Best Nutrition Book I've Read In A While

[LfcCharlie4]

58 minutes ago, Michael569 said:

I've been thinking more about this lately. Is it really the "processed" bit? Or is it the fact that we simply overconsume because they are hyper-palatable? If we assume that the processing itself is the problem, it would indicate that there is something in the wholefood that isn't in the processed food which makes it somewhat bad. But then dark chocolate and tofu are ultra-processed foods and I'd argue that both are health-promoting. Same for let's say chickpea pasta, tomato puree, pumpkin puree, baba ganoush, or even a wholegrain tortilla. 

I think the real issue is: 

• high sodium content (although this is being reduced across the board, at least in EU) 
• high palatability which drives overconsumption and that leads to weight gain and weight gain leads to increased chronic disease risk 
• low volume (occupies less space in the stomach and high caloric content per 100 grams of a portion 

 

Hmm. that's an interesting point! 

I guess by ultra processed I kinda mean the 3 bullet points you put and not foods like Tofu & Lentil pasta erc

I mean usually the kind of person eating a Tofu Lentil pasta w/ Veggies isn't the same as someone having a big mac for lunch. 

I'm also with you on the 3 points, and understanding we live in an obesogenic environment, as well as how hard it can be for many parts of society to learn about nutrition, afford healthy meals etc makes it easy to see why we are, where we are. 

'Big Food' know this of course though, hence why they purposely confuse people & promote the 'moderation' argument, cos 99% of people (including myself) struggle with 'moderating' junk food once you have that first bite. 

 

So, I guess it goes back to avoiding those hyper-palatable foods except for when you are allowing yourself to indulge (social gatherings. holidays and the sort) as by simply not buying it, you're not only developing healthy everyday habits, you add a HUGE barrier to consuming it if you have to go to the shop, compared to pull it out the cuboard

[inFlow]

On 11/20/2022 at 8:41 PM, Matt23 said:

Basically I get super duper brain foggy and even my vision seems clouded and unfocused.

I can agree on this, meat kind of makes me feel bad on a very subtle way which is noticeable when you are running everyday all cylinders 100%, focus is great, mood is great, motivation is great, then you eat meat to get some protein/strength and boom you are actually going down in energy, but on a subtle way.

[LfcCharlie4]

Just received blood tests back after 7 1/2 years vegan. 

For reference I drink alcohol socially, don't smoke & have a history of type 2 diabetes in my family (mum & grandad). As far as I'm aware there's no real history of heart disease, but certainly is of cancer, but sadly, these days that seems very normal. 

@Michael569 Is going to analyse them for me (HIGHLY recommend working with him!!), as there was 1 slightly concerning reading, then if he approves I will post them here & re-post again in 6-12 months as I only read this book this month, and have certainly slacked on the WFPB in certain areas!

 

[King Merk]

I’ve tried plant based and while I didn’t feel like shit I certainly didn’t feel near as good as I do on carnivore.

I’m to the point where I just really don’t give a shit what any study or expert says. They are all at conflict each other anyways.

I listen to my body and eat intuitively. Thats naturally a high fat and low carbohydrate diet that’s primarily composed of red meats. All grass fed and organic.

I’ve never felt better eating animal based. My joint pains, brain fog, gum gingivitis and bloating all went away when I made the switch. I struggled with all these issues bad while eating plants so that’s all the feedback I need ??‍♂️

[LfcCharlie4]

@King Merk I've seen Carnivore work very well as a short-term elimination diet for people with issues similar to yours. 

However, from the long term RCTs & Meta-Analysis its pretty clear eating a High Sat Fat animal based diet increases the risk of several chronic diseases such as Heart Disease, not to mention the lack of Fibre issue. (Colon cancer risk) 

Have you ever done a test to see if you have underlying gut issues or certain sensitivities that was causing the issues?

Also, to be honest I think a lot of plant based diets aren't prepared sufficiently, so that could've been an issue. 

