And I have to leave you with one more video if you haven't yet seen it.  You see, after Jimmy "went Paleo" along with his crusade against LC food manufacturers like Julian Bakery and Dreamfields, he gained weight and was losing business from those former podcast sponsors.  He proudly announced how he would never resort to promoting products like Body by Vi with all of the "bad ingredients", then months later his podcasts and blog sported ads/sponsorships from this Leaner Living MRP.  Enjoy!



    Lastly, Jimmy wrote:
    When people attempted to correct these blatant errors in their portrayal of me in the comments section of the YouTube video, their comments were summarily deleted by the VegSource admin within minutes. Nice. 
    Oh the irony Jimmy.  When's the last time you allowed people to point out blatant errors on your blogs? You weighed 248 lbs in April of 2011.  You weighed under 250 from some time mid-to-late 2008 through at least 6 months of 2009 .  Yet you repeat over and over how you haven't weighed under 250 for 5 years (a claim that fits in with the vegan video mind you, if only a sampling of pics is used ...).    I will allow comments pointing out any blatant errors in my video above.  Got any?  I won't censor you.

    In the end, this video by a vegan gets a few details wrong, but the overarching message unfortunately correct.  Mind you it doesn't make the case for a 180 twist to veganism, but Jimmy is fond of pictures worth more than 1000 words .....  LC has been failing Jimmy Moore for a long time, or he's been failing it (though that would be a tougher case to make since he's been pretty steadfast LC all along).  He has been unable to maintain any weight loss longer than a month before regaining, or for that matter any sort of steady weight for more than a few months.

    But you didn't get this far for the science did ya?  Just funnin!

    89 comments:

    George Henderson said...

    Here's what Jimmy Moore said a few days ago: "But what is it that brought about the reduction in calories to begin with during this experiment? I contend it is the increased prevalence of the beta-hydroxybuterate ketone bodies in my blood. And did I force the issue by reducing my overall calories purposely? Nope. It all happened spontaneously as a natural response to the higher-fat intake in conjunction with lower protein and my already reduced carbohydrate consumption that increased my level of blood ketones to the point that my body began burning stored body fat for fuel to make me keto-adapted. This, in turn, has curbed my appetite, cravings and desire to eat food at every turn to the point that I don’t even think about food anymore, allowed me to engage in unplanned periods of intermittent fasting and given me freedom for the first time in my life to be in control of what I’m putting in my mouth to eat as a means of fueling my body rather than satisfying an insatiable hunger or habit to eat. THIS IS A FREEING CONCEPT!

    So one question remains: Was it the keto-adaptation or the calorie-cutting that has worked in producing the weight loss success I’ve seen? If you ask me, I say WHO CARES?!"

    Now, you could disagree with Jimmy about the reasons for his change of appetite (and it seems to me that no-one can ever know till they've been Jimmy Moore), but it seems to me he's finally landed right-side-up.

    I don't care if he got there by sacrificing frogs in a monkey suit while listening to Andy Williams records played backwards, I would still contend that he's finally achieved the one thing that matters the most in his case.
    He might even be able to eat real food now.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    I don't care either, just so long as he realizes he's eating less. What I do care about is that he's ignoring people asking about negative side effects and playing Shultzie about it (brittle nails?!)

    Oh, thanks for posting about his biggest lie. For 8 years he was touting how his healthy blahblahblah diet was superior because he was never hungry. Guess that wasn't true.

    michaelbell_a said...

    rant, rant, rant, attack other people's character, rant, rant. Worthless. goodbye.

    Andrew C said...

    Jimmy Moore's spin on everything he does never ceases to be of great comedic value. It's nice that he's losing some weight, but he already has a book planned before he's reached a significant loss, not merely a relative loss from where he had allowed himself to get.

    Not only that, but his book is going to be about cholesterol levels. But in response to this recent vegan video he says he is not a guru. So why is he writing a book on how people should interpret their cholesterol levels, and who knows what else.

    Twisting the truth to support their high fat cravings doesn't seem to be limited to Jimmy Moore either. The "Diet Doc" recently got caught displaying an edited diagram and passing it off as the researchers' original diagram.
    From http://paleobuzz.com
    ----

    It’s the Insulin, Stupid Dietdoctor.com
    http://www.dietdoctor.com/its-the-insulin-stupid

    Paleobuzz Note: The two images are actually not exact duplicates. The one on
    dietdoctor.com, insulin2.jpg, has had labels altered without an explanation to
    readers. Compare with the original image from the source at
    http://www.cell.com/cell-metabolism/retrieve/pii/S1550413112004536 :
    http://download.cell.com/images/journalimages/1550-4131/PIIS1550413112004536.fx1.lrg.jpg
    Sure, these are mice studies, but why distort the information provided by the
    actual authors by photoshopping their image without note?


    ----

    Looks like the Diet Doc would like to avoid the name "high fat" if it isn't represented well in animal studies. Rename what the researchers call "high fat" diet as "bad food", and "prove" his own point! Diet Doc and Jimmy Moore should do a comedy teamup!

    Andrew C said...

    Character? Or the very message and how everything he does covers for the message, no matter what contortions he has to make to do so?

    Your comment is more of the rant than anything I've ever read on this blog. I think most of it goes over the simplistic insulin blamers' heads though.

    George Henderson said...

    Hunger is relative, and what it takes to satisfy it changes. One can be stuffed and still hungry (high carb SAD), stuffed and satiated (like old Jimmy), or not stuffed but still not hungry (new Jimmy, let's hope).

    lian johnston said...

