• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Caloric vs protein restriction

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
Not sure what subforum to put this in...

Anyone know some good research that might elucidate the difference between and relationship between caloric restriction and protein restriction as a means to achieve greater health to an older age?

We all are probably aware that caloric restriction is proven to increase life span in a host of widely varied creatures. New research has come to light that protein restriction does the same and may actually be the reason caloric restriction works (less calories means less excess protein)... Has this been done with mammals or just bugs?

Other ways to extend life?
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today 10:23 PM
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
2,026
---
Location
germany
extend quality lifetime by not eating things that kill you slowly and painfully, such as animal products and highly processed or overcooked meals (look up the various ratios of dementia causing advanced glycation end products/AGE, for example)

a video on caloric restriction and aging:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hpy9wZ0N0mk

random inconsequent experiments with caloric restriction can cause overweight, because a body that experiences famines wants to protect itself against them, by saving a fraction of ingested food as fat, whenever it get's a chance, meaning in periods when you don't restrict quite as much. a body that wants to be(come) fat will also increase appetite.

the correct way to moderate calories is by moderating appetite. this is done by eating only the most saturating foods. the most saturating foods are those, that deliver maximum micronutrients with maximum live factor (uncooked or lightly cooked) with quickly available energy, meaning carbohydrates. such foods are fruits and starches with vegetables. the reasonable goal is not tiny calory intake (and living without energy like an indian bum at the river), as this would be famine, see above paragraph. the goal is just avoiding extra calories that don't satiate any appetite or cause even more appetite, such as oils or dead carb or protein powders. fatty foods and oils can cause extra appetite, as their presence makes carbohydrate utilization ineffective, thus they virtually take away from the given saturation that came from carbs.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Local time
Today 2:23 PM
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,691
---
There's ongoing research funded by the US NIH (principle's name is Luigi Fontane I believe) into why Caloric restriction extends lifespan. AFAIK they don't have any firm results yet but the IGF-1 (a protein) pathway seems to be involved. That may be what you heard about.

Separately Dr. T. Colin Campbell did extensive epidemiological research into the relationship between caloric consumption and health/lifespan (c.f. The China Study). That research conclusively showed a relationship between lowering protein consumption and longevity. Ironically he was raised as on a dairy farm and wanted to prove the benefit of protein.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
extend quality lifetime by not eating things that kill you slowly and painfully, such as animal products and highly processed or overcooked meals (look up the various ratios of dementia causing advanced glycation end products/AGE, for example)...

...the correct way to moderate calories is by moderating appetite. this is done by eating only the most saturating foods. the most saturating foods are those, that deliver maximum micronutrients with maximum live factor (uncoocked or lightly cooked) with quickly available energy, meaning carbohydrates. such foods are fruits and starches with vegetables. the reasonable goal is not tiny calory intake (and living without energy like an indian bum at the river), as this would be famine, see above. it's just avoiding extra calories that don't satiate any appetite or cause even more appetite, such as oils or dead carb or protein powders. fatty foods and oils can cause extra appetite, as their presence makes carbohydrate utilization ineffective, thus they virtually take away from given the saturation that came from carbs.

You're on the right track for the most part. AGEs are a major cause of aging and tissue degradation, but they result from carbs binding to protein and fat (especially PUFAs) and increasing carb intake can increase AGE formation. Exogenous AGE formation can be minimized by cooking foods in wet/low heat rather than dry/high heat...

The goal is to achieve maximum satiation from whole, healthy foods by ensuring that your immediate micro- and macro-nutritional needs are met or exceeded. This helps moderate appetite. However, I am at a loss as to why people are still laboring under the assumption that carbs increase satiety and help moderate appetite while fats do the opposite. This is the opposite of the truth.

SOME fats appear to stimulate appetite but those are mainly the highly inflammatory omega 6 fatty acids found in high concentrations in industrial nut and seed oils (such as corn, safflower, sunflower, soy, etc...). Eating healthy fats (a good balance of saturated and monounsaturated while minimizing and balancing PUFA's) suppresses appetite and slows gastric emptying. Carbohydrates tend to lead to more desire for carbohydrates.

I find that protein consumption around 10-14% of total calories is sufficient for satiety and good body function, filling the remaining with a mix of fat and carbs (in my case more fat than carbs).

There's ongoing research funded by the US NIH (principle's name is Luigi Fontane I believe) into why Caloric restriction extends lifespan. AFAIK they don't have any firm results yet but the IGF-1 (a protein) pathway seems to be involved. That may be what you heard about.

Separately Dr. T. Colin Campbell did extensive epidemiological research into the relationship between caloric consumption and health/lifespan (c.f. The China Study). That research conclusively showed a relationship between lowering protein consumption and longevity. Ironically he was raised as on a dairy farm and wanted to prove the benefit of protein.

I'm fairly familiar with Campbell and his work though I never read The China Study myself. His methods and conclusions have been broken down and heavily criticized by so many others that I'm not sure it's worth even reading, though I prefer to reach my own conclusions. I'm pretty dubious about any epidemiological studies because confounding variables tend to shift the data. They're good at finding correlation but not causation. They're best taken with a dose of the scientific method, IMO. Some things just can't be directly tested in a lab, but lab tests can help confirm or call into question the findings of epidemiological studies.

I think we have a lot more to learn... but new info is coming to light every day and it's very exciting! I've been very actively researching the latest findings for the past couple years.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today 10:23 PM
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
2,026
---
Location
germany
a few brazil or walnuts or some coconut or avokado meat can give you a good hormonally induced feeling, that could be interpreted psychobiologically as satiation, but this feeling does not give you an eating-stop-signal, hence it is not actual satiation, in my book.

this nice rewarding feeling occurs, because your body appreciates the extra safety it receives from something that is fattening. every body needs some bodyfat and getting it from plants like that is just perfect, because the body is lazy. the body will hardly ever stop rewarding you for fattening foods. it doesn't appear to assume, that too much fat could be around. it's similar with a slight taste of salt.

i like to eat some fatty whole plant foods in the evening, not every day though. they harmonise nicely with rice meals. the mct in coconut meat can also give you a comfortable heat kick.

but true satiation is the holistic feeling of running on full energy and being ready to tear out trees. in this state, eating is of zero interest to you. you become almost afraid of eating more.

oxigen availability also plays a big role in satiation, oxigen availability depends on blood composition, depends on nutrition.

it may not be completely obvious, why i use the word satiation as a synonym for a high energy state, but the opposite is a sense of total starvation, a low energy state, as experienced after about three days of fasting, when glycogen stores are running in emergency mode and you are relying on ketones, so it makes sense to look at the whole dichotomy, satiation - depletion.

a happy tummy is only 80% of what is required for satiation, in my book. your energy can be at 60% or 30% and your tummy can still be happy. it's misleading and it's why people think they are happy on low carb diets, which please the tummy, but can't satiate the whole being, blood, muscles and brain. a fasting tummy is a happy tummy, too.

larger amounts of fats in the absence of sufficient amounts of carbs can never achieve this high energy state, not even when you are already in ketosis. the body has a lot of glycogen storage, but is only happy to burn them without inhibition, if they are totally loaded. loading them takes impressive amounts of carbs, especially if you have muscles. i was on a low carb diet for ~2 years, i think about it in accordance with my experience.

and larger amounts of fats from whole foods combined with sufficient amounts of carbs may still induce this high energy state, despite the fat, but all the fat will just go to bodyfat and doesn't contribute to the state.

if the body doesn't want to be fat, it will burn that fat in the evening, the night and in the early morning, by abstaining from giving us any appetite. in this phase we are tolerant of existing in a low energy fat burning mode, as long as we are passive.

however, if the body does want to be(come) fat, it will simply keep that ingested fat as body fat, and cause more appetite for carbs, once it needs more energy.

a body wants to be fat, when storage is interpreted as survival advantage. running fast (being lean) can also be interpreted as survival advantage. body intelligence interprets your subjective environment and experience, to figure out, which of those priorities is relevant.

however large amounts of processed liquid fat will flood the blood, due to their fast digestibility, which will totally ruin the functionality of insulin, which will also ruin the state of high energy availability. that's the feeling of comfortably falling into the couch after a pleasing fatty meal ;)

i doubt that there is actual proof for the inflammatory effect of sane doses of omega 6 from uncooked whole plant foods. afaik it's all just correlation studies about processed oils and similar.

processed/isolated or heated oils are inflammatory per se, even omega 3 rich fish oils, even coconut oil, all of them.

i urge anyone who believes in fish oil capsules: open some capsules, taste the oil, keep it in your mouth for a while, taste it. and reconsider. you are what you eat.


say if you were hungry and then you ate nothing but cashew nuts, you'd have to eat so much cashews, that the few carbs in them amount to a nice meal, before you would receive an eating stop signal. brazil nuts on the other hand do not even turn you on, as they have no carb taste. you'd eat five of them, loose interest and continue being hungry, looking somewhere else for satiating carbs. small carb meals can sometimes appear to make you hungry, because they turn you on. this only happens, when your glycogen storage is very depleted, after eating the meal.
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Local time
Today 2:23 PM
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,691
---
His methods and conclusions have been broken down and heavily criticized by so many others that I'm not sure it's worth even reading, though I prefer to reach my own conclusions.