It takes a lot of effort- 40+ plants a week, making sure the 8 nutrients of focus are taken care of etc- not to mention the wide array of Vegan junk that is available now

I know there's a lot of Anecdotes that point both ways to feeling better, removing xyz, but there's a reason anecdotes are regarded the lowest form of scientific proof & RCTs / Meta Analysis are regarded as the best

[RendHeaven]

On 11/20/2022 at 5:05 PM, Michael569 said:

Red meat is one of the very few foods where the link to chronic disease is so strong that it is probably causative.

Sorry bro... This is EXTREMELY sloppy reasoning.

Just intuitively speaking, without appealing to flawed, biased, epidemiological "studies" (aka self-reported surveys full of healthy user bias, misreporting bias, etc.):

Our ancestors have consumed fatty animals for millennia, period. This is indisputable from isotope testing alone - but that aside,

In the cold of winter where there are no plants, prior to the agricultural revolution where we learned to store a surplus of grains, how could we humans have possibly survived? We don't hibernate or have the ability to consume grass or shrubbery buried beneath snow. That leaves the obvious: animal fats.

We have tangible evidence of tribes that thrive almost solely on red meat + animal byproducts alone, to this very day. The hadza, the maasai, the tokelau, eskimo populations, etc. These tribes have the LEAST signs of disease! This is NOT something you can so easily brush aside.

Cancer, diabetes, atherosclerosis, arthritis, macular degeneration - AKA diseases of MODERN CIVILIZATION... the rates of these began to SKYROCKET in the last 120 years. In the 1800s, a heart attack was so rare that it wasn't even in the medical literature.

And you're seriously telling me that red meat which we have eaten for literally thousands of years is CAUSING disease that has risen in only roughly the last century?

Please......

To my knowledge, there has never been a single large scale, long term interventional study that convincingly vilifies red meat.

I'm eager to hear your response!

 

Edit: as you can tell, for now I have clearly adopted a pro-red-meat stance. I am not interested in telling people how they ought to eat per se, but I am greatly puzzled when people disparage red meat before thoroughly contending with the above points I've laid out!

Edited December 13, 2022 by RendHeaven

[LfcCharlie4]

@RendHeaven

Firstly, wasn't the lifespan literaly 40 in the 1800s, and likely even shorter before that, couldn't that be one of the reasons? 

And, most people tended to die from infectious diseases such as TB & things like Pneumonia.

So, considering heart attacks average age is 64.5, is it not just a matter of it takes longer for these habits to have an effect on the CV system and lead to CV disease, which is the number 1 killer in the developed world according to WHO. Same for Lifestyle causes cancers- its very rarely a 18 year old smoker getting lung cancer for example? 

Also, the studies / reports of the 'Bluezones' and populations who live the longest do seem to eat a very plant rich diet, low in all forms of processed foods of course, but also low in Red Meat - https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/food-guidelines/ . 

To me, it makes much more sense to look at what people have done recently to increase lifespan, than a time period where the causes of death were completely different, like night and day difference, due to living standards etc

Also, isn't pure survival completely different to optimizing yourself for not just a longer lifespan but healthspan? 

In terms of the benefits you've seen, this is incredibly common, especially if you had food sensitivities / insulin sensitivities beforehand & you've basically done an elimination carnivore-based diet, meaning you've stripped anything that can cause issues. 

Long-Term I would argue such a diet will increase the risk of various chronic diseases, and I think within the next 3-5 years we will see much more evidence of this in Carnivore based communities. 

One more thing, if you were eating a lot of carb heavy meals before, especially processed carbs, that could explain the benefits, I just finished a book called Glucose Revolution and after implementing the hacks have seen great improvement in just a week. Essentially if you was constantly snacking or eating lots of processed carbs / carb heavy meals in a certain way you could've just fucked your glucose & insulin sensitivity which leads to a lot of shit outcomes basically. I think this could partially explain the benefits seen on a high fat based diet. 