    These videos have nothing to do with plant positive btw.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    I'll take your word on that and change this, thanks.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    C'mon George, is there any rationalization you won't come up with? Really. The whole thing about LC is "you're never hungry" and LC'ers are quite nasty mocking calorie counters, WW, etc. b/c they were always hungry. Now we find out Jimmy has been hungry all along.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    Yes, character. Jimmy Moore is a "public figure" who is selling his story. He has written two books about it. Therefore his character as a businessman is certainly relevant and I make no apologies for pointing out that he's not what he appears to be.

    This man is going to write about cholesterol levels? Based on what exactly? Having ridiculously high LDL levels he's dismissed as "large and fluffy" for years, described as "spectacular" and other such adjectives?

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    The PB folks must follow me on Twitter ;-) Yes, this "doctoring" of the graphic from that paper was unacceptable. Eades made some smug tweets about that paper too of the "duh they just discovered insulin stores fat" variety. Ass hats both.

    Javeux said...

    Maybe he's just developed his first (?) bout of euthyroid sick syndrome? Or is he actually losing weight as well as appetite?

    MM said...

    JM: "What I’m “selling” isn’t “very unhealthy” but rather for people to find what will work for them."

    Only if it's low carb. I don't know how many podcasts I listened to where Jimmy would get up on his soap box and rant about how "healthy whole grains" weren't healthy. I guess they're not allowed to work for me. I'm so tired of hearing him say that he supports people finding what works for them and then just turns around and dumps on whole grains, too much protein, or carbs in general. He doesn't really want people to find what works for them. He wants people to eat low carb.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    Then there's his other meme: Find what works for you then follow it exactly as written for the rest of your life.

    He doesn't even do that because otherwise he'd be doing DANDR to the letter. He'd at least be following Atkins' advice on long term carb restriction and thyroid, and/or his admonitions about the fat fast.

    Also, I'd say Dayspring referring to his lipids as "nightmarish" is pretty damning as to the healthfulness of what he is indeed promoting. What else should people try -- "maybe it works for you!!"

    Sigh ...

    twoidhd said...

    JM is a lair. I had a few email exchanges with him after his "there's no such thing as a paleo diet" show around Xmas of last year. In his emails he stated that he didn't believe in evolution. On the paleo facebook page I called him out on this. He lied and said he never said that.

    Typical christian from my experience.

    Diana said...

    The comments on Regina's post are a riot. About half of them show disillusionment with Jimmy. About a quarter are the stunned responses of the herd. How can you do this? You've "turned" on him! How can you criticize what works for him??!! Pathetic.

    river rance said...

    Like to know Jimbo's Hip to Waist Ratio after seeing some of the down under video...

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    I don't know the ratio, but based on his reports in 2009 when he weighed a bit less than he does now, I'd guess he's a 48" waist.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    He's been called out on so many public inconsistencies you would think people would catch on. As to typical Christian? I don't know that's the case. He's typical of a certain type, I'll give you that. The kind that uses their faith as a shield and a crutch (Oh I go to church and sing in the choir and make references to God all the time, but don't you dare call me unChristian for stabbing someone in the back, throwing supposed friends under the bus, lying for convenience, fun and profit, etc.). That has nothing to do with Christianity per se, though unfortunately it does apply to many who claim to be Christians.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    They are hysterical! It's funny b/c Regina posted here a while back on my LC morph to HAES post (that got me into all that trouble) about heavy low carbers. I mentioned her only because JIMMY had mentioned her in a 2009 blog post, I didn't really know much about her and to my knowledge had not had any interaction with her. But now she's getting the treatment from some of her readers. How dare she criticize him -- he's losing weight! Funny but sad all at the same time.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    PS I was surprised she posted my comment. Even more surprised she edited in his correct low weight for 2011.

    Primal Woman said...

    Before she stopped blogging, she was on my daily read list, and I don't remember her ever censoring comments. She knows her stuff and she's called Jimmy out over the years when he's done stupid shit. He never listens because his head is in the sand, but really, when she's maintained and he's not, why anyone listens to him anymore is beyond my comprehension. I'm glad she is writing again and hope she has more to say about Jimmy and his antics to get attention.

    sexyfemalemuscle said...

    I think we must take everything Jimmy Moore says with a grain of salt.. There is no way he was eating a lower carb diet the last several years.

    His weight gain more than likely came from over eating a variety of differnt foods.

    Currently, you can tell he has lowered his protein and increased his fat intake just my the make up of his body. But if he actually doing any exercise, I would be shocked. He is sadly lacking in muscle tone and his fat distribution is all around his abdomen.

    He can claim all he wants that he is healthy, his appearance says just the opposite. It is with great saddness for me, as it was a guest on Jimmmy's show who helped me years ago, that Jimmy has devolved so dramatically. Also, I get no pleasure with this observation, but I do not think Jimmy will be with us much longer.

    Primal Woman said...

    Off topic, but something you might want to write about. Jimmy said he had 11% body fat way back when, and here he is with 35% body fat at 250, with 40+ pounds of fat around his belly as per the dexa scan he had done. No way while lowcarbing was he ever 11% body fat, and no way he's in spectacular shape now with 40+ pounds of butter in his middle!

    Kade Storm said...

    Yeah, they are leagues beneath what Plant Positive does on the internet. I mean, there's no looking past his bias and slants, but his videos are worthwhile discussions on evidence and he discusses them while making proper cases that are far more convincing than the grasping at straws that I see form the other camp. This video seems more in tune with the kind of drama-generating crap you get from the DurianRider.

    Kade Storm said...

    Yes, but cholesterol is good. Cholesterol is essential. We couldn't exist without cholesterol. We should all have stellar lipids and high fluffy LDLs that should NOT be allowed to oxidise in the presence of those evil, insidious sugars! It protects us from infection! Danish study shows how people in old-world times with familial hypercholesterolaemia lived longer (citation. . . kinda' missing)! ZOMG! O TEH UFFE RAVNSKOV!