On the internet, by groups that don't like his conclusions such as Weston Price primarily. It was peer reviewed research that has received nothing but praise among other researchers, AFAIK.

I'm pretty dubious about any epidemiological studies because confounding variables tend to shift the data.

That's kindergarden ... the first thing you do as that type of researcher is to manage the confounding variables. Any researcher beyond undergraduate level knows this and knows how to do it.

They're good at finding correlation but not causation.

That's the point.
 

Cognisant

cackling in the trenches
Local time
Today 10:23 AM
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
11,155
---
immortality.jpg
 

Redfire

and Blood
Local time
Today 9:23 PM
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
422
---
We need to live long enough to live forever, Cog.
 
Local time
Today 9:23 PM
Joined
Jan 7, 2012
Messages
5,022
---

SpaceYeti

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 2:23 PM
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
5,592
---
Location
Crap
Don't pig out, but why deny yourself the pleasures of food? Once you're dead, you can't enjoy food, sure, but if you can't enjoy food while alive, what's the point? Extend my life? For what? Am I extra special, does wisdom ride my dandruff down onto younger people?

No, life is now. Enjoy it. Don't overindulge, but don't deny yourself a simple pleasure here or there. Go to Arby's. Have an ice cream sandwich. Just have a bit of broccoli and your vitamins, too. No bigs.
 

pjoa09

dopaminergic
Local time
Tomorrow 4:23 AM
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
1,857
---
Location
th
There's ongoing research funded by the US NIH (principle's name is Luigi Fontane I believe) into why Caloric restriction extends lifespan. AFAIK they don't have any firm results yet but the IGF-1 (a protein) pathway seems to be involved. That may be what you heard about.

Separately Dr. T. Colin Campbell did extensive epidemiological research into the relationship between caloric consumption and health/lifespan (c.f. The China Study). That research conclusively showed a relationship between lowering protein consumption and longevity. Ironically he was raised as on a dairy farm and wanted to prove the benefit of protein.

Wait I thought IGF-1 was insulin or something?

Bodybuilders inject themselves with it.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I really didn't intend nor expect this to become a debate about veganism, meat, and macronutrients. I was just looking for useful studies related to a hypothesis I've been toying with about protein restriction and life extension despite the many drawbacks of protein restriction... But, since you all have ventured to attack my own world view, I shall defend.

It's interesting how ideological and almost religious people get about diet and nutrition but it makes sense. For the health conscious it's more than just habit... It's a lifestyle choice central to our inner values.

a few brazil or walnuts or some coconut or avokado meat can give you a good hormonally induced feeling, that could be interpreted psychobiologically as satiation...

...this nice rewarding feeling occurs, because your body appreciates the extra safety it receives from something that is fattening.

Fat is not fattening. Not that I'd worry about it, personally I've never been overweight. As a matter of fact, fat in the absence of carbs and protein is almost never stored as body fat because the "store excess energy" signal is never received from insulin (whose release is stimulated by carbs and protein)...

i like to eat some fatty whole plant foods in the evening, not every day though. they harmonise nicely with rice meals. the mct in coconut meat can also give you a comfortable heat kick.

Interesting. I like to load on carbs in the evening because they can be very relaxing and help me get a good night's rest. To each their own....

but true satiation is the holistic feeling of running on full energy and being ready to tear out trees. in this state, eating is of zero interest to you. you become almost afraid of eating more.
I get that feeling when I've eaten a well rounded (and fatty) breakfast. The well rounded part is optional though and some VLC fanatics go overboard IMO... Ever heard of "bulletproof coffee"? I can't drink that because I don't want to lose weight. It may in part depend on whether your metabolism is appropriately fat adapted... I burn fat just as readily as I burn carbs, except of course in my brain and a few other places because I don't do ketosis.


larger amounts of fats in the absence of sufficient amounts of carbs can never achieve this high energy state, not even when you are already in ketosis. the body has a lot of glycogen storage, but is only happy to burn them without inhibition, if they are totally loaded. loading them takes impressive amounts of carbs, especially if you have muscles. i was on a low carb diet for ~2 years, i think about it in accordance with my experience.
Low carb dieting isn't my cup of tea but just FYI there are some really high-impact, high-performance athletes on very low carb diets. Check out MDA...

and larger amounts of fats from whole foods combined with sufficient amounts of carbs may still induce this high energy state, despite the fat, but all the fat will just go to bodyfat and doesn't contribute to the state.
Not really. While the insulin response from a high carb meal does cause fat to be stored, that's not the end of the story. I eat meals with lots of carbs and fat all the time and my n=1 results are clear: no fat stored. In the end, you won't store fat unless you have the right mix of stress hormones and excess energy.


if the body doesn't want to be fat, it will burn that fat in the evening, the night and in the early morning, by abstaining from giving us any appetite. in this phase we are tolerant of existing in a low energy fat burning mode, as long as we are passive.

however, if the body does want to be(come) fat, it will simply keep that ingested fat as body fat, and cause more appetite for carbs, once it needs more energy.

a body wants to be fat, when storage is interpreted as survival advantage. running fast (being lean) can also be interpreted as survival advantage. body intelligence interprets your subjective environment and experience, to figure out, which of those priorities is relevant.
Now you're getting it! While eating certain things can have an affect on fat storage, you won't get fat unless a whole host of requirements are met. America has gotten really good at creating the perfect fatass scenario, unfortunately.

i doubt that there is actual proof for the inflammatory effect of sane doses of omega 6 from uncooked whole plant foods. afaik it's all just correlation studies about processed oils and similar.

You're probably right about this. The signaling (inflammation vs antiinflammation) will probably function pretty well so long as you don't suffer from a deficiency in either n6 or n3. Then again, you have to define "sane" because most Americans eat loads of industrially processed seed oils. Even if you're a healthy whole foods vegan, you might eat too much in the form of whole nuts and seeds, and maybe some dressings and vegan oils... However, a high carb diet, particularly if you eat lots of wheat, beans, etc... can be pro-inflammatory.

My main concern with excess n6 is excess overall PUFA's which cause oxidative stress, possible hormone problems, and can cause or exacerbate systemic inflammation.

processed/isolated or heated oils are inflammatory per se, even omega 3 rich fish oils, even coconut oil, all of them.
Not quite this time. Close... Heating PUFA's can make them more inflammatory and generally "bad for you" but coconut oil is mostly SFA which does not easily oxidize and stands up well to high heat. MUFA's are only slightly more oxidizable than SFA's and so olive oil isn't terrible to cook with either.

i urge anyone who believes in fish oil capsules: open some capsules, taste the oil, keep it in your mouth for a while, taste it. and reconsider. you are what you eat.

We evolved to recognize putrified PUFA's from sources like fish oil. It stinks like nothing else and taste gross. However, putrid, highly oxidized omega 6 from oils like soy or corn oil tastes and smells almost normal. This, IMO, is just because we didn't evolve to eat those and so didn't evolve the hardware to recognize when they've gone bad. FWIW: I agree that fish oil supplementation is overrated. In the rare instance I do, it's from a carefully preserved batch in the back of my fridge.

say if you were hungry and then you ate nothing but cashew nuts, you'd have to eat so much cashews, that the few carbs in them amount to a nice meal, before you would receive an eating stop signal. brazil nuts on the other hand do not even turn you on, as they have no carb taste. you'd eat five of them, loose interest and continue being hungry, looking somewhere else for satiating carbs. small carb meals can sometimes appear to make you hungry, because they turn you on. this only happens, when your glycogen storage is very depleted, after eating the meal.