[RendHeaven]

@LfcCharlie4 I really appreciate the response man. Those are amazing objections and you phrased them in a way that wasn't insulting.

I showed your comment to my best friend & mentor Jason, who is single handledly responsible for my current nutrition paradigm... here are his answers!

 

Firstly, wasn't the lifespan literaly 40 in the 1800s, and likely even shorter before that, couldn't that be one of the reasons? 

Not lifespan, average life expectancy, that's a really important difference... The average is confounded by infant mortality.

And, most people tended to die from infectious diseases such as TB & things like Pneumonia.

Right. As opposed to the chronic diseases (heart disease, cancer, stroke, Alzheimer's, diabetes) that plague modern civilization.

So, considering heart attacks average age is 64.5, is it not just a matter of it takes longer for these habits to have an effect on the CV system and lead to CV disease, which is the number 1 killer in the developed world according to WHO. Same for Lifestyle causes cancers- its very rarely a 18 year old smoker getting lung cancer for example? 

Solid logic, but no. There is this tacit assumption that chronic disease is inherent to the human condition. It's not. But it is true that these diseases take time to develop. NEVER FORGET THIS 18 WORD SENTENCE: "Consuming more polyunsaturated fat than that found in nature will SLOWLY oxidize your body and cause chronic disease." The fact that this oxidative process is slow is actually precisely why it's difficult to ascertain the true danger of seed oils in a short-term study. But for evidence that modern humans do not have to succumb to chronic disease in old age, look no further than the Tokelauans, whom exist to this very day, and thus nullifies the argument that our ancestors are not an apt comparator.

Also, the studies / reports of the 'Bluezones' and populations who live the longest do seem to eat a very plant rich diet, low in all forms of processed foods of course, but also low in Red Meat - https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/food-guidelines/ . 

Yes. The antioxidants in plants offset the linoleic acid in olive oil, but animal fats would still be superior. A plant rich diet however IS NOT enough to overcome a diet which also consists of seed oils, and to appreciate that fact, look no further than Israeli Jews, and yes, that is true TODAY, not merely historically or ancestrally.

To me, it makes much more sense to look at what people have done recently to increase lifespan, than a time period where the causes of death were completely different, like night and day difference, due to living standards etc

Right, but the causes of death historically were precisely NOT chronic disease, and that's the whole point. Yes that's true, living standards are a confounding factor, for example nowadays we have to contend with air and water pollution (rich in heavy metals that can cause oxidation)

Also, isn't pure survival completely different to optimizing yourself for not just a longer lifespan but healthspan? 

True. The goal is to have your health span most closely approximate your lifespan, i.e., live 90 good years and then bite the dust due to natural causes. But evidence of good healthspan is lack of chronic disease.

In terms of the benefits you've seen, this is incredibly common, especially if you had food sensitivities / insulin sensitivities beforehand & you've basically done an elimination carnivore-based diet, meaning you've stripped anything that can cause issues. 

Okay. Addition through subtraction, that's a fair point. But then again, to truly understand, you would need to actually eat a pound or two of beef per day. Pony up, wontcha? Or would we rather not put the onus on ourselves to smoke the psychedelic, to look through the telescope, so to speak?

Long-Term I would argue such a diet will increase the risk of various chronic diseases, and I think within the next 3-5 years we will see much more evidence of this in Carnivore based communities. 

[RendHeaven speaking here, my mentor responds cheekily here but he means no ill will haha]

Oh good, finally someone puts a timeline on this. Perfect, I'm adding this to my Google calendar right now, and we will follow up in 1826 days which accounts for the leap year in 2024. This gives you the benefit of the doubt by using the end of your time interval, that being 5 years. In the meantime let's ask 13 year carnivore doctor Lisa Wiedeman which ailments she experiences!