    Lesley Scott said...

    "he stated that he didn't believe in evolution" forget Church 'n State, we need a separation of Church 'n Diet. :)

    Unknown said...

    I think he looks better in recent pics but he still looks older than me, and I'm quite a bit older than him.

    If you want to look youthful and you are a man you do need to exercise, women can get away with lack of exercise a little more because they naturally tend to have less muscle mass.

    markgillespie said...

    11% is around the level of a professional athlete, Jimmy Moore will never get close to 11%. From all the photos I've ever seen of him, I don't think he's been less than 30% at any point.

    Diana said...

    @Primal Woman, markgillespie,

    I remember reading that on his blog and saying to myself, "no freaking way Moore was ever that low in body fat." If he was 11% body fat, what difference would it make that he never broke the 200 mark? He'd be rippling with muscles if he were 11% body fat.

    Craig in CT said...

    I've always thought it was a little inconsistent for LC advocates to tout the 'never be hungry' benefit of such diets, and then move on to doing things like Intermittent Fasting. If you are eating according to the clock or calender, then you are ignoring your appetite. IF seems just as contrived and inconvenient as calorie counting. Yet you seldom see people being mocked for IF.

    Galina L. said...

    Can't speak on everybody's behalf, but my main problem used to be being too hungry to unbearable degree, I tried eating bulky foods, exercised as much as I could to compensate for eaten food, and not only fasting, but eating less often than every 3 hours was out of question, I always had an emergency food in my purse. It looks like not everyone has hunger in the same degree, it is hard to measure. The LC food normalized my appetite, and I was able to start practicing IF when I got that idea from reading different blogs , which farther increased appetite control, or rather diminished appetite so much that I don't remember when I was really hungry last time . It is way more convenient than counting calories for people who want to eat less, and probably too lazy or not organized enough, or don't have a personal assistant to log all food day in, day out,year after year. I don't know how it is possible even to compare thous two activities. I don't need to count anything, and I don't have to fight my hunger.I read that instead of diminishing appetite IF caused some people to binge-eat, others felt stressed-out or had other issues. Well, we are not the same, but I feel that I have an easier life now than before.

    I think JM must have really huge appetite, I wouldn't be able to go through even half of his keto-breakfast, and judging by results, it is an improvement compared to previous ways of his eating.

    blogblog said...

    Hunger is completely NORMAL. You won't die if you don't eat. Learn to ignore hunger.

    blogblog said...

    If Jimmy really wanted to lose waeight he would have gastric bypass surgery. It's the only proven long term (>5 yr) treatment for morbid obesity. No fame or money in that for Jimmy.

    blogblog said...

    I went to university with a national level middle distance runner. He had 15% body fat.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    Hi PW, welcome! I'm pretty sure I've linked to the post where he bragged on his 11% body fat. Ah yes, here: http://carbsanity.blogspot.com/2012/11/amazing-and-not-so-amazing-low-carb.html

    No doubt this was a standing scale and the reading was heavily biased by the fact that he carries little weight in his legs and hydration status also heavily impacts such measurements. He believed that, however, but as we now know, he's obese by the more accurate %BF measure.

    I didn't find the LC community until after Regina had stopped blogging so am largely unfamiliar. There's a mega Kimkins thread at LCF where she was highly critical of that escapade of his at the time. I read that a year or two ago and always found it interesting that friendships developed after that between some in the community.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    I disagree that he couldn't have done that eating LC. Yes, sometimes he went through a little Dreamfields stint or Julian Bakery phase -- when they gave him free product it seemed -- but overall the man just eats a lot of food. He's been a walking, talking example that it is indeed possible to overeat without eating many carbs. When I first came upon his menus I was dumbfounded to discover he was eating two 8 oz burgers with cheese, mayo and a side salad drenched in dressing and something like LC "cheesecake" for dessert all in one sitting. That cheesecake was nothing more than a tub of whipped creamcheese with AS and flavor mixed in! Even counting the carbs in the lettuce he probably didn't top 20g for the meal, but a whole lotta calories!

    As for exercise he's taken back up the slow burn lifting the past couple of months. And frisbee golf.

    @Unknown: I think he certainly looks to have aged more than the number of years that have transpired. This hoopla about LC preventing gray hair, baldness, wrinkles and all that jazz is a load of bunk.

    Evelyn aka CarbSane said...

    Jimmy claims his current IF is "spontaneous". Ketones do suppress appetite in some more than others, an effect that persists in some more than others. He's eating only every 12 to 24 hours. If I could manage to eat that much in one sitting, I'd eat only every 12 to 24 hours too!

    In his NK lecture in Oz, he did a live finger prick to test blood and complained how cold his fingers were. I'm someone who generally feels colder than those around me, but don't generally have this problem when I'm standing up while everyone else is sitting, even if the room is cold. So this stuck out at me as he was wearing a long sleeves, buttoned up and long pants and lots of the pics show people in lighter clothing in attendance.

    Galina L. said...

    Of course, body of people who lost a lot of weight is trying to bring the lost fat back. I wonder how long it lasts. Evelyn, you lost 100 lb yourself.

    I don't know how spontaneous 24 hours fasting could be, ketosis or not. Eating is also a social activity in many cases.

    I would hate to be in the situation when my ability of making a living would depend on running a LC website, especially with a paleo-twist. There is almost nothing to sell, the only possible sponsors are small farmers who produce grass-fed staff. Even people who sell books have others regular jobs.

    Kade Storm said...

    Ah, yes. The whole 'high insulin and glucose will age you' concept.

    Haven't quite a few of these low-fat heretics reduced their overall fasting insulin by greatly improving their glucose tolerance and clearance rates on a whole food low-fat diet with all those vile grains and lentils included?

    Kade Storm said...

