re: How The Sugar Industry Shifted The Blame To Fat

quote:

---

Activity is a great thing. Diet is absolutely crucial, however. Give me a guy who eats perfectly over a shitty eater that works out every day every time (if it's a contest for longevity and quality of life.)

---

Diet
Activity
Stress Management
Sleep

LINK


What people do not understand (and arguing in this thread) is that these variables need to change depending on:

Your age
What you are optimizing for
You goals

Sleep and stress management are non negotiable and will torpedo anyone trying to optimize diet/activity. These must be held in check.


So that leads us diet/activity:


The name of the longevity and quality of life game is to:

-maximize / optimize glucose partitioning
-practice relative caloric restriction
-preserve healthy skeletal muscle mass (the metabolic site optimizing glucose partitioning) while not over-promoting mTOR/ IGF-1 pathway (tumorigenic)
-optimizing the gut microbiome





LINK

A diet high in fat with moderate protein and relative carbohydrate restriction accomplishes the goals above while maintaining a robust quality of life. Strong hormonal satiety is invoked by a diet high in fat/protein. This allows for interval episodes of fasting (intermittent fasting) and less meals per day (if you believe in the limiting exposures to food additives sort of logic). Most would argue that this is the way the human species evolved to eat and manage food scarcity. In modern times it promotes compliance with a dietary lifestyle change.

Metrics such as grip strength, waist to hip ratio <0.9, and wether you can get up from a chair or the ground without assistance become very simple / practical predictors of longevity. Muscle preservation /strength set the tone for this resilience.

If your diet is dialed in, you have many more options with manipulating training volume.

If you are a professional athelete or elite solidier paid to train, it may be easier for you to handle massive training volume (assuming you are resting / managing stress)

If you are a 40 y/o Dad with 3 kids and a regular job, increased training volume becomes a physical, mental, and social stress. Increasing training volume becomes problematic.

The one constant that optimizes both examples (and all folks for that matter) is optimization of the diet.

For those who continue to dismiss diet, best of luck to you. The sick care system of management of chronic disease awaits you...

quote:

---

you are a 40 y/o Dad with 3 kids and a regular job, increased training volume becomes a physical, mental, and social stress. Increasing training volume becomes problematic.

---

That's the basic problem with this thread.

There are 2 types of people on this board: college age kids with wayyyyyyy too much time on their hands and Superman syndrome and adults with families.

The former thinks there is unlimited time available every day to be a gym rat and eat entire dominoes pizzas in one sitting because they believe theur current metabolism rate and other health markers will always stay the same.

They also don't start saving for retirement because.. Young.

Most people don't realize there is almost a monopoly on sugar and sweeteners globally too.

An English company called Tate and Lyle own almost every sweetener producer globally. They own all the producers in Louisiana. I worked at one of their facilities years ago in a different state and realized it at that point.

I think because the cost is so reasonable no one cares about the monopoly part.

quote:

---

Why would you need to burn 2000 calories to maintain weight?

---

The post I replied to said if you want to maintain your weight you burn off the exact amount of calories you take it. The recommended daily diet is 2,000 calories.

Low carb diets work because by nature, they are low calorie foods. Which is great. But you can count calories and lose weight all the same. You just have to be more disciplined.

If you're eating 2500+ calories in keto food each day, you won't lose weight. It is just fortunately hard to do that. Keto often doesn't work for petite women unless they count their calories too because of this.

More fat logic excuses.

As if your body defies the laws of thermodynamics

Indeed..

I can eat 2000 calories of pop tarts or 2000 calories of bacon and have near similar results, in terms of body composition, to about 99% accuracy

The other 1% is just a massive circle jerk - hence this thread

quote:

---

I was referring to more of the protein side.

---

Protein consumption should remain approximately the same whether you are going keto or not, so that is still not a valid point. Protein and carbs have the same amount of calories/gram. Fat has over double.. so a keto diet is not inherently low calorie if you are taking in adequate amounts of fat.

quote:

---

Regardless of which fad you pick up (low fat, low carb, whatever) it all boils down to calories. People just don't want to admit it.

If someone has found success doing keto, more power to them. But it is all about calories.

---

I agree for the most part, but the body is not a machine that is mass produced and every body is different. If you eat less than you consume, you will lose weight, but finding an optimal macro ratio will enhance your performance in the gym, help you retain muscle and burn more fat while losing weight vs simple CICO.