One more thing, if you were eating a lot of carb heavy meals before, especially processed carbs, that could explain the benefits, I just finished a book called Glucose Revolution and after implementing the hacks have seen great improvement in just a week. Essentially if you was constantly snacking or eating lots of processed carbs / carb heavy meals in a certain way you could've just fucked your glucose & insulin sensitivity which leads to a lot of shit outcomes basically. I think this could partially explain the benefits seen on a high fat based diet. 

Glucose control is important, yes, but I, for example, recommend a high carb animal-based diet which offers the same benefits. It's not the macronutrients conferring this effect, i.e., the high carb, low fat, or whatever, but rather, it's the bioavailable micronutrients in the meat that take you to the next level.

Edited December 16, 2022 by RendHeaven

[LfcCharlie4]

12 hours ago, RendHeaven said:

@LfcCharlie4 I really appreciate the response man. Those are amazing objections and you phrased them in a way that wasn't insulting.

I showed your comment to my best friend & mentor Jason, who is single handledly responsible for my current nutrition paradigm... here are his answers!

 

Firstly, wasn't the lifespan literaly 40 in the 1800s, and likely even shorter before that, couldn't that be one of the reasons? 

Not lifespan, average life expectancy, that's a really important difference... The average is confounded by infant mortality.

And, most people tended to die from infectious diseases such as TB & things like Pneumonia.

Right. As opposed to the chronic diseases (heart disease, cancer, stroke, Alzheimer's, diabetes) that plague modern civilization.

So, considering heart attacks average age is 64.5, is it not just a matter of it takes longer for these habits to have an effect on the CV system and lead to CV disease, which is the number 1 killer in the developed world according to WHO. Same for Lifestyle causes cancers- its very rarely a 18 year old smoker getting lung cancer for example? 

Solid logic, but no. There is this tacit assumption that chronic disease is inherent to the human condition. It's not. But it is true that these diseases take time to develop. NEVER FORGET THIS 18 WORD SENTENCE: "Consuming more polyunsaturated fat than that found in nature will SLOWLY oxidize your body and cause chronic disease." The fact that this oxidative process is slow is actually precisely why it's difficult to ascertain the true danger of seed oils in a short-term study. But for evidence that modern humans do not have to succumb to chronic disease in old age, look no further than the Tokelauans, whom exist to this very day, and thus nullifies the argument that our ancestors are not an apt comparator.

Also, the studies / reports of the 'Bluezones' and populations who live the longest do seem to eat a very plant rich diet, low in all forms of processed foods of course, but also low in Red Meat - https://www.bluezones.com/recipes/food-guidelines/ . 

Yes. The antioxidants in plants offset the linoleic acid in olive oil, but animal fats would still be superior. A plant rich diet however IS NOT enough to overcome a diet which also consists of seed oils, and to appreciate that fact, look no further than Israeli Jews, and yes, that is true TODAY, not merely historically or ancestrally.

To me, it makes much more sense to look at what people have done recently to increase lifespan, than a time period where the causes of death were completely different, like night and day difference, due to living standards etc

Right, but the causes of death historically were precisely NOT chronic disease, and that's the whole point. Yes that's true, living standards are a confounding factor, for example nowadays we have to contend with air and water pollution (rich in heavy metals that can cause oxidation)

Also, isn't pure survival completely different to optimizing yourself for not just a longer lifespan but healthspan? 

True. The goal is to have your health span most closely approximate your lifespan, i.e., live 90 good years and then bite the dust due to natural causes. But evidence of good healthspan is lack of chronic disease.

In terms of the benefits you've seen, this is incredibly common, especially if you had food sensitivities / insulin sensitivities beforehand & you've basically done an elimination carnivore-based diet, meaning you've stripped anything that can cause issues. 

Okay. Addition through subtraction, that's a fair point. But then again, to truly understand, you would need to actually eat a pound or two of beef per day. Pony up, wontcha? Or would we rather not put the onus on ourselves to smoke the psychedelic, to look through the telescope, so to speak?

