This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Warren Dew
Pages: 1 ... 296 297  299 300 ... 364
« on: December 16, 2009, 09:49:20 AM »
Low carb diet
Breakfast - Scrambled eggs (40 g); bacon rasher, fat trimmed, grilled
(20 g); hash brown, grilled (45 g)
Lunch - Wholemeal bread (72 g), cooked ham (30 g), mayonnaise
Dinner - Potatoes, in skins, boiled (145 g); chicken breast in
crumbs, baked (140 g); peas, boiled (95 g); carrots,
boiled (70 g); gravy instant granules (4 g)
Additional - Peanuts, roasted and salted (40 g); Brazil nuts (30 g);
butter (21 g); cheddar cheese (44 g);
That's "low carb"? Hash browns, bread, potatoes ... and of course peas, peanuts, and cheese to make it even more nonpaleo.
« on: December 16, 2009, 09:33:23 AM »
I wonder if the cataract epidemic may have some dietary component. Honeslty, more people work indoors and exercise indoors and on average most peope probably get less sun exposure now then in past generations. It would seem that sun exposure was not the main culprit.
Cataracts are associated with diabetes and smoking. The diabetes connection suggests that excessive carbohydrates may be an issue.
It's known that farsightedness is related to crosslinking of the proteins in the lens - crosslinking that happens when blood sugar reacts with the the proteins. I wonder if cataracts might have a similar cause.
« on: December 16, 2009, 07:58:03 AM »
Marika, Don does recommend supplementing Magnesium. I agree with you on vitamin D (i supplement 5000IU/day), but disagree with needing to supplement vitamin K. AFAIK theres plenty in organ meats and muscle meats. Im not well enough versed on Thiamin and Manganese. Have you come across any studies or case histories that have shown a meat only diet leads to the typical symptoms of deficiency in Thiamin, Manganese or Vitamin C?
Keep in mind that the body can synthesize vitamin D with sunlight exposure. There should be no reason to supplement if you get adequate sunlight, though for people who work indoors getting adequate sunlight can be difficult.
My own experience is that I don't seem to have any need for vitamin C on a mostly meat diet as long as I don't have any carbohydrates. However, without vitamin C, even a small amount of sugar or starch can really do a number on one's immune system. I think that's consistent with Andersson's experience where he got pneumonia only after stopping his meat only diet. (I think it was Andersson, not Stefansson).
With regard to some of the other issues in this thread:
I don't think it's reasonable to say that a meat only diet is low in calcium - bones have lots of calcium! If some people don't want to get calcium from bones, that's fine, but I don't have a problem with it and I suspect others don't either. Not everyone has to eat exactly the same diet or get their nutrients in exactly the same way.
The Inuit that Stefansson and Andersson lived with ate an all meat - specifically all fish - diet for six months, through the winter. It's not clear whether they might have supplemented with small amounts of berries or vegetable matter during the summer, so this doesn't prove that a permanent all meat diet diet was used, but it does prove that it is fine for at least six months at a time, provided one eats all necessary parts of the animal and not just lean muscle.
Marika, interesting point on the thiamine. I certainly feel better when I have pork at least once a week, and not just beef and fish. I'd like to see more than just a couple of measurements on the thiamine before drawing conclusions, though, as I don't understand why pork would have a different composition from beef; as Paleo Dude noted at some point, sometimes these figures come from a very limited number of samples, and sometimes the zeros just mean they didn't measure for it.
« on: December 15, 2009, 04:11:51 PM »
So, you'd think I'd learn, but apparently not....
Just to close the loop, I'll mention how this turned out. That post was from a Sunday; I was sick enough to stay home from work on Monday, and was sick but went in on Tuesday. I figured it was just a sore throat and thus not too communicable, as I wasn't coughing.
Then I felt well enough by that Friday to have a couple ounces of chocolate - talk about not learning! - and got sick again for the weekend! That time I was well enough to go in to work on Monday, though.
So, anyway, not nearly as bad as tale #1, when I had a lingering cough for six weeks, and I'm fine now, but I really need to stay away from the sugar!
« on: December 15, 2009, 04:03:02 PM »
I've also had some bad experiences from cheats when on a mostly meat diet. Despite the low vitamin C, I don't seem to get sick as long as I don't cheat, but the immunosuppressive effects of refined sugar and other concentrated carbohydrates seem to be exacerbated on a diet devoid of inflammatory agents like grains.
Eventually I'm hoping I'll learn not to cheat; until then, I use vitamin C pills if I realize I've had too much carbohydrate.
« on: December 15, 2009, 01:29:45 PM »
If you're feeling very hungry on the paleo diet, you're probably following a version of the diet that's not quite right. The most likely thing is that you're eating excessively lean meat and not getting enough fat.
Go ahead and eat fatty cuts of meat.
« on: December 15, 2009, 01:12:13 PM »
Two reasons I can think of off the top of my head:
1. Table salt is exclusively sodium chloride, so excessive amounts of it tend to mess up one's electrolyte balance, specifically the sodium/potassium ratio.
2. Many of us on the paleo diet find that excessive salt gives us the runs.
Very small amounts of salt are needed by the body; it's excessive amounts that are bad.
