Author Topic: Fathead  (Read 6945 times)

Virgil0211

  • Bogon filter
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
  • Bogometer: -30
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Fathead
« Reply #15 on: April 07, 2011, 05:07:38 PM »
Really now?  A bit odd since, last I checked, Atkins didn't have any evidence for his diet, but still somewhat fascinating.

Well, it has more to do with insulin resistance and the reaction of the pancreas when it attempts to digest carbohydrates as opposed to proteins. A person with more body fat has a higher level of insulin resistance and thus produces more insulin to digest the same amount of carbohydrates as someone with a lower level of body fat. Since carbohydrates are digested first as opposed to other energy sources (fat, protein, etc), this somehow messes up the body's ability to utilize them. However, the diet plan doesn't recommend eliminating them completely. Just keeping it below 100g (subtracting fiber) and encouraging that you stick to more complex carbohydrate sources when you do eat them. Like I said, I'd have to look up the chart again.

The diet itself has been working out for me pretty well so far, at least when I manage to stick to it. College life makes it hard sometimes. =P

Travis Retriever

  • Sarcasitron collider
  • *****
  • Posts: 5999
  • Bogometer: -1
    • View Profile
    • My DeviantART
    • Email
Re: Fathead
« Reply #16 on: April 07, 2011, 05:10:33 PM »
College life makes it hard sometimes. =P
True that.
"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole worldó'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537

Virgil0211

  • Bogon filter
  • ***
  • Posts: 725
  • Bogometer: -30
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: Fathead
« Reply #17 on: April 07, 2011, 05:36:27 PM »
True that.

I will, however, take this moment to plug kettlebells. I can exercise in under 20 minutes and still get a good cardio workout out if it. It's one of the few things I've tried where I've directly noticed a significant increase in my endurance. Tradeoff is that it's insanely tough, you need to practice proper form, and it takes alot of willpower to do it in such a way that you'd be done in under 20 min.

It's basically interval training. You do 12 sets of kettlebell swings, 20 repetitions each, with one minute of active rest (shadowboxing, jogging, speed-walking, etc) in between. Once you reach the point where you can do this all the way through without taking any longer rest breaks, you reduce the rest periods by 10 seconds. Keep going until your rest periods are down to 10 seconds. Then you either go up a weight or start working on sets of olympic lifts.

Now I need to go to a Hapkido class. =P

/end off-topic post.

Travis Retriever

  • Sarcasitron collider
  • *****
  • Posts: 5999
  • Bogometer: -1
    • View Profile
    • My DeviantART
    • Email
Re: Fathead
« Reply #18 on: April 10, 2014, 01:31:02 PM »
*UPDATE*  Okay, so since I've been getting into fitness and nutrition from a skeptical, rational, empirical and Bayesian point of view, I've found out the diet the documentary's OP is advocating.  It's called the "Paleo Diet" for those who might be wondering.

From Alan Aragon (read: a very smart nutritionist):

"The present decade has just begun, and eating clean has taken some interesting directions. One is an appeal to imagination about Paleolithic eating habits, which eliminates the consumption of grains, legumes, dairy, added salt, sugar, alcohol, and even certain vegetables. This definition of clean is perhaps the most logically inconsistent one. It emphasizes a prehistoric model, yet many of its proponents take an array of cutting-edge nutritional supplements, and use satellite technology to navigate their drive to the closest parking spot at the gym. Fruits and vegetables have always been a mainstay of clean eating, but pesticide-free produce is now somehow cleaner, pests and all. Another twist in the carbohydrate saga has snowballed as well. Insulin spikes from high-GI carbs were the bane of the 90’s. But now, fructose, a low-GI carbohydrate with minimal effects on insulin response, is now one of the top public enemies."-- http://www.wannabebig.com/diet-and-nutrition/the-dirt-on-clean-eating/
Incidentally, it turns out that, when controlled for Calories, HFCS is not more fattening than other sugars.  My bad.  Though it can indirectly cause you to eat more sweet/sugary foods as it tends to be in damn near everything courtesy of govco's corn subsidies, and because people just generally crave more of what they normally eat; and since sucrose, and other sugars tend to be very caloric 'empty' calories....there you go.  And due to differences in rodent metabolic processes vs human ones.

http://www.nsca.com/uploadedfiles/nsca/inactive_content/program_books/ptc_2013_program_book/aragon.pdf (It's a powerpoint presentation, so it's a lot shorter than it looks).

I also doubt Tom's implied correlation/causation that it was eating grains/oils that caused people to become shorter and fatter.  I mean, come on! Evidence or GTFO, Tom.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2014, 01:55:54 PM by Travis Retriever »
"When the mob and the press and the whole world tell you to move, your job is to plant yourself like a tree beside the river of truth, and tell the whole worldó'No. You move.'"
-Captain America, Amazing Spider-Man 537