Eh, I avoid cashews for the most part. A staple in my diet is macadamia nuts though, which are almost pure fat. Again, my n=1 study suggests that this does quite the trick. As long as my glycogen stores aren't tapped out, my body doesn't send me carb craving signals when my energy requirements are met by some quality fats. When I do need carbs, I tend to reach for tubers or fruits as they're fairly benign, especially tubers. I would guess you eat grain, no? Dig a little deeper. You may want to rethink a diet with lots of nuts, grains and legumes. The phitates and other antinutrients and toxins make them questionable, plus did you ever notice... grain foods are ALL highly processed. With few exceptions, you can not eat grain without processing it. That should be a natural sign that these things aren't what we're made to be eating, if the science and digging isn't for you. But judging by your relatively well-read reply I would guess you're willing to dig a little deeper.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
And now for you, my good man... with all due respect:

On the internet, by groups that don't like his conclusions such as Weston Price primarily. It was peer reviewed research that has received nothing but praise among other researchers, AFAIK.

Yes, mostly other groups that don't like his conclusions. Who else would go out of their way to challenge them? I'll link a few good ones, but first one highlight:

The china study did a lot to show the harmful effects of casian, a milk protein, but that hardly suggests that whole food animal products in the context of a well rounded WF diet will cause anyone trouble.

The China Study actually showed that higher protein intake [even in the processed milk protein extract form used] appears protective against cancer. Only after the development of cancer does low protein (read starvation) diet appear protective, because the cancer needs protein to replicate.

While Campbell did some great studies and I respect the fundamentals of his work, for whatever reason when it came to his book he didn't fairly report all of his findings and managed to pry some odd conclusions from them. It seems Campbell was no stranger to cherrypicking and misrepresenting data to make a point. WAPF has its merits, though I don't agree completely with their apprach either. They have this nice critique related to the above right here if you're interested.


That's kindergarden ... the first thing you do as that type of researcher is to manage the confounding variables. Any researcher beyond undergraduate level knows this and knows how to do it.
I feel like this was just an attack on me for being younger and naturally a little more naive. I'm no statistician and didn't read his book but I have looked into the data (more interested in that than his conclusions anyway) and The China Study book does let confounding variables mix things up. Not to mention outright ignoring some data and reporting other data to make things look the way he wanted. I'll let the notorious Mrs. Minger tear it up for me rather than filling another page with examples. AFAIK nobody else has been quite so thorough in debunking the good old China Study...
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today 10:23 PM
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
2,026
---
Location
germany
plz consider reading the whole thing instead of replying to paragraphs one by one, as i can not say everything that matters at once, i'm like a painter, i go over details again and again.

>It's interesting how ideological and almost religious people get about diet and nutrition but it makes sense.

because it's about survival. when people are suffering left and right because of misinformation, it's appropriate to cover the topic in thorough manner. alzheimer is really no fun, being fat isn't either. being led on for years, by steroid pumping liars or corrupt authors, when you struggle with weight, isn't fun at all.

if mainstream science can't properly explain something as important as alzheimer or metabolic syndrome, then the doors for more speculative approaches will be open.

everyone needs a hypothesis, to experiment with. we can't just wait for them to figure it out. our own experiments take months and years, so the hypothesis becomes like religion.

i believe discussing health is more important or basic, than discussing many other topics, for better health would yield in better mental performance for all other topics. for instance, the wrong foods can take away your ability to remember dreams, which completely changes your understanding of the human condition and your philosophy and hence your ideas about politics. i have given up all political discussion. understanding the world or ruling is a futile endeavour for most of us.

since you do not believe, that your life depends on low carb, you may be relaxed enough, to
consider some arguments against low carb and low carb paleo. also, i don't even want to push VLC on you, since you don't have weight problems yourself, but anyone who wants to loose weight needs to consider every fattening factor (there are many). and much of this may still be relevant to any ideas of calory restriction for longevity.

you might want to consider veganism for health and longevity (see okinawa), but i can't argue all the science on this topic, i am not some ISTJ data swamp. ( nutritionfacts.org helps)

i can only deal in reasoning, plausibility. if everything impossible has been ruled out, the remaining theory may be on to something. (freely quoting a quote)

as i said, i fell for the faulty logic of the low carb and paleo paradigm a couple of years ago. i'm glad i have overcome it now. low carb kills, as i've noticed in the process, which lead to my change of mind. it didn't work for weight loss either, i hit a plateau (lower setpoint) after loosing 25kg of almost 40kg bodyfat, then appetite sky rocketed to move me back to higher setpoint.

fat can not completely fuel your muscles, during high activity, as not enough oxigen can be transported, especially, since fat sabotages blood's ability to handle oxigen. fat will probably only be burned in muscles, when most glycogen or glucose is already gone, by that time you are far away from being high energy and you may have hunger and would sooner eat more than exercise. during low activity, up to 50% of muscles energy can come from fat. 50% of low energy. not a lot. it serves endurance, when required. does nothing for feeling strong.

fat can not be burned in the brain either, so it has to be converted first (neoglucogenesis). this doesn't simply happen, it's an effort and the body only makes effort, when there is reason. so where does the signal to convert fat come from? from starvation. in the absence of starvation (or in the presence of carbs, as you would put it), fat is therefore one fattening factor.

eat as much percent of calories from fat, as you want to maintain bodyfat. 7% is cool for men, 20% is still acceptable for most.

paleo is really the biggest lie. fine, let's look at evolution, i'm a big fan of looking at evolution. humanity did evolve on fruits, then slowly moved on to starches. without abandoning fructose. "transcend and include". digesting animal 'products' has never been more than an altered state emergency mode. of course evolution attempts to conquer all means of survival, within reason. ketosis is starvation. i know the difference to ketoacidosis. i also know, that a body in ketosis is highly acidic. i know how it feels like to wake up with an acidic dry mouth every day, or how it becomes impossible to sleep, especially after active days, because stress hormones, which wake you up, are involved into activating or turbo boosting neoglucogenesis while your brain is starving. this is really so close to dying, you panic. not to mention how the fat will mechanically fuck up arteries long term or oxigen availability short term or how rancid (heated) fat causes instant states of painful mental distortion. those symptoms accumulate over time. they were absent or they seemed tolerable for like six months, then the struggle became obnoxious.

there is no evidence for the low carb theory to begin with, it only attempts to explain overweight, but overweight is already better explained (fat sabotages insulin reception + the body has a setpoint), so there is not even a need for a low carb theory, except for the meat industry, to justify itself. blaming it on insulin. perfect con.

if you think it through, low carb theory is broken. i would probably have to find my old notes from when i was discovering the holes and seeking explanations for my symptoms, to explain this is depth and completely. but why so complicated, let's just look at evidence.


if you believe that fat isn't fattening, which is understandable in proper context and i agree (the bodys setpoint logic considers multiple factors and decides), then you should not fall for believing that carbs make fat either. if something as rare in our original food as fat should still be defended, than something as common and basic and original as carbs deserves to be defended, especially from a paleo point of view.

i just say combining fat and and carbs is fattening, 50/50 is worst, i really doubt anyone stays lean eating mostly almond chocolate and pizza with extra cheese and olive oil, unless he has to run from predators all day every day.

if carbohydrates make fat, why did virtually nobody who grew up on fruit and starch based whole plant diets became fat? the exception is famines, they can always cause fat.

and why do okinawa people do even better than japanese people (who use more fat) and why are most low carb gurus still fat?

and those diet studies, that prove that violent calory restriction works slightly better in low carb mode are flawed thinking, because while true, ketosis is most effective fat burning, calory restriction can not produce lasting weight loss anyhow, it will never lower the setpoint and it was such a waste of time for myself, i wish i could time travel.

you have to eat for the body you want, for the maintenance of such a hypothetical body.

not against the body you have righ now, not for manipulation, this can only induce instability.

you want to be strong and lean, eat as if you had tons of muscles to nourish.

muscles depend on glycogen, they are almost made out of it and they concur with the brain for this glycogen/for blood sugar. everyone wants muscles, except for a body that always runs short on glycogen, this body can not afford muscles. in the absence of abundant energy for muscles, activity will lead to less muscles. many joggers have noticed it. broken muscles will be removed instead of fixed. unless you are running from predators and you body understands the priorities.

i did not say, that eating nothing but fat (and protein) must make you fat, it wouldn't, if you counted calories, only that it doesn't satiate completely and being unsatiated causes overeating, so it does make fat, in reality, but fat also makes fat, because you have to eat it with carbs, in reality, unless you want to die, and then it's fattening, because fatty blood gets in the way of handling carbs and in the way of oxigen and muscle effectiveness.

it doesn't always cause severe overweight, because of the setpoint, however I have not seen one 'butter on sour bread and meat and potato eating' old school person who doesn't have a moderate arnold schwarzenegger type of belly at age 50. notice, they are not running from predators nor hunting chicks. they are farmers or workaholics and the chicks may hunt them for money. they are highly active though.

fat intake correlates roughly with body fat, long term. i estimate that old school people eat about 25% fat. and these fuckers think they are eating low fat, that's the funny thing.

you know, my father always told me, don't eat fat, because he hates fat people.
and i was like, dude you eat butter and cheese. i never ate that shit. just nutella and peanuts in candy covers. he didn't tell me don't combine fat and carbs. that could have saved me. i didn't want to get fat. i wanted a sense of satiation, but try to find true low fat foods in a supermarket. i ate pasta with sugar and my father hated it.