    Sometimes, a good old-fashioned look at a person can say much more about their body fat percentage than one of these fancy new scales.

    Lerner said...

    VegSource is the youtube account that has the long Esselstyn talk that I'd watched last week. The LCers don't have any similar case series, AFAIK, on reversing CVD. If I thought that I would have imminent CVD problems, I'd likely go that low fat route. Note that it also excludes olive oil.

    However, I'd hate to end up that thin unless it was absolutely necessary. It seems that the approach is sufficient, but maybe not all of it is necessary.

    But, since Esselstyn and co. are also advocates and not unbiased, I'd want to see some credible rebuttals - if there are any.

    My summary of Esselstyn's series: a small group of 2ndary cardiac Pts were put on very low fat (not just vegan) and they experience a greatly reduced event rate. In fact, maybe a rate of zero for compliers -- except for the sketchy part about one guy who gets a half gram here and there (said half-grams don't appear on labels as per FDA) and he has problems. Now, that reminded me of Eades and his half-grams of carbs sneaking in and being blamed for causing fatness.

    Or, maybe Esselstyn's half grams were of TFA which just might be bad in small amounts-- but if so the failure to mention that is misleading.

    Esselstyn also refers to plaque regression studies, which I have to look up some day.

    Lerner said...

    I bit the bullet and listened to Attia yesterday, on ATLCX. Wrt Jimmy's LDL-P, at the end of the audio: Attia goes into how it's bad but then mainly talks about how it needs to be interpreted along with other tested measures. No hint of cutting down on fat (as per Dayspring) or cholesterol. So, all in all it was a typical advocates viewpoint - only missing the usual reference to "large, fluffy".

    Also, he talks about how inaccuracies can occur in a DEXA, and in so doing gives a guide on how to gimmick the test.

    Time of day, what you wear, fasting or not... variation equals +/- 1% BF in results I'd also wonder about dehydration/diuretics.

    That's at 25:00

    Lerner said...

    "whole food low-fat diet"

    but then I'd ask as always: was there also calorie reduction and weight loss that might account for the benefit?

    Lerner said...

    wrt waist to hip: that's the first thing that I also thought of, with greatly restricted protein possibly leading to being skinny-fat, which along with lots of intra-ab fat provides the highest CVD risk (according to the observational studies we talked about here not long ago).

    Then again, what about the excess skin - as in Extreme Loser type shows? Maybe it's not fat after all... well, okay, that's a stretch.

    Come to think of it, Attia didn't mention that part at all wrt Jimmy's risk on ATLCX.


    Also, in general I'd think that waist/height is much better to use. Once I was at an online waist-to-hip calculator, and discovered that I could reduce my risk just by adding inches of fat to my butt, at least according to the calculator. Somehow that seemed just wrong :)

    Diana said...

    In fact Jimmy said that his goal was to be 6% body fat. This is completely delusional. Honestly...a formerly 410 pound man, 6'3" should have as a reasonable goal 15-18% bodyfat, 210 pounds. And that would be hard to stick to but I think reasonable.

    For him to HAVE to get under 200, and have 6% body fat is so punitive and fantastic. He's the male version of the girls who are "pro-ana" and have pictures of anorexics as their "thinspiration."

    Lerner said...

    "a good old-fashioned look at a person"

    Amen to that, as also e.g. in having a healthy tan. Which is quite different than the vit D hype that's taken over the world. I'm still waiting for the news headlines about how disease rates have declined very sharply worldwide, seeing as how so many are swilling mega-doses of vit D these days.

    Here's an interesting counter to vit D hyping, also exposing some of the tactics of the advocates:
    http://bacteriality.com/2009/08/10/iom/

    It's long so let me point to this sentence and the bit around that: "Several things about Dr. Garland’s chart are of interest." That reminds me of LC gurus and I'd also imagine the same goes for vegan gurus.

    Unknown said...

    I don't know if it delusion or just ignorance, people who have never been physically fit and active may not have any idea what it would take for them to get to 11% body fat much less 6%.

    For someone his age to get to 6% he would have to have an endless capacity for self-torture, to get to 11% he would merely have to be very disciplined in regard to both diet and exercise for an extended period of time, the possibility of either happening is very close to zero.

    Lighthouse keeper said...

    The most credible attempt at a rebuttal might be by Harriet Hall at science based medicine in the post " Bill Clinton's diet " based on the fact it was an uncontrolled intervention trial with some of the patients also on statins. There does seem to be something of a split in the vegan community over acceptable levels of oil intake, the P.C.R.M. doctors advocate no added oils at all whilst Virginia Messina and Jack Norris { perhaps the two most prominent vegan R.D.s} argue the opposite.

    Lerner said...

    "Harriet Hall"

    Thanks, LHK. Here's a video of her:
    "Harriet Hall squatting 540 at the 2005 USAPL Women's Nationals"
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KrSNCDS0DI

    Oh wait, this might be the correct one:
    http://www.skepdoc.info/index.html "The SkepDoc"

    Seems she also has written some reviews on Taubes.

    Lighthouse keeper said...

    Ha! I think she was a doctor in the U.S. military, she is not critical of Taubes in the mention he gets in the Bill Clinton post but one believes she is more skeptical of him elsewhere.

    Kade Storm said...

    Sure. Although that accounts for benefits across both diets and you'd also be correct in assuming that most of these people that undergo such treatment enter these programmes with a weight problem. Otherwise, there's little else to boast about -- people are too focussed on physical results, and in many cases, they do tie into improved bio marker parameters, although not always the case for even the fittest in the primal-paleo scene.

    Rarely have I read an account of someone who doesn't have weight to lose but still bothers to post bio-marker improvements as a result of a certain dietary intervention, but even those sort of folk seem to pop in the low-fat camps. I could be considered one of these individuals because I have seen changes in blood and bio markers as a result of change in dietary approach without any significant change in weight or physical fitness.