Long-Term I would argue such a diet will increase the risk of various chronic diseases, and I think within the next 3-5 years we will see much more evidence of this in Carnivore based communities. 

[RendHeaven speaking here, my mentor responds cheekily here but he means no ill will haha]

Oh good, finally someone puts a timeline on this. Perfect, I'm adding this to my Google calendar right now, and we will follow up in 1826 days which accounts for the leap year in 2024. This gives you the benefit of the doubt by using the end of your time interval, that being 5 years. In the meantime let's ask 13 year carnivore doctor Lisa Wiedeman which ailments she experiences!

One more thing, if you were eating a lot of carb heavy meals before, especially processed carbs, that could explain the benefits, I just finished a book called Glucose Revolution and after implementing the hacks have seen great improvement in just a week. Essentially if you was constantly snacking or eating lots of processed carbs / carb heavy meals in a certain way you could've just fucked your glucose & insulin sensitivity which leads to a lot of shit outcomes basically. I think this could partially explain the benefits seen on a high fat based diet. 

Glucose control is important, yes, but I, for example, recommend a high carb animal-based diet which offers the same benefits. It's not the macronutrients conferring this effect, i.e., the high carb, low fat, or whatever, but rather, it's the bioavailable micronutrients in the meat that take you to the next level.

Appreciate the answers, its all a bit of fun after all and as Michael said I doubt we will change either opinion. 

I also want to say I am glad you found what works for you & are seeing improvements in all areas that you mentioned on another thread. 

I certainly agree with the healthspan point, I just don't think we agree on how to get there! 

In relation to the 5 year point, I'm certainly open to it, and on a longer basis- 10,20 & 30 years if you wish, I meant as an overall community. Personally, based on the data, I view a WFPB diet as optimal for longevity and minimizing risk of chronic disease. 

You mentioned 13 year carnivore doctor, I could easily mention 10s of 'Vegan Doctors' thriving in their 60s/70s with decades of the diet behind them

Also, why would I eat a 1lb/2lbs of meat day when I feel amazing on this diet (and same could be said for you right?) I'm 23 & been Vegan since I was 15, had multiple blood tests (recently one Michal checked over) and all biomarkers are very healthy this included testing for Testosterone which was the US equivalent of 700, which I thought was very good considering all you see online is young guys struggling with low test.

I know you mentioned struggling to gain weight while Vegan, I've gone from a scrawny 126lb 15 year old to now 167.5lbs @ 13% Body Fat at 23, with the best results I've seen in the last 18 months when I began training properly, proper nutrition & of course Creatine & EAAS which are more important for WFPB diets. 

I'll admit I had issues 1-2 years in, but this came from following quacks from old school 2014-2017 vegan youtube, not taking care to reach all micronutrient goals & just a lack of education really. But, since then I've just been feeling better & better

Like I said, I understand why you've done what you've done, and I think trying to persuade each other is mostly a waste of time, I'm sharing what's worked for me (health & performance wise) and you are sharing what has worked for you. 

So, as long as both happy & healthy its all good right? 

One final thing in regards to Glucose, I eat a shit ton of Carbs, I just meant there's certain hacks to stabilize it throughout the day which I got from the book Glucose Revolution. 

 

 

Shall we agree to set a reminder for a decade from now & see where we're at performance, health & overall wellbeing wise? 

That will put me at 17 years of eating this way & 10+ for yourself? 

Full blood test, physique, health, performance etc?

 

 

Edited December 16, 2022 by LfcCharlie4
Fun Idea

[Asayake]

23 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

Appreciate the answers, its all a bit of fun after all and as Michael said I doubt we will change either opinion. 

I also want to say I am glad you found what works for you & are seeing improvements in all areas that you mentioned on another thread. 

I certainly agree with the healthspan point, I just don't think we agree on how to get there! 