>store excess energy" signal is never received from insulin

animal products cause plenty of insulin secretion.

besides insulin has many functions, without insulin, your brain and muscles can not take in energy. what matters is that brain and muscles are more sensitive to insulin or sugar intake opportunities than the fat is, so that they take in the energy, before fat cells can take it away. fat cells sabotage insulin sensitivity in muscles and in the brain. in the brain this causes dementia, diabetes type 3. the brain is starving, while you get fat, from eating fatty carbs. if you eat pure carbs, they go straight into your brain and muscles and they can take in thousands of calories. it's not impossible to get fat on excess carbs, when your setpoint is already higher, but you have to eat so much more calories.


>I like to load on carbs in the evening because they can be very relaxing and help me get a good night's rest. To each their own....

ripe bananas or dried dates are not relaxing, except in contrast, when you come from stressful fasting with neoglucogenesis involved, which is particularly stressful.

what can be somewhat sedating is cooked foods or high blood sugar or just a very full tummy.

one common cause of high blood sugar is mixing some fat into a high carb meal. only very little is fat is sufficient to that effect, at least for me.

i also eat carbs in the evening (you said 'to each their own' as if i had said something very different), i just add maybe 10 gram of coconut meat with my last meal, which does cause higher blood sugar, but not too high, yet.

a fatty breakfast should gives you high blood sugar.
perhaps comfortably high, compared to the rather low blood sugar before.

but try three ripe mangos on a sober tummy, one day.

fret not, coffee with oil won't cause uncontrolled weigh loss, only dementia.

>In the end, you won't store fat [...]

yeah, yeah, a body that really wants to stay lean for a reason will use time-windows to burn fat and create those time-windows by limiting appetite.

>but coconut oil is mostly SFA

MOSTLY. some products contain tranfats, that were, afaik, created especially to make the non heat resistant fraction more heat resistant.

olive oil is usually already rancid, when you buy it, even cold pressed.

c'mon. eat all olives and all coconut meat and all avocados you want.

but oil from bottles is for burning on a wick.

and if you had no more than two raw fish per months, i wouldn't even say something, as a vegan with systemic naturalistic perspective. i even ate some honey, last year. on cereal pops. good shit. highly processed empty calories though. probably fattening (because of poor satiation/calory ratio).

>However, putrid, highly oxidized omega 6 from oils like soy or corn oil tastes and smells almost normal.

ALMOST.

it'S good to remember, that not all bad things taste bad. refined (chemically bleached) sugar doesn't taste bad and we have not evolved to eat refined chemically bleached things. nor have we evolved to eat extracted fish oil. of course the industry goes to extra effort, when they want to sell a toxic product, that needs to be palatable. i think the important point is that fish oil does not taste like fish. fish can be halfway yummy, fish oil is ultra yuk.

taste processed coconut oil (not good), then taste virgin coconut oil (i have never tried it). taste many brands of olive oil (all i have tried were horrible). taste at room temperature, as cold masks the taste.

all foods should taste good, unless you are starving and have no choice.
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
Not sure what subforum to put this in...

Anyone know some good research that might elucidate the difference between and relationship between caloric restriction and protein restriction as a means to achieve greater health to an older age?

We all are probably aware that caloric restriction is proven to increase life span in a host of widely varied creatures. New research has come to light that protein restriction does the same and may actually be the reason caloric restriction works (less calories means less excess protein)... Has this been done with mammals or just bugs?

Other ways to extend life?

Most current research suggests that older men and women with more muscle mass life longer, healthier, more vibrant lives. It has to do with the hormones that having extra muscle gives. So, lifting weights, even a little, and then eating plenty of protein to recover is a fine way to go (I don't know if you're a vegetarian, but meat is definitely my preference).

Also, recent studies have shown that certain types of cholesterol gets metabolized as testosterone, especially if you're lifting weights.

I could provide links, if you wish.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
Links are always nice. I'm not vegan but I tend to eat only a little meat or fish each day

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
plz consider reading the whole thing instead of replying to paragraphs one by one, as i can not say everything that matters at once, i'm like a painter, i go over details again and again.


It's difficult to respond to such a long and multifaceted post as a whole. You made many different points...

I want to point out that I have no real attachment to meat and animal based foods from a habitual or ideological standpoint. I've had many vegetarian/vegan days just by happenstance. Let me explain some of my objections to veganism to see what you have to say about it. I'll also explain some of what I eat below...

In my research I have reached the conclusion that a few neolithic foods are particularly dangerous to our health. The top category is rally vast: processed foods. The more processed the worse with few exceptions. Next comes seeds (grains, legumes, and nuts) which, again with a few exceptions, aren't ideal human foods. Grains in particular. Ever notice how most grains are essentially inedible without extensive processing? And if you think whole wheat is healthy... OMG I don't know where to start. I'd start by pointing out that you can't buy real wheat anymore. It's all highly engineered hyperglutenous high-yeild dwarven wheat which is so, so not good for you. Last but certainly not least is PUFA's (especially omega 6). It's true that getting a little too much n6 is probably harmless but when it's on the scale of 25-40 times what you need (common for Americans), especially with inadequate EPA and DHA (dietary plant-based omega 3 must be converted to EPA and DHA in our bodies which is extremely inefficient) it can be very inflammatory. Even if you don't accept that, you must realize PUFA's lead to considerable oxidative stress. So, if your salad dressing contains seed oils, it's probably a mega-dose of omega 6. Even canola oil, with a lot of omega 3, isn't good for you because it's still almost pure PUFA, the n3 is actually MORE easily oxidized, and the n3 comes in the wrong form to balance all the n6...

So how do I eat healthy?

I'll start with what sounds like a system shock but is actually very light and refreshing:

This morning I had 5 macadamia nuts, 8 almonds, 4 egg yolks, 32g of grass fed sour cream, 24g liver pate, 4 Tbsp salsa... This was a very small meal (filled the bottom of a small bowl) but is incredibly satiating and DELICIOUS. I do not feel full, just amazingly satisfied. It's a strangely refreshing meal, considering it was about 41 grams of fat and 19 grams of protein and almost no carbs and little moisture. It was packed full of micronutrients and energy and since my glycogen reserves are packed from last night, and I'm spending time at a desk, there's no need for extra carbs.

With this meal I've met more than 50% of my nutritional needs for the day on 20% of my caloric requirements. Lots of B vitamins, vitamin A and D, some E, and a ton of minerals (half my iron needs, a bunch of calcium, almost all the selenium I need, 60% phosphorus, etc...)

Last night I ate an apple, an orange, an Asian pear, some assorted boiled veggies, grass-fed cream cheese (great topping for Asian Pear), and some goat's milk Kefir. Earlier in the day I also ate a mango, a banana, and another orange. That was a very fruity day. Also a lot of sweet potato and plantain chips. Carbed it up... Why would I wake up and eat more carbs? That just makes me sleepy. Right now I'm riding a nice even plateau of energy and focus that will last most of the day on just one small meal. At lunch I won't feel hungry but I'll probably take a quick jog and slice up the mango and kiwi I brought. I'll proceed to top it with about a Tbsp of grass-fed heavy cream. Since it's heavy cream it has very little milk protein and since it's from grass-fed cows it's choc full of micronutrients. That will ensure my glycogen reserves are topped out for my jog home after work.

Eating this way I meet or exceed all my nutritional requirements without overloading my body with toxins found in the above mentioned bad-for-you's...


---------------

How can you eat a vegan diet without loading up on seeds, processed foods, and inappropriate PUFA's?? How is what I ate harmful for my body? I'm sincerely hoping someone can objectively poke some holes in my approach. If I'm actually doing something bad for me, I want to know. I'm feeling great though. And apparently I'm radiant with health. Several people have pointed out that I look incredibly healthy these days, that I've been glowing with health and exuberance. When I explain how I'm eating, they look confused.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
since you do not believe, that your life depends on low carb, you may be relaxed enough, to consider some arguments against low carb and low carb paleo.