    Speaking specifically on the topic of ageing, I do think it goes a little beyond just weight control or loss. Douglas Graham looks terrible for his age, and even I've taunted Harley on another forum by posting up a shot of Graham compared against Scisson when Boy Durian was harping on about the AGE content of cooked meat or something along those lines.

    Alison Shapiro said...

    I have to say that most people that hear low carb diet always assume that all you do is eat bacon, steak and cheese all day. I once went to lunch with a friend who ordered a grilled chicken sandwich with an order of fries. I ordered the same except no bread and no fries, add veggies. He kept saying "what about all that fat your eating?" I had to point out that we ordered the SAME THING. I do not eat pounds of bacon all day. I actually eat mostly salads and veggies and yes steak and chicken. When the whole eat low fat diet craze came out in the late 80s I cut down (way down) on fats and meats and we all gained tons of weight. One would think that we had been eating cake and donuts all day from the amount of weight we gained but we were not. Oatmeal for breakfast (with splenda and fruit) , brown rice and chicken ( grilled for lunch) with a slice of whole grain bread , dinner was usually pasta and veggies with whole grain bread on the side. (no butter). My husband and I couldn't figure out why we were gaining so much weight. It took years later for me to discover that it was the extra grains we started consuming. Since we have kicked the grain habit we a so much healthier. We all remember Susan Powter don't we?

    an3drew said...

    11% is very low. I hit that mark one time and I was ridiculously thin (for me and most people). I'm talking about really, really lean.

    And I'm just guessing that I was 11%. A doc I was going to at the time wanted to measure me and did so with a few measurements..... I'm thinking she used skinfold calipers, but it was a while back and I actually don't remember. :(

    Anyway, 11% is way low. I don't think that Jimmy has any real clue. I doubt he's been below 23-25% in a long, long, long time, if ever.

    an3drew said...

    I used to be a professional athlete (over a decade ago!) and I hit 11% BF one time and one time only. I did not feel good. I wasn't used to that little BF and added a few pounds back to feel and perform better.

    Lerner said...

    Speaking of AGEing, the thing that seems alarming about long term severe restriction of protein (especially during weight loss) would be that you can't replace proteins that are irreversibly damaged by glycation, nitration, oxidation.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnGK0auyj1Y
    "SENS5 - Increased damage to proteins in ageing" 28 minutes

    Attia said he does "Intermittent ketosis", viz. having a protein feed window. Actually, I'd listened to that Attia interview in order to see if he was wasting or what on low protein - so he seems to have sidestepped that effect.

    Here is a photo of D Graham:
    http://30bananasadaysucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Dr.-Doug-Graham-March-12-2012.jpg

    Looks a little cachectic in the face area. Not robust.

    P.S. Must be a funny backstory about Durian.

    Lerner said...

    There's also the extreme example of kwashiokor, though seen usually in children. That comes with liver damage. I wonder if Jimmy gets liver function tests.

    Kade Storm said...

    Cheers for that SENS5 video! Always into their material, even if some of it is highly technical and some of it even intriguing but well-informed speculation.


    Protein's an interesting factor that as of late, seems to be getting slammed by all the extremists. I mean, if there's one area where the 'nutty ketosis' folk and the ultra-low protein, low-fat fanatics agree on, is the whole 'bad protein' mantra. I've always wondered if it is beneficial to get a little extra protein on top of what is requirement. Don Matesz and co., seem to think that protein in general is bad and that 1 gram protein per 1kg of body mass should be the maximum. Jimmy seems to think that it's chocolate cake, heh, so I'll just focus on Don's criticism of protein. Now I know that there's plenty of contention around the topic of protein, but for those in the low-fat vegan camps, a little extra protein does seem to alleviate issues with hair and skin, which in turn does produce a more youthful appearance for those concerned. Eh, but then there's that talk about excess protein and mTOR. Hell, I wonder whether the standard protein understanding of protein and its requirement per kilogram of body weight for the average folk will change down the line.




    With regards to the Graham photo. Haha! I used that very photo, actually, and on that very website (30BaDSucks)when I used to be active. Wait. . . I think I found the thread. Really though, it's not all that funny and full of the same ol' drama and even religious hysteria provoked by Harley's babble that could comatose an amoeba from sheer boredom about how Robb Wolfe looks old and how ponies are kind creatures and blah blah/whatevers, so I decided to troll back with a photo comparison. Don't know which was worse: BoiDurian being a dunce or the excessive theological talk-down on the topic.

    http://30bananasadaysucks.com/2012/05/one-year-811-almost-destroyed-my-health/

    Unknown said...
    This comment has been removed by the author.
    Lerner said...

    http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/bill-clintons-diet/

    Hall questions Esselstyn's veracity: "Hype that goes far beyond the evidence."

    I remember well the PBS documentary (probably 1993) on Ornishes efforts. He was thrilled to get a halt to progression (until then practically unheard of), and sometimes a little regression. So I'd wondered about how Esselstyn achieved supposedly much greater results.

    I'm glad I asked for a critique. Thanks, LHK.

    But still, she also says "Gary Taubes wrote the huge, extensively referenced tome Good Calories, Bad Calories to debunk the alleged certainty that dietary fat has anything to do with cardiovascular disease, and also to expose the colorful history of nutrition science and how surprisingly little good diet research has actually yet been done." Sure, Harriet... the brilliant research authority on insulin never even knew about insulinogenic proteins -- coincidentally sidekick Attia's current big focus.

    So I wouldn't necessarily put a lot of creedence in what Harriet Hall says. She is also associated with quackwatch -- I remember something about that guy misrepresenting his credentials. Sigh... it never ends.

    Diana said...