In relation to the 5 year point, I'm certainly open to it, and on a longer basis- 10,20 & 30 years if you wish, I meant as an overall community. Personally, based on the data, I view a WFPB diet as optimal for longevity and minimizing risk of chronic disease. 

You mentioned 13 year carnivore doctor, I could easily mention 10s of 'Vegan Doctors' thriving in their 60s/70s with decades of the diet behind them

Also, why would I eat a 1lb/2lbs of meat day when I feel amazing on this diet (and same could be said for you right?) I'm 23 & been Vegan since I was 15, had multiple blood tests (recently one Michal checked over) and all biomarkers are very healthy this included testing for Testosterone which was the US equivalent of 700, which I thought was very good considering all you see online is young guys struggling with low test.

I know you mentioned struggling to gain weight while Vegan, I've gone from a scrawny 126lb 15 year old to now 167.5lbs @ 13% Body Fat at 23, with the best results I've seen in the last 18 months when I began training properly, proper nutrition & of course Creatine & EAAS which are more important for WFPB diets. 

I'll admit I had issues 1-2 years in, but this came from following quacks from old school 2014-2017 vegan youtube, not taking care to reach all micronutrient goals & just a lack of education really. But, since then I've just been feeling better & better

Like I said, I understand why you've done what you've done, and I think trying to persuade each other is mostly a waste of time, I'm sharing what's worked for me (health & performance wise) and you are sharing what has worked for you. 

So, as long as both happy & healthy its all good right? 

One final thing in regards to Glucose, I eat a shit ton of Carbs, I just meant there's certain hacks to stabilize it throughout the day which I got from the book Glucose Revolution. 

 

 

Shall we agree to set a reminder for a decade from now & see where we're at performance, health & overall wellbeing wise? 

That will put me at 17 years of eating this way & 10+ for yourself? 

Full blood test, physique, health, performance etc?

 

 

Good post. To the carbs point I would like to add that I consume 100-150g of white sugar added to my food per day and my blood sugar levels are very stable, no brain fog. I believe it's because I eat no oil and no fatty foods and it increases the body's ability to regulate blood sugar because there's less fat inhibiting insulin function.

I do think that oil is bad though, unless you want to put on extra weight but that's probably healthier to do with whole food anyways.

[LfcCharlie4]

@Asayake Would you include Olive Oils in that? It seems the longest living communities eat Olive Oil over any other & in some cases, in abundance. 

Interesting RE: White Sugar. Do you think you could improve blood sugar levels further if you cut that down / implemented hacks from here - https://nypost.com/2022/04/02/enjoy-carbs-and-lose-weight-with-these-glucose-goddess-hacks/

[Asayake]

45 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

@Asayake Would you include Olive Oils in that? It seems the longest living communities eat Olive Oil over any other & in some cases, in abundance. 

Interesting RE: White Sugar. Do you think you could improve blood sugar levels further if you cut that down / implemented hacks from here - https://nypost.com/2022/04/02/enjoy-carbs-and-lose-weight-with-these-glucose-goddess-hacks/

Yes, I believe the olive oil industry is an industry that makes profit from sugar being seen as something bad, just like the energy drinks industry, coffee, adhd meds, chocolate, seed oil, meat, protein powder and more industries either try to replace the energy increasing & stress reducing effects of sugar or the taste by adding oils and/or sweeteners. Or they simply make money by selling something that's free of sugar. I am more of a believer in the China study than in a mediterranean style of eating. I believe in a meditteranean style of eating they eat other things that cancel some of the negative effects of consuming olive oil like a lot of wheat and vegetables.  I believe oil is a bad source of energy(every cell in the body runs on sugar). I also believe oil/fat increases insulin resistance which gives sugar the brain fog effect people complain about(the insulin resistance causes elevated blood sugar which is responsible for brain fog, not the spikes), and makes people add on weight which is not bad for everyone but obesity is a bigger problem in the western world than being underweight. Unless one is underweight or wants to gain weight I see no reason for eating oil.