I'm also curious why people tend to create this dichotomy between low carb and high carb eating plans. What's wrong with eating moderate carb, moderate fat, and low protein as I'm doing?

you might want to consider veganism for health and longevity (see okinawa), but i can't argue all the science on this topic, i am not some ISTJ data swamp. ( nutritionfacts.org helps)

I feel that about being a data swamp. I see a lot of those ST types on www.paleohacks.com and my god I can't keep up with all their facts and data.

I also want to point out that Okinawans are not vegans, nor vegetarian. However, they eat a lot of veggies and tubers. I do eat a lot of veggies and tubers... In fact, I just made some awesome sweet potato curry with none other than those notoriously purple-fleshed Okinawan sweet potatoes. Okinawans don't eat as much meat as I do, but I don't eat much meat either. It's a rare treat. Probably 4-8 servings per week of meat, usually tending to the lower end.
 

nanook

a scream in a vortex
Local time
Today 10:23 PM
Joined
Aug 16, 2011
Messages
2,026
---
Location
germany
>What's wrong with eating moderate carb, moderate fat, and low protein as I'm doing?

logic :o

you can't 'moderate' all three.

and 50/50 carb/fat is the worst combination, if we are talking about a single meal.

eating a coconut and three fish on one day in one month would clog your arteries and cause some inflammation, but you would have time to recover.

statistics say that people get problems when their fat goes as high or higher than (i don't know exactly, where the mark is) about 20% and that people are excellent and can even reach ages like 120 when their fat is lower, 10% or less. those are not daily ratios, but totals.

it's more logical to look at what you need and eat it, instead of looking at what you could get away with. the latter strategy would be pleasure based thinking. but the pleasure seeking problem arises from addictions and from compensating for chronic lack of nutrients (i grew up with insane addiction to sweets and junk). when plenty of fruit is eaten, the pleasure problem will be forgotten.

you may need a little fat for hormones and what not, plants like beans and omega 3 rich greens should already have enough, but if you are insecure add some seeds and nuts or avokado or coconut. it's unlikely that you need extra protein, but if so, make the bean portions larger or more frequent. now you may have 500kcal. you also need vitamins and energy. add fruit or potatoes or rice until you have enough of both. maybe add vegetables for extra micronutrient. done.

loading up glycogen stores with slowly digesting cooked carbs in the evening and skipping breakfast is a common strategy, i do it too. i know, the mind feels very awake in the morning, i often find myself working while fasting and getting really hungry and ignoring it. it's probably not ideal for weight loss to eat most carbs in the evening though, as the night is the only time window, when body fat is really lost. but it sort of works for lean roman warriors who march all day. i really doubt that raw carbs from ripe fruit make you tired. (unripe fruit can make tired). if you avoid cooked carbs in the morning, because they are tiring, you don't have to replace them with fat, you could replace them with raw carbs. you may find that your office performance is even better or perhaps more friendly, when your blood sugar is no longer at night level or when you don't need to rely on stress hormones, to raise your blood sugar a bit to a day level.

also, carbs make especially tired, when they are dry and you are too. because they can't be digested like that. carbs float on water, so to say. first thing in the morning should be drinking 1 liter of water, anyhow. have a proper glass of water with every carb meal. that's essential.

the only reason i go 100% vegan is that i have the feeling, that the body is reacting to complete absence of problematic food with giving up odd adaptive process layers that are suppressive somehow. all those denatured proteins fucking with the immune system. i might even eat some meat or fish some day, maybe when going out, but i will absolutely stay away from milk. i had some dark chocolate lately and it has really fucked my blood sugar up like crazy (i know, cocoa is also involved) and caused a clogged nose and i was swollen the next day. this swelling is the natural reaction to pasteurized milk and it will be suppressed, when you have milk daily or weekly. eggs are probably the same.

if i remember correctly, okinawa people have virtually no dairy. they have significantly less meat and fish than their neighbours. i am too demented to remember if the neighbors in question are japanese or chinese. other aspects of the diet are very similar. life expectancy is hugely different.

have a look at this
http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-animal-protein-restriction/
http://nutritionfacts.org/index.php?s=okinawa

legumes are not ideal and should be limited, but history has shown, that with proper preparation, no real problem arises. soaking and perhaps even sprouting. sprouted mung beans taste okay, raw.

personally i reject grains because of opioids, because i can't have addictive crap in my diet. and my sister claims to have stomach issues with gluten, so i might as well follow her in that. i also had leaky gut and processed gluten is the most likely offender, but i have no proof. i'm pretty sure the only negative thing about rice is it's lack of vitamins and perhaps pollution from dirty ground in china or whatnot. potatoes have vitamins but may have some toxins. somehow my body just likes rice more than potatoes. sweet potato and quinoa are really cool foods, unfortunately expensive. i look at those foods as back up foods. bananas are first choice but it's good to have something that can be stored longer.

i consume neither oil nor salt.
only trace amounts of pepper or chilly (it's also involved in leaky gut).
i use some tumeric, medicinally.

but you see, when i am eating 20 brazil nuts, 10 walnuts and a spoon full of sunflower seeds per week (not at once) i am not going to count the omega 6 involved and eat so much flaxseed, that i make up for it with omega 3. i haven't seen any evidence for problems occurring from consuming so little fat.

i can only tell you that i had psychotic nightmares from 250ml of ultraheated (long lasting) cream, in my low carb days, probably because of those proteins that break into halves and one half turns into a drug. it appears that the ultraheating made it worse, compared to say cheese, which is also psychotropic, but never gave me a nightmare with violent egoloss, like someone smashes your consciousness into a meat grinder, like a psychedelic trip.

and the calcium from dairy? people who consume dairy have osteoporois, dairy has been shown to deplete the body of more calcium than it gives. people who don't consume dairy have lower calcium needs. vegans populations don't suffer from a lack of calcium and don't bulk up on nuts either. did you assume i HAVE to eat tons of nuts for calcium?

and about those nutrient loaded organ meats: i will only say, that inuit don't get very old and are not healthy at all and do have osteoporosis.

to summarize my typical shopping list:

bananas, dates, grapes, apples, mangos, raisins, melon, oranges/clementines

(and i would eat any fruit, but i can't afford all of them, or find them in good quality, etc)

rice, potatoes, sweet potatoes, quinoa, beans, (if i can't afford enough fruit to get all of my calories from fruit)

any vegetables that i know how to handle, but no onion or garlic or peppers.

brazilnuts, walnuts, coconut meat. because i can limit those.

it's difficult not to eat a whole bag of cashews or roasted pistachios or roasted almonds - raw almonds give me allergy). so i don't buy these.

i eat 80 10 10 or actually more like 85 10 5. (carb/protein/fat/percentage)

if i had more money, i would eat better and more vegetables and even more fruit.

bad things i consume occasionally: fruit juice. rice waffles. occasionally brown sugar. (the chemical bleaching in white sugar appears to be immune system reducing factor, in my experience - i never woke up with a cold or herpes, after consuming a ton or brown sugar, but it happens for white sugar. still, brown sugar is bad for fat loss).

i avoid some things, because i react to them. i don't consume soy, peanut or buckwheat or hazelnut. vegetables that have minty oils are also taboo for me.


i'm a fan of the gabriel method, even though john gabriel doesn't recommend veganism, he understands more about weight-loss, than anyone else. he recommends live foods. which is a logical contradiction to not going vegan. cooked eggs are in no way live food and he likes them for breakfast too. however he eats lots of live food, much more salads than i can afford and so he looks healthier. that healthy glow comes from how much money people can invest in organic produce. and he can afford raw fresh self made wheat grass. fucking millionaire. i can't even afford organic and that makes a huge difference. a few animal products do not ruin the glow that comes from live food and any heart disease or clogged arteries are invisible. so is dementia.
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
The youngest looking guys I've met (often 10years younger than what I thought) were cyclists. And not the hardcore logo dipped spandex wearing ones either. Well they might have had some spandex on.

Yeah, I know younger looking doesn't mean healthier, but it usually does.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
The youngest looking guys I've met (often 10years younger than what I thought) were cyclists. And not the hardcore logo dipped spandex wearing ones either. Well they might have had some spandex on.

Yeah, I know younger looking doesn't mean healthier, but it usually does.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Chronic cardio may actually be pretty harmful long term... Though real conclusions on the topic are still up in the air.
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
Chronic cardio may actually be pretty harmful long term... Though real conclusions on the topic are still up in the air.