« on: December 15, 2009, 07:15:52 AM »
Tips: too much salt is bad, yes, but fat can be good, especially those with good omega 3:6 ratios. If you are trying to lose weight, starchy carbohydrates are the primary enemy, not fat.
For some reason I thought pork would be bad for me...at least bacon
Cured bacon with a lot of nitrates and salt can be bad, but it's because of the nitrates and salt, not the pork itself. Uncured low salt bacon is fine.
« on: December 14, 2009, 10:37:18 PM »
I'm A positive. My wife is A negative.
« on: December 14, 2009, 12:40:35 PM »
I think in general dietary parlance, "low carb" is any diet that has fewer calories from carbohydrates than from fat. By that definition, probably just about everyone on this forum eats "low carb".
A lot of people on this forum are closer to "very low carb", maybe in the range of 10% of calories from carbohydrates.
« on: December 13, 2009, 07:12:48 PM »
I keep reading about how happy and good you guys are feeling, that's great! I'm just wondering how you deal with being around all the other carb-eaters in your life? Are you able to be just as sociable as you were before? Do you allow yourself to have a glass of wine at parties? How do you manage to be so extremely different with your diet, while remaining a member of a food-focused/carb-focused world? I live in North Carolina, and that's all people do around here... eat, party, and eat some more... everyone in the Carolinas is pretty much overweight. It's madness!
Well, I'm married and have kids, so I mostly socialize with my family; that makes it not a problem for me.
That said, I've always been a teetotaler, so I've always avoided alcohol based entertainment. When I have lunch with coworkers, I just order something with meat and don't eat the nonpaleo parts of the meal.
« on: December 12, 2009, 04:34:39 PM »
I ended up buying Gedgaudes's book. I've read maybe a quarter to a third of it, but I do have some comments.
I don't disagree with the general thrust of her book, but I do notice that she has a strong tendency to oversimplify and to state things in a much more positive way than is justified. Where Taubes will take you all the way through voluminous amounts of research and let you decide for yourself, Gedgaudes will just present the conclusions - and they'll be her conclusions, not necessarily the researchers' conclusions.
Her discussion of the mToR pathway is a good example. She says the mToR pathway is the "protein switch" the way insulin is the "carbohydrate switch". As it turns out, though, that's quite misleading; if you look at the actual research, mToR reacts to all caloric intake, and the protein sensitivity doesn't appear to be much higher than the carbohydrate sensitivity.
In addition, some parts of the book read more like a list of notes than like an organized book. For me, this makes it hard to read - but without the benefit from Taubes's book of getting more information.
« on: December 12, 2009, 10:46:15 AM »
ketosis, as far as i know, is when there are elevated levels of ketone bodies in your body. they occure when fat is burned (fat you eat with your diet or fat from your body. so this occurs in a low carb diet, fat loss diet or fast.)
fat is directly converted to ATP but ketogens are a byproduct.
your brain can only use glucose as fuel, the liver can do this job for you and turn protein into glucose.
so the body is able to function on fat/protein only.
correct me who knows better but thats what i can remember from everything i read about it.
That's pretty much my understanding too.
I think the ketosis headaches happen when the liver first "learns" to do gluconeogenesis - turning protein into glucose. There can be a few days when there isn't enough glucose for the brain. Once you're into long term ketosis, that's no longer an issue.
« on: December 12, 2009, 09:56:06 AM »
Sunlight, listening to your circadian rhythms and exercise. This will help.
I agree with those too.
One thing though that I think a lot of people need to know about anti-depressants, is that new research has shown that they do not in fact alter brain chemistry as once thought, but actually heal neurons.
Interesting link. However, it looks to me like that link says that SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) antidepressants like Prozac do still alter brain chemistry - just that they may also heal neurons, and the latter is the important effect.
I'm not sure about the characterization of which is the important effect. That page - although perhaps not the studies - appears to mischaracterize "Prozac lag". I had a live in girlfriend for five years who, it eventually turned out, was bipolar (as was her father), but was diagnosed with regular depression and put on Prozac. She was told by her psychiatrist that there was a "Prozac lag" that came from the fact that the drug took a couple weeks to reach equilibrium levels in the body.
However, I could always tell if she had taken her Prozac on a daily basis. Whenever I noticed particular irritability, I'd ask if she had taken her Prozac that morning, and she'd get really angry at me for reminding her, but she never had. Then for a while I'd sometimes ask when it wasn't a bad day, just to check that it wasn't that she never took it, and on those days, she wouldn't get angry about the question and she would always have taken it. I was only wrong once or twice over several years.
Based on that, I think "Prozac lag" is something of a myth. There might well be a healing effect as well, but I think the immediate biochemical effect is real and is definitely important.
I note that omega 3 fats, or rather a proper omega 3:6 ratio, may operate similarly. The well known effect is that omega 3 and omega 6 fats are two main components of the myelin sheath that insulates the nerve cells, in roughly equal amounts. They also seem to affect brain signaling and serotonin levels, though those effects are less clear. I think that backs up your point that dietary interventions should be tried before SSRIs.
Pages: 1 ... 296 297  299 300 ... 364