Regarding the article I believe blood sugar spikes are not a problem so I would say I generally disagree with her view on the matter. I believe sugar spikes are a natural way for the body to regulate cortisol levels. Basically I believe that sugar spikes is how the body knows it's getting enough fuel and without them the body will release cortisol to compensate and crave energy in other forms like stimulants(weed, coffee, chocolate, amphetamines, modafinil). You can test this out for yourself by eating a big bowl of rice or rice & heinz canned beans in the evening, you will be hit by a strong relaxation and have an easier time falling asleep. What is called feelings of fatigue in the article is not actually fatigue imo, it's strong feelings of relaxation from crashed cortisol levels, which is a good thing if you're trying to relax and will happen only if you eat a very big meal of starch or A LOT of sugar. The stronger the blood sugar spikes, the harder the cortisol plummets. Cortisol is the body's way to compensate for low blood sugar, it gives you this fight or flight caffeine like feeling/headspace. it's the body's stress/survival mode hormone. If you avoid blood sugar spikes you will avoid diabetes but you will miss out of the benefits of blood sugar spikes which includes increased motivation(dopamine), increased content & mental clarity(serotonin). When I need energy I eat fruits. canned fruit in syrup, low oil cereal & white sugar. If I need to relax I slam down a big meal of rice, potatoes or pasta. I believe a better way to avoid diabetes is to cut out oil & fats because that's what causes insulin resistance, which is what we should really be fearing, not blood sugar spikes(as long as the blood sugar levels return to baseline afterwards which requires good insulin sensitivty).

Edited December 16, 2022 by Asayake

[LfcCharlie4]

@Asayake Definitely an interesting perspective, reminds me of Durianrider & Freelee lmao from back in the day 

However, I've defo found the opposite, I used to eat very high Carb / Sugar breakfasts with fruit smoothies & oats etc, and suffer crashes, since implementing those hacks, it seems my energy is much, much smoother throughout the day! 

[Asayake]

47 minutes ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

@Asayake Definitely an interesting perspective, reminds me of Durianrider & Freelee lmao from back in the day 

However, I've defo found the opposite, I used to eat very high Carb / Sugar breakfasts with fruit smoothies & oats etc, and suffer crashes, since implementing those hacks, it seems my energy is much, much smoother throughout the day! 

For sure, I am heavily influenced by Durianrider in particular. I was aware of him years back but I just thought he was crazy. After eating a more high fiber low sugar vegan way of eating for 4 1/2 years, followed by an omnivore high protein bodybuilding style of eating for the past 1 1/2 years I found myself in a position with declining health. Then I rediscovered Durianrider and went on his protocoll. I should disclaim I have only been on this super high carb/sugar style of diet for roughly a month but I can confidently say that it is working very well for me so far, my health both physical and mental has improved significantly in a considerably low period of time.

But I don't know for sure yet how it's going to work longterm. But I think there's a logic behind it that checks out and makes sense in regards to my prior experiences with diet. There was a MD in the 1940s that used a similar diet to treat patients of many varying ailments like malignant hypertension, chronic kidney disease, obesity amongst other things with good results. His name is Walter Kempner and Durianriders way of eating is basically the Walter Kempner rice program adapted to fit a more active lifestyle(no caloric restriction).

It's also important to mention that it could also be that it's just the mainstream omnivore diet that is very unhealthy and that the benefits I have noticed so far are from being freed from that diet, it's possible a more normal WFPB diet would have had similar positive effects. I am going to experiment with this further in the future but for now I'm going to stick with high sugar as long as it doesnt cause any issues, atleast for a few more months. I will keep those article tips in mind for the future.

Edited December 16, 2022 by Asayake

[LfcCharlie4]

@Asayake Defo interested to hear how that goes. 