I hear ya, what isn't. Looking for the right regime is a bit like an alchemist's journey.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I’m actually practicing what seems like a pretty radical diet but aside from higher fat levels, most people would agree it’s quite healthy. However, if I’m doing harm to my body I certainly want to know. Likewise, if someone else (like @nanook, possibly) is harming or at least not helping their health goals, I want to inform. What I’m saying is I value this exchange and seek to alter my own perspective just as much as I seek to alter yours.

>What's wrong with eating moderate carb, moderate fat, and low protein as I'm doing?

logic :o
How so? I still don't see the logic...

you can't 'moderate' all three.
I mainly just moderate protein. To an extent I moderate carbs but I don't have to think much about it because the carb/fat ratio I use is just what my body asks for...

and 50/50 carb/fat is the worst combination, if we are talking about a single meal.
Although I'm not sure how this relates to aging, you may have a case here. I might even stop pouring heavy cream on my fruit at lunch... When watching your weight you're almost certainly right. Flooding your serum simultaneously with free lipids and insulin will send a bunch of it right into your adipose tissue...

eating a coconut and three fish on one day in one month would clog your arteries and cause some inflammation, but you would have time to recover.
Fat does not clog your arteries. Period. In particular, the types of fat in coconut oil and fish oils have the opposite effect. In fact, high-carb diets have been more strongly associated with inflammation and CVD than fat! Read this if you're still confused...

statistics say that people get problems when their fat goes as high or higher than (i don't know exactly, where the mark is) about 20% and that people are excellent and can even reach ages like 120 when their fat is lower, 10% or less. those are not daily ratios, but totals.

I'm no stickler for citing sources but I gotta draw the line somewhere. A claim with such far-reaching implications must be backed up. Also, I encourage you to back away from population level statistics relating diet/lifestyle with longevity. Healthy, disease free, exceptionally old people are the outliers. They're the exception to the statistics. I want to know the difference, for instance, between the diet/lifestyle of an Okinawan who lives to 100 without any traditional "diseases of aging" and one who dies at 95 with Alzheimer's. The 95 year old had a good go but so did most of the Okinawans. We already know they enjoy a low-stress, physically active, socially integrated lifestyle and include lots of veggies every day. Nobody rational will argue that those aren't life extending practices. That doesn't mean the typical Okinawan macro ratios have some magic to them. Average population level life span isn't nearly as interesting as an extraordinary individual, to me at least.

Here are some nicely curated centenarian stories... The outliers. The exceptions. Luckily for these people, they didn't grow up with the food pyramid...


it's more logical to look at what you need and eat it, instead of looking at what you could get away with

We agree here. I think we're just coming at it from different perspectives. We "need" to eat adequate protein and micronutrients and calories. It's likely that whether those calories come from fat or carbs has only a small impact on longevity; I also don't see why there need be a dichotomy between low fat and low carb diets. Why do either? Low protein is the only rational one I can see.

And I agree that legumes, in moderation and properly prepared (soakin/sprouting/slow cooking) can be part of a balanced diet. I simply don’t have a place for them in my diet since I get all that nutrition from meat and veggies, why take the time to soak a bucket of beans when I could reach for a nice salad with a couple ounces of steak?

I was wondering about your stance on grains and I’m glad to hear that you’re enlightened enough to know that no matter the propaganda you hear, wheat is a bad food choice, especially if you’ve had leaky gut issues (I may have too but never had any proof). If you are going to get a lot of your calories from carbs, I agree rice is a good way to go. I get most of my carbs from sweet potatoes and fruit but that amounts to 140-300 grams per day, usually hovering close to 170. I don’t think I could stomach enough sweet potato to get the majority of my calories from it… However, if you look in the right places you can get them for about $0.50 per pound, or at least under $1…

I figure you’re getting most of your calcium from fruits and veggies, maybe a bit from nuts. I mostly consume only high-fat (low protein) dairy products with the exception of whole milk yogurt and kefir, which are still relatively high-fat, low-protein… I probably get ¼ of my calcium from dairy. Raw dairy can be an alternative but it’s expensive and doesn’t last long in the refrigerator.

and about those nutrient loaded organ meats: i will only say, that inuit don't get very old and are not healthy at all and do have osteoporosis.
The Inuit live in extremely harsh conditions and consume huge amounts of calories daily just to stay alive and maintain homeostasis... and they eat a lot of protein.

raw almonds give me allergy). so i don't buy these
The only way I eat almonds is after soaking them and peeling the skin. After soaking, it’s easy to pop them out of the skin with a well-placed squeeze. Try this. It might eliminate the reaction, might not…

You do avoid a lot of things you should (soy, peanut, wheat, etc…) to me, brazilnuts are dangerous because of how much n6 they have. I usually eat 2-4 per week just for the selenium though.

To respond to your closing I’ll reiterate: animal products and/or fat do NOT cause heart disease, clogged arteries, or dementia. That’s a fallacy. Prove me wrong. Or at least open your mind to the other perspective...

From your links, this http://nutritionfacts.org/video/caloric-restriction-vs-animal-protein-restriction/ was interesting. Best scientific anti-meat argument I’ve seen… Congrats in inching me towards considering less/no animal meats (though I'd still eat their fat).
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I hear ya, what isn't. Looking for the right regime is a bit like an alchemist's journey.

HAH! I totally agree. And since this thread hasn't really touched on the topic I created it for, I'll try making one about your alchemist's journey...
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
I’m actually practicing what seems like a pretty radical diet but aside from higher fat levels, most people would agree it’s quite healthy.


I'll admit I haven't read much of this. Are you doing the Bullet Proof diet with lots of good olive oil an lots of grassfed butter?

If so, I LOVE this diet. I'm skinnier, ectomorph and have craved fats all my life, even though people say it's bad, mmmmkay.

But I've given in, and feel fantastic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I'll admit I haven't read much of this. Are you doing the Bullet Proof diet with lots of good olive oil an lots of grassfed butter?

If so, I LOVE this diet. I'm skinnier, ectomorph and have craved fats all my life, even though people say it's bad, mmmmkay.

But I've given in, and feel fantastic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not bulletproof, though I have looked into the exec's stuff and he seems pretty legit. I'm just not a fan of drinking straight up oils and hyperrestrictive diets... I eat a lot more carbs than that.

I'm an ectomorph too. I've always craved fats and for a while I started to give into the hype and think I should avoid it, like i'm harming myself... But even before I started my current regimen I had concluded that I just felt better when I didn't avoid fat.

I'm practicing something more akin to the Perfect Health Diet by the Jaminets, though I have my own take on it... Definitely includes lots of grass fed butter and olive oil though.
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
Not bulletproof, though I have looked into the exec's stuff and he seems pretty legit. I'm just not a fan of drinking straight up oils and hyperrestrictive diets... I eat a lot more carbs than that.



I'm an ectomorph too. I've always craved fats and for a while I started to give into the hype and think I should avoid it, like i'm harming myself... But even before I started my current regimen I had concluded that I just felt better when I didn't avoid fat.



I'm practicing something more akin to the Perfect Health Diet by the Jaminets, though I have my own take on it... Definitely includes lots of grass fed butter and olive oil though.


I eat a hella lot more carbs too. Most diets fail to mention things like Dave Asprey is an Endomorph that couldn't for the life of him, lose weight, until he conditioned his body to burn fat (ketosis). (well he does mention it, but prescribes the diet like it's for everyone. I hate that shit, even though he does have some good stuff).

There's really VERY few diets tailored to ectomorphs. Though Tim Ferris does a pretty good job in The 4 hour body. Tho you have to wade through an almost encyclopedic mountain of knowledge. Mostly because I really do think he tries to cater to many different body types, which is RARE.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

PhoenixRising

nyctophiliac
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Jun 29, 2012
Messages
723
---
Haven't done a whole lot of research on this topic, but here is one of the more comprehensive papers I've found on it so far: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/

Recent studies do suggest that calorie restriction alone doesn't decrease IGF-1 concentrations in humans. It takes protein restriction, but not to the point where the muscular system (especially the heart) atrophy. From what I've read, a low level of protein is recommended, between .7 and .8 grams per kg of bodyweight per day.

As far as I understand, IGF-1 is a type of growth inducer that increases the rate of cellular division, as well as the rate of metabolism in cells. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
Haven't done a whole lot of research on this topic, but here is one of the more comprehensive papers I've found on it so far: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2673798/

Recent studies do suggest that calorie restriction alone doesn't decrease IGF-1 concentrations in humans. It takes protein restriction, but not to the point where the muscular system (especially the heart) atrophy. From what I've read, a low level of protein is recommended, between .7 and .8 grams per kg of bodyweight per day.