    Sigh, Alison, please. Do not expect me to believe that you gained "tons of weight" because you ate brown rice, oatmeal, and a slice of whole grain bread.

    We have all heard these anecdotes on low carb forums of how eating a slice of whole wheat bread caused the poor sufferer to gain weight. I'm sick and tired of listening to low-carb fanatics tell these stories.

    I've heard all them. I call bullshit.

    If you gained weight, it's because you ate the whole loaf, not a slice.

    Kade Storm said...

    One would think that after his 'the number of LDL is what really matters' from his cholesterol blog series (http://eatingacademy.com/nutrition/the-straight-dope-on-cholesterol-part-v), he'd want to be a little consistent in interpreting Jimmy's case without becoming an apologist.

    A bullet point from the closing summary on that blog post:

    "To address this question, however, one must look at changes in cardiovascular events or direct markers of atherosclerosis (e.g., IMT) while holding LDL-P constant and then again holding LDL size constant. Only when you do this can you see that the relationship between size and event vanishes. The only thing that matters is the number of LDL particles – large, small, or mixed."

    Lerner said...

    Kade, I approached thinking about protein requirements initially from the vantage point of all the MPS studies done for weightlifting. Then I discovered the SENS5 rationale. But also that even a veteran runner, after a normal training run, undergoes a fair amount of MPS and also satellite cell recruitment for repair. So it seems to me that there are well orchestrated but complex priorities for protein use. Repairing injuries first, for survival purposes. Net accretion only if the supply is plentiful and there is no shortage of energy. Replacement of chemically damaged proteins only if there are plenty of essential AAs -- and this might be the catch: chemically damaged proteins in muscle might be exactly the ones that get most broken by exercise, so therefore exercise helps you to switch out the bad ones by breaking them. Fountain of youth. Exercise makes the body run right, once again. Anyway, that's a work in progress.

    Meanwhile, oversupply gets used as fuel or gets converted, of course - and during starvation all likely gets used as fuel. Which brings things back to the MPS studies and the way they usually feed only protein PWO and so skew things greatly, IMO, in indicating a bigger need than necessary because of all the oxidation that goes on without added carbs.

    Ah well, thinking out loud.


    Craig in CT said...

    @ Galina,

    I didn't mean to dismiss that which worked for you. Just trying to make the point that if LC resulted in a perfect match of appetite to caloric needs (reversed the horizontal growth disorder), none of this other stuff - calorie counting, intermittent fasting, carb cycling, cold immersion, etc., would be necessary.

    I personally haven't done real well at calorie counting either. It does require a lot of attention to detail. But checking the calories in a meal once in awhile is instructive, and useful to calibrate your eye. And you don't need to track every calorie eaten to make an effort to reduce food intake. I'll also note that I have tried IF, using an eating window. It didn't reduce my hunger, which seemed to get worse the longer I went, and I eventually succumbed to the urge to eat outside the window.

    Craig in CT said...

    I occasionally read through the McDougall forums. You find a lot of folks with CVD who are firmly convinced that a low fat, whole food, vegan diet saved their lives. It certainly does produce very low cholesterol in a lot of people. But there are a few dissenters who believe that they still had plaque progression on that kind of diet, which they were able to reverse by moving to Fuhrman's version of low fat vegan. Fuhrman recommends consuming some nuts, as a source of healthy fat, and greatly favors high fiber beans over grains and starches. One of the most vocal Fuhrman proponents is "engineerguy", who has a lot of posts on WebMD.

    My understanding is that Esselstyn is willing to use statins, if necessary, to get cholesterol to what he considers safe levels.

    Sue Staltari said...

    You gained weight as you cut the fat but increased the calories with all the other food.

    Craig in CT said...

    Back in the day, I tried to follow the advice to avoid fat, particularly saturated fat, and eat more healthy carbs. I also got pretty heavy. But looking back, I'd have to say that I was eating a hell of a lot more food back then, too. It doesn't take much to pile on the calories - sneak in a donut with the coffee you just bought, get a bag of Doritos to go with the diet coke that you just got out of the vending machine, have a half a pizza to go with the beer at the local bar because, hey, it's Friday. And what would a trip to the mall be without an ice cream cone or a bag of Annies pretzels dipped in cinnamon sugar and butter. Even my healthy meals were quite a bit bigger back then. I cringe at what I thought a decent size serving of pasta was. I thought they had to be kidding with that 2 oz portion size on the box. Do this for a few years, and the results will be quite visible.

    Galina L. said...

    I tried counting calories several times, I just can't be very organized about it, it also made me almost scared to eat and I was thinking about eating too much. I spent some time conditioning myself to get used to fasting, increased fasting window very gradually, at the beginning I got hungry headaches.I mostly used the advice from Todd Becker http://gettingstronger.org/2010/11/learning-to-fast/. It is a luck to find what is working, because, as I commented before, odds are against people who once got fat to loose weight. For somebody nothing works. A lot of advise sounds logical until you try it and stumble over something what is not working for you. As many people who diet, I run into a weight loss stall after loosing 20 lb on a LC, and IF was the next thing to try. Body has means to stop weight loss after a while on any diet. Often the mechanism kicks in after just 10% of the loss of the body weight. So, I achieved the stability of weight on LC after loosing 20 lb, but I needed to loose more. It also looks like that diet regiment has to be the permanent change, not just a crash-course, so it is better to find a diet you can stick with almost forever. Some people manage to reintroduce some carbs into their diet, but it doesn't work for me.

    I don't understand why it is so, but for some reason I can't eat much after a long brake(some people report an opposite reaction), so the later in the day I start eating, the less food I need to eat to feel satisfied.It almost feels like my stomach shrinks after not eating. I used to have problem with grazing. Today my first meal was at 3 pm (20 hours fast), before that I drank several times green tea with lemon and had a cup of coffee in the morning. It is possible caffeine in my beverages has some effect on my appetite.

    markgillespie said...

