Show Posts

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 - TallDog

Pages: [1]
Diet and nutrition / Re: Almond Flour
« on: February 07, 2016, 02:29:40 PM »
Trying to find a mock for wheat flour just prolongs the agony. I suggest you go through a mourning period for flour (just like you would with any loss) and then move on.

If you think about it, only a handful of foods make up 90% of the SAD diet. They take different forms, but the base ingredients are few.

Focus on all the new and exotic foods you are adding to your diet, instead of what you are losing.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Don't Feel Full Anymore
« on: July 16, 2012, 09:43:44 AM »
I've had the same experience--don't feel hungry and don't feel full either. The word you are looking for is satisfied.

Hunger is the signal that you need to eat more.

Full is the signal that you can't eat more.

If you don't need to eat more, your body turns off the hunger (even if you aren't full). This is the way it's supposed to work.

Fat causes diabetes?

This is the NIH's food pyramid for diabetics. Anyone else see a problem with this?

Research / Re: Fibre and whole grains reduce bowel cancer?
« on: January 24, 2012, 07:28:32 AM »
I believe the connection between fiber and the health claims made for it are tenuous at best.

Research / Re: UCLA Heart Attack Study
« on: January 24, 2012, 07:15:50 AM »
Good point that correlation is not the same as cause.

The low cholesterol levels may just be a side affect of something else they are doing that is the actual cause of the increase in heart attacks.

And, the high cholesterol levels may just be a side affect of something else they are doing that is the actual cause of the decrease in heart attacks.

Someone pointed out that while statins lower cholesterol, they are also are an anti-coagulant (which means they prevent blood clots from forming). That may be why statins lower heart disease, and the lowered cholesterol level may just be a coincidental side affect.

Regardless, it's hard to look at this study and conclude that low cholesterol levels are associated with a reduction in heart attacks.

Research / Re: Fibre and whole grains reduce bowel cancer?
« on: January 23, 2012, 01:37:37 PM »
Fiber is simply undigestible carbohydrates, and they are found in all kinds of plants, not just grains.

Plenty of fruits and vegetables, like apples, pears, bananas, peppers, spinach, & pumpkin, are high in fiber. And, there is no reason to presume that the fiber in grain is in any way superior to the fiber in fruit and vegetables.

An apple has 3g of fiber.
A cup of multi-grain cheerios has 3g of fiber.

Which is really the better choice?

Research / UCLA Heart Attack Study
« on: January 23, 2012, 10:03:53 AM »
I saw this study mentioned it several books. It looked at the LDL & HDL levels in hospitalized heart attack victims between 2000 and 2006. Overall, they examined the records of 136,905 patients (59% of all heart attack patients during the period).

This is the study where they found that 75% of heart attack patients had LOW LDL cholesterol levels (below 130), and came to the conclusion that we need to lower cholesterol levels even more. The conclusion was so out of whack with the data, that I looked up an actual copy of the report.

They lumped everyone with an LDL level over 159 into the high category (high LDL is considered bad). They also lumped everyone with an HDL lever over 59 into the high category (high HDL is considered good). So, what percentage of heart attack victims had high LDL & high HDL?


That's less than 1 percent. Or, to state it another way: 99.3% of heart attack victims have a LDL level below 160 and a HDL level below 60.

What was just as interesting, was that lowering the LDL level increased the rate of heart attacks. 7.1% of victims had an HDL level over 59, but an LDL below 160.

HDL though, seemed to be the key (imho). 92.2% of heart attack victims (no matter what their LDL level) had a HDL level below 60.

So, of course, what are we told to do? Concentrate on lowering our LDL levels. I'm starting to wonder if the conclusion was written before the report, as they don't seem to have anything in common.

A copy of the actual report can be found here:

The relevant numbers can be found in the total cohort grid.

Diet and nutrition / Re: Carbs to sugar conversion ratio question
« on: January 18, 2012, 07:16:04 AM »
1g of starch converts to 1g of blood sugar.  1g of table sugar converts to 0.5g of blood sugar in the short term, from the glucose half of the sugar, because the fructose half of the sugar goes to the liver to be processed.  The fructose is later processed either into fat or into more sugar, so in the long term, 1g of table sugar converts to somewhere between 0.5g and 1g of blood sugar.

However, blood sugar is also removed from the bloodstream when it's high - that's what insulin is for, to drive sugar, along with other nutrients, out of the blood stream and into muscle, fat, and liver cells.

Thanks, given your explanation, I feel I can use the 1 to 1 ratio as a "rule of thumb." 

I understand it's more subtle than that, but so are most things in life. It's important to understand the general rule before you dive into the details.


Diet and nutrition / Re: Carbs to sugar conversion ratio question
« on: January 17, 2012, 03:03:36 PM »
I'm pretty sure 1g digested = 1g in blood. This applies to both starch and sugar. So 10g of carbohydrates from fruit will result in 10g of carbohydrates entering the bloodstream.

Any particular reason you're trying to find this out?

I was trying to explain to someone that you are only supposed to have about 1 teaspoon of sugar in your blood at any one time. So, if you ate some carbs it would raise you sugar level.

And of course they asked the obvious question: if it eat this candy bar, exactly how much will it raise my blood sugar level?

I am also, just curious.

My understanding is that the glycemic index is a rating of how fast a food's carbs convert to sugar, not of whether they all convert. My assumption is that all digestible carbs eventually end up as sugar in the blood stream, but I don't know for a fact that's true.


Diet and nutrition / Carbs to sugar conversion ratio question
« on: January 17, 2012, 10:38:33 AM »
I know that digestible carbs end up as sugar in the blood stream. What I don't know is how to convert the amounts.

If you eat 10 grams of carbs, how many grams of sugar does that end up being in the blood?

Is it a 1 gram to 1 gram ratio, or is there some formula to determine the correct amount?

Meta / Captcha on signup too hard
« on: January 13, 2012, 09:47:21 AM »
I signed up for the sight today.

I had to go request at least a dozen versions of the captcha on the registration page to find one that I thought I could read. It took about a half dozen entry tries till I finally entered one correctly.

I came pretty close to throwing my hands up in the air and saying forget it. How many people do you think have done exactly that? My guess is a lot.

I understand the need for something like a captcha to prevent spammers from creating logins, but this particular one may be presenting too high a barrier and actually costing you users. You might want to switch to one that--while still machine unreadable--is a little easier to read with the naked eye.

Just an observation based on my registration experience.

IMHO, protein shakes are just another form of over processed food.

Whey (the protein in protein powders) is a byproduct from cheese making. For centuries it was either thrown away or fed to livestock. Only the desperately poor ate whey.

Today, it's dried, pulverized into power, fortified with vitamins and minerals, and sealed in a plastic container so that months (if not years) later someone can dish out a scoop and make a "healthy protein shake".

While this doesn't disprove proteins powders health benefits, if you've adopted a paleo mindset, then this should set off all kinds of red flags in your head. Many of the problems with modern diets derive from the fact that so much of modern food is over processed.

Instead of looking for a shortcut (which is exactly what protein powders are), why not try and find another answer that isn't a short cut?


Pages: [1]