As far as I understand, IGF-1 is a type of growth inducer that increases the rate of cellular division, as well as the rate of metabolism in cells. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insulin-like_growth_factor_1

Great link BTW forgot to thank you!
 

The Gopher

President
Local time
Tomorrow 8:23 AM
Joined
Aug 26, 2010
Messages
4,674
---
After kinda reading this thread I feel there needs to be an idiots guide. I know nothing on this topic.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Tomorrow 8:23 AM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
---
Location
Yes
Other ways to extend life?

Grow/raise your own food. It's better for you in every way and will help to promote longer life.

Eat more grains.

Eat less carnitine.

Increase your omega 3 and 6 intake.

Exercise every day.

Be happy.

Move out of the city (preferably next door to a rural hospital).

Keep your brain active into your elderly days.

...Its all pretty simple stuff...
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
After kinda reading this thread I feel there needs to be an idiots guide. I know nothing on this topic.

I think we're getting close the point where that will be possible. As you can see though reading this thread, there are some seriously conflicting points of view right now. There are a few things most of us agree on: JERT for instance. Just Eat Real Food. That means no processed foods... Beyond those few points of agreement though we're left to make our own opinions. Without becoming quasi-expert you can't make sound decisions; you can only follow someone's lead.

There are certainly professionals in the field (i.e. "nutritionists") who "know more" than me, but quite likely have it all wrong. The trouble is that we've endured just over 50 years of malignant misinformation as big agra, big pharma and other interest groups influence the messages sent to the public for their own economic benefit. A majority of well-funded studies were funded by these very interest groups and, surprisingly enough, reached conclusions that were in those groups' best interest (i.e. "wheat is good for you").

At this point there are a few "idiot's guides" available but you'll have to pick your poison. Are you going to go high-carb vegan? Are you going low-carb paleo? Gonna do the 40 40 20 diet? Mediterranean? They all have their strong points and weak points.

Here's one simple and oft-overlooked practice: circadian entrainment. Simply getting your sleep cycle in sync with the sun and seasons may have dramatic effects on health and longevity.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
Here is a great example:

Grow/raise your own food. It's better for you in every way and will help to promote longer life.
This is spot on. Not only is the food you grow usually more nutritious but working in the garden is, itself, a sound life extension technique...

Eat more grains.
Pretty sure you're WAAAYY off here. Are you aware of just how much evidence there is against this? This is one of those messages we've been sent by big agra. Grain is one of the most profitable, reliable crops to grow and they want you to believe it's healthy. Try to find some studies both in support of this position and opposing it. Compare them. Compare their funding sources and methods as well as their conclusions.

Eat less carnitine.
That's interesting. I'll have to look into it. One component of carnitine is methionine which some studies show to shorten lifespan by increasing ageing-related bio-signals. Then again eating some extra glycine might counter the effects.

However, a quick Google for "carnitine longevity" seems to paint the opposite picture, I'll have to read this and this in more detail later...

Increase your omega 3 and 6 intake.
Another common misperception resulting from corporate efforts to push industrial seed oils (corn oil, sunflower oil, sawflower oil, canola oil, soybean oil, etc...) While both n3 and n6 are essential fatty acids, the average american gets something like 15-20x too much n6 and is terribly deficient in n3. Worse, the type of n3 provided by plant foods shows little efficacy, meaning you need to get it from sea food and grass fed ruminants instead.

Exercise every day.
And this one is spot on again. So many mixed messages huh? But... you must practice discretion. Too much exercise, or the wrong kind, can be detrimental to maximal life span.

I like the simple way it's been put by a few experts: "move frequently at a slow pace" and "lift heavy things" and occationally get your heart rate up with high intensity exercise. Maybe 2-4x/week for 20-40 minutes at most, though less may be just as good.

Be happy.
This one is also spot on. Some pretty convincing observational studies have shown that an optimistic predisposition is associated with extreme longevity. For instance, The Georgea Centenarian Study...

Move out of the city (preferably next door to a rural hospital).
Can't argue with this, though I haven't seen any compelling evidence for or against it I'd just like to think it's true.

Keep your brain active into your elderly days.
Again, spot on.

...Its all pretty simple stuff...
As you will learn if you delve deeper into it, this is definitely not the case. At least not yet. Hopefully within the next few years overall patterns will emerge that simplify the process of functional life extension, at least moderate life extension. Extreme life extension though will always require a certain level of rigor.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Tomorrow 8:23 AM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
---
Location
Yes
Pretty sure you're WAAAYY off here. Are you aware of just how much evidence there is against this? This is one of those messages we've been sent by big agra. Grain is one of the most profitable, reliable crops to grow and they want you to believe it's healthy. Try to find some studies both in support of this position and opposing it. Compare them. Compare their funding sources and methods as well as their conclusions.
I should have specified - I was referring to grains that humans ate pre-domestication. I'm not an expert, but if memory serves correct, those wild grains are great for extending life. Not the mass produced ones. (Or the mass produced anything for that matter)

But hey, barley was one of the catalysts for the development of human civilisation, so it can't be all bad, right? :p

Another common misperception resulting from corporate efforts to push industrial seed oils (corn oil, sunflower oil, sawflower oil, canola oil, soybean oil, etc...) While both n3 and n6 are essential fatty acids, the average american gets something like 15-20x too much n6 and is terribly deficient in n3. Worse, the type of n3 provided by plant foods shows little efficacy, meaning you need to get it from sea food and grass fed ruminants instead.
I've been presented with conflicting information on this one. Some reputable sources say we have too much omega 6 - other reputable sources say we need more of both. Either way, we all could do with some more omega 3.
Hm, thats the first I've heard of little efficacy from plant foods - might look into that one.
Anyway, Dr. Happy (not a doctor) advises to just take a fish oil capsule every day and you'll be right, I say. (here's a fun fact - you know how you smell fish and if it smells like the sea, its fresh, if it smells like fish, it isnt - yeah well apparently* the same criteria applies for comparing different brands of fish oil capsules)
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
Fish oil capsules are a good stop-gap but omega 3 is a HUFA and is highly susceptible to oxidation. Depending on the brand and processing it goes though, some capsules come already ravaged by oxidation. Others are better but must be refrigerated to slow down their inevitable oxidation on the shelf.

My favorite go-to sources are sardines and wild-cought canned salmon, though fresh fish is best. Absorbtion may be poor in supplement form as well, but it's certainly better than nothing.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Tomorrow 8:23 AM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
---
Location
Yes
I managed to get really high quality ones. They're in the fridge. I buy them from my doctor.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
What's the brand? I do keep some in my fridge for when I feel my dietary supply is insufficient...
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Tomorrow 8:23 AM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
---
Location
Yes
I think it's bioceuticals or something.
 

TBerg

fallen angel who hasn't earned his wings
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Oct 8, 2013
Messages
2,453
---
Separately Dr. T. Colin Campbell did extensive epidemiological research into the relationship between caloric consumption and health/lifespan (c.f. The China Study). That research conclusively showed a relationship between lowering protein consumption and longevity. Ironically he was raised as on a dairy farm and wanted to prove the benefit of protein.

I thought the research eventually landed upon animal protein as the prime suspect, as ruling protein out of the entire diet would mean not even getting the protein from vegetables. The first suspect was specifically a dairy protein, which caused liver cancer, and then the general increase in animal consumption correlating with affluent disease (cancer, heart disease, diabetes) increase in China. Don't make me give up my baked beans, now!
 

Architect

Professional INTP
Local time
Today 2:23 PM
Joined
Dec 25, 2010
Messages
6,691
---
I thought the research eventually landed upon animal protein as the prime suspect, as ruling protein out of the entire diet would mean not even getting the protein from vegetables. The first suspect was specifically a dairy protein, which caused liver cancer, and then the general increase in animal consumption correlating with affluent disease (cancer, heart disease, diabetes) increase in China. Don't make me give up my baked beans, now!


Yes of course, it's all in the book. Higher amounts of plant protein also led to higher rates of cancerous cells, but at a much lower overall rate. You can't avoid protein and you shouldn't, just avoid the extremely high amounts in animal foods.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I've been digging pretty deeply into this lately and the evidence just keeps stacking up. While the balance of amino acids appears to have significant influence on longevity and the diseases of aging, the source (animal vs vegetable) is probably inconsequential. You might think I'm a meat-munching paleo fanatic but I actually eat very little meat. I just think it has been inappropriately demonized and that aside from ethical concerns, animal-derived foods are an important part of a well-optimized human diet. Imagine all the phytonutrient-packed fruits and veggies you could fit into your diet if you ate fewer grains, nuts and legumes (vegan protein staples). Replace all that protein with one small piece of fish or steak...