    You were likely less than 11%. 11% is around the level of a pro tennis player i.e.slim but not ripped. Single digit bodyfat% is when you start to get six-pack, striations, veins popping out etc like fitness pros and 100m sprinters. Or without that level of muscularity a long-distance runner or cyclist.

    Kade Storm said...

    So basically, in pursuit of low-fat, people end up eating fatty foods that are branded as 'carb culprits'.

    Kade Storm said...

    In my opinion, while there are differences between the two camps -- Fuhrman and McDougall -- in the end, they have more in common than otherwise.

    McDougall typically recommends more grains because he believes, in a maintenance state, a calorie restricted diet of beans and vegetables isn't going to yield long-term commitment from those on the programme. He himself advocates a greater share of vegetables and beans/lentils for those looking to reverse immediate weight issues and problems associated with said weight issues. It's primarily the acceptance of vegan fat sources that's the high point of division between the two sides.

    As for people McDougall's followers being convinced that the diet has saved their prospects. Well, until and unless we don't have a definitive answer on the situation, which we do not, it is hard to fault them for being convinced since there are many positive testimonials and results in that realm. Seeing as we don't have another default position on the matter, and lowered cholesterol by way of LDL below 100 does seem to have its benefits in line with present evidence, the McDougall camp certainly does owe some credit to their diet, as does the Fuhrman camp, which also favours lowered cholesterol.

    Kade Storm said...

    Good thoughts on the matter, kind of line with my own. I don't go out of my way to hold back on protein and certainly think that a moderate amount--without being too obsessed with the sources--along with some decent exercise is key.

    Kade Storm said...

    And by moderate, I don't mean the demonised amount that is presently being argued by extremists on both sides of the dietary spectrum. I doubt that in the context of a well-running metabolis that few extra grams of protein right above the body's requirement will cause chaos. That's Rosedale's argument that protein is good but bad as a fuel. I don't see that as a problem for someone who indulges in some levels of daily exercise while deriving a large sum of their energy from glucose to protect and spare muscle with plenty of dietary protein to assist the repairing process.

    Lerner said...

    This guy does a good review of the data, conveniently presented in the figure following these words: "As you can see, 1.8g/kg (0.82g/lb) is the point at which additional protein intake ceases to yield any benefits..." That's for resistance training, then there are also lines for endurance training and sedentary
    http://mennohenselmans.com/the-myth-of-1glb-optimal-protein-intake-for-bodybuilders/

    Also, there is a huge, huge difference between maintaining and gaining - IMO with diminishing returns being very dramatically experienced in the latter case. Very.


    P.S. I remember some Paleo guy (named Bear?) who tried an all meat diet and gave up after a period.



    Lerner said...

    "I can't eat much after a long brake"

    I used to say that I can't eat on an empty stomach.

    "I run into a weight loss stall after loosing 20 lb"

    I knew a girl who would watch her diet, do her treadmill and still said she couldn't lose a final 7 pounds. When I started taking her on two hour walks in sometimes hilly terrain, she began losing. The best benefit of MM for weight loss might just be in sustained exercise beneath the talk test but close to it, for long periods (not just 30 minutes) -- to break through stalls caused by lowered basal rate.

    Lerner said...

    Craig says, "Esselstyn is willing to use statins"

    I don't take statins, but those studies (ASTEROID, REVERSAL, SATURN) do demonstrate that reversal can take place - which is informative in and of itself. I'd guess that somebody is now working on an agent that is purely anti-inflammatory to see if that can accomplish the same result, using scans and not event end points.

    Lerner said...

    On listening to his interview, I was beginning to think that he was a new breed of LC advocate. E.g., he says that not everybody needs VLC (much less chronic ketosis). Then he said that his wife can't possibly get fat no matter what she eats... the same LC advocacy talking point that some are just genetically "lucky" (aka fat gain is not from overeating).

    eulerandothers said...

    I had my physical last week. I was so nervous because I went 'off the reservation' and have been carbing it up for an entire year, approaching almost a vegetarian diet - meat or fish every one or two weeks and non-fat dairy daily. Not to worry: my fasting blood sugar is the lowest it's been in five years (that includes years of low-carb dieting) and my lipids are also low (HDL actually went up). This was a huge relief; I was worried I might be pre-diabetic. I thought my triglycerides would skyrocket; they went down and are also the lowest they've been in five years. I also have normal hemoglobin and hematocrit, etc. - and give blood to the Red Cross regularly.

    Just goes to show - the carbs ain't going to kill you if you're a somewhat average person like me. What I have maintained and not changed is my average daily calorie intake (I track it online). I haven't lost weight. Typical macro breakdown: 46% carbs, 34% fat, 18% protein, and 3% alcohol. Over months of tracking on fitday, this varies slightly, but not much!

    Discussed this turn of events, and my diet, with my doctor. He said a medical conference he went to in the past year convinced him to try veganism. He said his favorite food is now spelt pizza. He lost 8 pounds in a month, which he didn't need to lose, being a person of average build, on the slim side!

    Galina L. said...

    Lerner, so you can't eat on an empty stomach too? It doesn't make sense, but it is how I feel when skipping breakfast. A fruit before a meal improves my appetite a great deal.
    Yes, changing of a routine can cause a mild weight loss during the adaptation. Unfortunately , a long-distance walking in Moscow didn't prevent me from gaining there 5 lb during my 2 months stay. I love our old park next to my mom's apparent, it is situated on the high bank of a Moscow river, very hilly, I started my day there with going to the park every day to enjoy autumn colors that I don't see much in Florida. They also installed weight-lifting machines in park for free for a public to use. Besides,life in Moscow requires a lot of unintentional walking - my mom lives on a fourth floor without an elevator, even while using metro one has to walk a lot,while changing stations, there are stairs everywhere, shopping is done without a car.