I think a lot have issues with the original transition to WFPB due to such a rapid increase of Fibre & new plants, hence why it needs to be done properly. 

Do you think previous experience with WFPB helped that maybe? 

Tbh, what I've found work best for me is simply a balance of macros, and focus on Micros (customized for my gym goals) & making sure to get the 8 nutrients of focus, and just cutting out as much junk as possible!

[RendHeaven]

5 hours ago, LfcCharlie4 said:

Shall we agree to set a reminder for a decade from now & see where we're at performance, health & overall wellbeing wise? 

That will put me at 17 years of eating this way & 10+ for yourself? 

Brilliant!

No animosity - just pure science. I am happy to declare that I was wrong, IF I am indeed wrong!

Thanks for being so fair with me, and for listening to my story all the way through, I didn't expect you to go out of your way to look at the other thread.

Let's keep in touch, best of luck

[Matt23]

On 11/24/2022 at 2:29 AM, inFlow said:

I can agree on this, meat kind of makes me feel bad on a very subtle way which is noticeable when you are running everyday all cylinders 100%, focus is great, mood is great, motivation is great, then you eat meat to get some protein/strength and boom you are actually going down in energy, but on a subtle way.

Ya.  I suppose balance is key.  When I got the brain fogginess, I was eating meat daily.  So maybe just a few times or even once a week can be good enough. 

It's easy to do extremes of anything; the hardest thing and what usually seems healthiest is finding balance.  

[Michael569]

10 hours ago, Matt23 said:

It's easy to do extremes of anything; the hardest thing and what usually seems healthiest is finding balance.  

^

I'm seeing more and more of this. The need to go all the way to the edges because anything that is in between doesn't sell. If nutrition books were completely unbiased and presented the REAL information, in accordance with the hierarchy of evidence, they would be so boring that nobody would read them because they would all point to the same thing - basically health guidelines diet. 

Instead, we have dama, cherry-picking, mechanisms, pseudoscience and dogmatism to appeal to the audience  

Edited December 19, 2022 by Michael569

[LfcCharlie4]

@Michael569 From your recent readings & thoughts what do you recommend for your clients?

Also feel free to include other habits, supplements, sleep etc as I think just looking at food / drink can be quite reductionist

[Asayake]

2 hours ago, Michael569 said:

^

I'm seeing more and more of this. The need to go all the way to the edges because anything that is in between doesn't sell. If nutrition books were completely unbiased and presented the REAL information, in accordance with the hierarchy of evidence, they would be so boring that nobody would read them because they would all point to the same thing - basically health guidelines diet. 

Instead, we have dama, cherry-picking, mechanisms, pseudoscience and dogmatism to appeal to the audience  

I see you guys point, but what is balance really? That is still very subjective in the case of nutrition, is it not? The word balanced in this context seems to be more or less synonymous with healthy to me. Because what's the point of eating in a balanced way if it's not healthy. In my mind 90/5/5 vegan, WFPB or carnivore could all be candidates for a balanced diet if they turned out to be the healthiest for humans, or in other words in balance with how humans have adapted to eat & thrive.

If the health guidelines are where it's at then why is dietary associated diseases like heart disease and cancer as bad as ever? I feel like there should have been positive results if the guidelines are pointing in the right direction.

Then some things to think about regarding sugar. Sugar free alternatives have been on the rise for many years, almost everyone I know buys them instead of the sugar containing alternative. Many of the same people are still overweight. I know you probably don't promote sugar free sodas but if sugar is as bad as it's made out to be by health guidelines then why doesn't more people avoiding sugar seem to net public health results? Poor asian farmers practically lived off of sugar (rice, sweet potatoes) for hundreds of years and seemed fine. Meanwhile my overweight dad who is a doctor is very careful with his carb portion sizes and has terrible health. 

 

Also @LfcCharlie4 sorry, I didn't quite get your question before. Could you explain what you meant?