Better yet, eat a good gelatinous soup or stew. Make chicken feet soup even. Muscle meat is perhaps the LEAST important animal-derrived food, though it's got its plusses. Consider munching on some pork skin cracklins or making a good hearty jello from beef gelatin. Don't forget organs. Liver is the most important one. Eat the animal, not just the muscles!

I'll offer some light reading for anyone interested in digging half as deep as I have...

Glycine supplementation has been shown to have similar effects to methenoine restriction (methenoine is prominant in muscle meat) but without the side effects (retarded growth). I wish I could see the rest of the study...

This one is mostly about mitochondria... It highlights the importance of ALA (Lypoic Acid) found mainly in red meat, especially organs such as liver. You can get it from sources like broccoli but the bioavailability is not nearly as good. It's an amazing multifunctional antioxidant and works in both fat- and water-soluable tissues. It also helps regenerate the antioxidant properties of vitamins C and E after they have been "spent"... L-carnitine is also great for the brain and mitochondria and while I'm not convinced young people should be getting lots of it; it's definitely helpful for those already suffering from degenerative diseases. CoQ10 is also very important and while it's primarily synthesized in the body, dietary consumption has shown some amazing results. Then there's Carnosine which is a pretty age-defying substance.

I like Ray Peat. His open-minded, holistic wisdom combined with scientific scrutiny and a certain sharpness and mental acuity gives him quite the edge in understanding what the body needs. He offers a great, holistic perspective. I don't agree with everything he says, but he's got a lot of good info out there. This article highlights the importance of gelatin as a key source of Glycine and Alanine while avoiding all the excessive cystine + tryptophan (antithyroid) and leucene and methenoine (generally pro-aging) but also goes off on some interesting tangents.

The WAPF is also a great source of holistic nutritional and lifestyle info... This is a good synthesis of the importance and interdependence of some key micronutrients: Vitamins K, D, A, B vitamins, Choline, Magnesium, etc...
 

digitalbum

ENTP
Local time
Today 3:23 PM
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
259
---
I've been digging pretty deeply into this lately and the evidence just keeps stacking up. While the balance of amino acids appears to have significant influence on longevity and the diseases of aging, the source (animal vs vegetable) is probably inconsequential. You might think I'm a meat-munching paleo fanatic but I actually eat very little meat. I just think it has been inappropriately demonized and that aside from ethical concerns, animal-derived foods are an important part of a well-optimized human diet. Imagine all the phytonutrient-packed fruits and veggies you could fit into your diet if you ate fewer grains, nuts and legumes (vegan protein staples). Replace all that protein with one small piece of fish or steak...

Better yet, eat a good gelatinous soup or stew. Make chicken feet soup even. Muscle meat is perhaps the LEAST important animal-derrived food, though it's got its plusses. Consider munching on some pork skin cracklins or making a good hearty jello from beef gelatin. Don't forget organs. Liver is the most important one. Eat the animal, not just the muscles!

I'll offer some light reading for anyone interested in digging half as deep as I have...

Glycine supplementation has been shown to have similar effects to methenoine restriction (methenoine is prominant in muscle meat) but without the side effects (retarded growth). I wish I could see the rest of the study...

This one is mostly about mitochondria... It highlights the importance of ALA (Lypoic Acid) found mainly in red meat, especially organs such as liver. You can get it from sources like broccoli but the bioavailability is not nearly as good. It's an amazing multifunctional antioxidant and works in both fat- and water-soluable tissues. It also helps regenerate the antioxidant properties of vitamins C and E after they have been "spent"... L-carnitine is also great for the brain and mitochondria and while I'm not convinced young people should be getting lots of it; it's definitely helpful for those already suffering from degenerative diseases. CoQ10 is also very important and while it's primarily synthesized in the body, dietary consumption has shown some amazing results. Then there's Carnosine which is a pretty age-defying substance.

I like Ray Peat. His open-minded, holistic wisdom combined with scientific scrutiny and a certain sharpness and mental acuity gives him quite the edge in understanding what the body needs. He offers a great, holistic perspective. I don't agree with everything he says, but he's got a lot of good info out there. This article highlights the importance of gelatin as a key source of Glycine and Alanine while avoiding all the excessive cystine + tryptophan (antithyroid) and leucene and methenoine (generally pro-aging) but also goes off on some interesting tangents.

The WAPF is also a great source of holistic nutritional and lifestyle info... This is a good synthesis of the importance and interdependence of some key micronutrients: Vitamins K, D, A, B vitamins, Choline, Magnesium, etc...

I understand you're in like a research collecting phase or something. But like nike said, eventually, ya gotta just Do It.

Just for me, I find that I just pick and exercise what I enjoy first, then kinda monitor my intuition about nutrition, on top of some research.

So there's this food allergy test that tests for like 200 foods or something for like 400 bucks (bit pricey) but it was worth it for me.

It was years ago, and they say allergies can change but here's my results.
Red: avoid for at least 6 months
Orange: avoid for 3 months
Yellow: 2-3 days in between consuming these
Green: every day, if you wish

klKlBKu.png

3Nkh98M.png


It's called https://www.alcat.com/

Some in the science community, especially allergen doctors are suspicious, but I was REALLY strict with this diet and felt like 10 times better. But the biggest changes were taking out wheat, and a few others.

So even though I still stay away from gluten when I can, if I'm training or working out harder, I find I can eat just about anything. But I lean towards meat if I'm lifting, and carbs when aerobic, go figure.
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I understand you're in like a research collecting phase or something. But like nike said, eventually, ya gotta just Do It.

Just for me, I find that I just pick and exercise what I enjoy first, then kinda monitor my intuition about nutrition, on top of some research.

So there's this food allergy test that tests for like 200 foods or something for like 400 bucks (bit pricey) but it was worth it for me.
It was years ago, and they say allergies can change but here's my results.
Red: avoid for at least 6 months
Orange: avoid for 3 months
Yellow: 2-3 days in between consuming these
Green: every day, if you wish

klKlBKu.png

3Nkh98M.png


It's called https://www.alcat.com/
Some in the science community, especially allergen doctors are suspicious, but I was REALLY strict with this diet and felt like 10 times better. But the biggest changes were taking out wheat, and a few others.

So even though I still stay away from gluten when I can, if I'm training or working out harder, I find I can eat just about anything. But I lean towards meat if I'm lifting, and carbs when aerobic, go figure.

That's really interesting. I'll have to look into getting that done... $400 seems steep but yeah, knowledge is power.

I think almost everyone should cut out wheat. It's not so much "wheat" that's bad. It's the highly engineered, dwarven, hyperglutinous, high-yield pseudo-wheat they're growing these days. This is the stuff you get pretty much anywhere "wheat" is listed. It's not, in a technical sense, "wheat" at all. I can't believe what our agricultural industry has come to.
 

Pfness

Member
Local time
Tomorrow 4:23 AM
Joined
Jul 14, 2013
Messages
46
---
I've cut out all wheat, sugar, dairy, legumes in my diet for the last 3 weeks, and my mind has never felt more sharp. I think that those who argue against eating meat/fat need to realize that perhaps the animals they're eating may not be the ideal animal to be eating. If you can ascertain the true source of that meat and make sure it is raised without any antibiotics, hormones, fed pellet food/grain food/crap, etc (only vaccines), I think that you'll experience a marked feeling & difference between meat raised in other settings....
:elephant:
 

Methodician

clever spec of dust
Local time
Today 1:23 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
196
---
Location
SoCal
I've cut out all wheat, sugar, dairy, legumes in my diet for the last 3 weeks, and my mind has never felt more sharp. I think that those who argue against eating meat/fat need to realize that perhaps the animals they're eating may not be the ideal animal to be eating. If you can ascertain the true source of that meat and make sure it is raised without any antibiotics, hormones, fed pellet food/grain food/crap, etc (only vaccines), I think that you'll experience a marked feeling & difference between meat raised in other settings....
:elephant:

I agree - the source of the meat makes a huge difference. Regarding red meat the best is definitely 100% grass fed and organic but I find that if it's at least raised humanely and with no hormones, antibiotics, etc... that alone makes a difference.

I've slowly added dairy and just a little well-prepared legumes to my diet without any ill effect - so long as I stay away from the processed, fat-free or low fat kind of crap. Real cheese, heavy cream, and certainly grass fed butter give me no trouble in moderation.
 
Top Bottom