    Unknown said...

    I haven't had a physical since 1991, imo they are best avoided.

    Kade Storm said...

    I've seen that review and did find the chart informative. I had lost the link a while back but thanks for sharing.


    About the Paleo guy. I don't think you're referring to Owsley 'The Bear' Stanley. The infamous LSD guy and roadie for The Grateful Dead who pretty much indulged in pure carnivory for almost 50 years until passing away from a fatal car accident last year at the age of 76. He also survived throat cancer in 2004 and was of the belief that the proclaimed low-glucose and insulin facets of his diet starved the cancer.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Owsley_Stanley

    There are plenty of other dudes who did drop-out from zero-carbing. Can't think of any at the moment, however.

    greeksquared said...

    I understand calling people out on their shit. It's very empowering and something as a society we need to get much better at, especially in person. It is perhaps one of the best ways to build self-esteem.

    But, when is it enough? I know there is some codependency that develops whenever I continually call a single person out for a long period of time. The act becomes self-serving for me and turns into a place where my ego can feel safe because of its clear superiority over the other.

    eulerandothers said...

    I don't know about 'calling people out' but there's always a chorus of low-carb complaints; it seems to be: I ate less, I ate healthy things, and it made me fat. Eating a slice of whole bread may cause a person to gain weight - if that's what they tell you they ate and that was the cause. What you don't know is how much sodium they have in their diet, how much they weighed and measured, what they consider to be 'active.'

    I just respond to people who say those things that they need to see a doctor right away. It's serious!

    When a person who attempts to lose weight eats 'healthy,' eats less than he expends in calories, and gains weight - a doctor who takes him seriously and believes him - which is a challenge - will see red flags everywhere. Unfortunately, I think doctors hear this story often enough that they simply say, 'Try another diet' because what are you going to do? Run a full battery of tests covering every deficiency known to man and ultimately have the person spend a week in the hospital, being observed and monitored?

    Spend a week in the hospital. Have bed rest with only the opportunity to walk when you are walking to the bathroom. Have your meals served to you in hospital-type portion sizes, no snacks. Do some catch-up reading, watch movies and TV, talk on the phone, all the while staying in bed. Then weigh-in at the end of that time.The hospital cafeteria food is not going to be prepared by you... the portions are going to be fairly uniform, the nutrition fairly adequate. Most important: the cafeteria workers have no incentive whatsoever to vary the portions of the food and there are no 'seconds.'

    This will tell a lot about what you think is the cause of your weight gain. If you gained weight- on those very moderate portions of food, then look to the physical activity side. If you lost weight, then look at the caloric-intake side. Then leave the hospital and proceed with your diet according to what those results were.

    I wish I could say this experience could be reproduced at home, but people know where the refrigerator is, and what's in the cupboard. Not many people like 'house arrest.'

    On a hospital ward, the nurse had to bar one of my friends from stealing food from the staff kitchen, and friends were not allowed to bring her food unless it passed inspection and the calories were subtracted from her daily allotment and meals adjusted!

    Diana said...

    @Craig in CT: "I personally haven't done real well at calorie counting either. It does require a lot of attention to detail."

    That's why I think that the new food plate is such a great idea. (Of course, the Low Carbers deride it endlessly.) It gives you a visual aid. I enjoyed calorie counting at first but after a while, I also found it annoying. And after another while, it was simply unnecessary. What iit comes down to is three plates a day - not heaped to the ceiling, and you can see space between the portions.

    This is difficult?

    Lerner said...

    Yes, you're right, that is the dancing Bear that I was thinking of. I'd wrongly thought that he'd quit. Which leads to the question: why did he do okay (or better) on it, while apparently not many others do?

    Kade Storm said...
    This comment has been removed by the author.
    Kade Storm said...

    That's a good question.

    Good points, Lerner.

    Since he was--for his eccentric dietary leanings--an individual of interest, I followed some of his work including a rather confrontational clash on a low-carb forum where he attempted to share his ideas.

    http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=287013&page=1&pp=15&highlight=bear+carniverous

    Now, health is starting to become one of those, "in the eye of the beholder" things. We can consider the psychological state of certain [insert name of odd diet fad here] proponents who are convinced--despite degenerating health markers--that they're on a 'healthy diet'. From what I was reading about The Bear's account on that forum, his fasting glucose was 100 mg/dl (5.5 mmol/l), and that it was dead stable at that figure, which I assume means postprandial reads as well. Now if that was really the case, then good on him, but what if that's hyperbole?

    Here's him talking about his throat cancer: http://forum.lowcarber.org/showpost.php?p=5977704&postcount=153

    Blood glucose:
    http://forum.lowcarber.org/showpost.php?p=5984192&postcount=296


    It's hard to take such accounts at face value, but even if he managed as well as he thinks he managed on zero carbohydrate, I think we'd need compelling reasons as to why he shouldn't be treated as an outlier or an anomaly. . . Or even an exception to the general trend.

    Diana said...

    Are you talking about Jimmy Moore? He should be called out until he admits the error of his ways. Until he admits that he was never "sensationally skinny," that despite eating LC, he struggles terribly with his weight, that "it's the calories, baybeee." He has counseled people on his forum that "it's not the calories" when it clearly IS. He deserves to be "called out."

    Regina Wilshire has in the last couple days published posts to this effect, and Jimmy has on his Facebook page accused her of "pontificating." How petty can you get? She's his *friend.*

    Blogger said...

    EasyHits4U - Your Free Traffic Exchange - 1:1 Ratio, Business networking. Get FREE Advertising!

    Post a Comment

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