Active Low-Carber Forums
Atkins diet and low carb discussion provided free for information only, not as medical advice.
Home Plans Tips Recipes Tools Stories Studies Products
Active Low-Carber Forums
A sugar-free zone


Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums.
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!

Go Back   Active Low-Carber Forums > Main Low-Carb Diets Forums & Support > Low-Carb Studies & Research / Media Watch > Low-Carb War Zone
User Name
Password
FAQ Members Calendar Mark Forums Read Search Gallery My P.L.A.N. Survey


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 12:20
Jacymac's Avatar
Jacymac Jacymac is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 43
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 238/220.4/178 Female 6ft1in
BF:40%/39%/??
Progress: 29%
Location: London, UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
From now on, I will only address impertinent content of your posts. Let it be a lesson on maturity.

It's easy to make ad hominems when we have no clue who we're speaking to or what they know. This says very little about out target but it says a lot about ourselves. It says, for instance, that we are not above using ad hominem to make our point. It says that we only intend to win an argument and not, for example, discuss a topic or even learn about it. It says we don't actually know our subject or that our arguments are weak at best and must resort to fallacious arguments and tactics in order to win the argument. Least but not last, it says that we have no respect for the person we are speaking to. Merit does not apply in any event. Regina, your arguments have no merit.

...etc etc....

So seriously, Regina, think twice before posting fallacious arguments. In the end, it only makes you look like an idiot.


I hope I am not stepping into something here in which I am not welcome, but amusing as it is to read all this, do you actually have a response to the information that Regina presented? I am genuinely curious as I follow "normal" Atkins and am currently stalled and considering dropping my carbs as close to zero as possible to try to break it. I realise that doing this for a short time is of no danger and not what is being discussed here, but it has got me thinking and I would like to know the pros and cons longer term. I suspect I will land on the side of Atkins as written and climbing the carb ladder, especially with the information provided by Regina. But I would be interested to know your response (other than the one quoted above!)
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
  #92   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 13:33
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacymac
I hope I am not stepping into something here in which I am not welcome, but amusing as it is to read all this, do you actually have a response to the information that Regina presented? I am genuinely curious as I follow "normal" Atkins and am currently stalled and considering dropping my carbs as close to zero as possible to try to break it. I realise that doing this for a short time is of no danger and not what is being discussed here, but it has got me thinking and I would like to know the pros and cons longer term. I suspect I will land on the side of Atkins as written and climbing the carb ladder, especially with the information provided by Regina. But I would be interested to know your response (other than the one quoted above!)

Regina gets no love from me anymore.


See my signature.
Quote:
Carbohydrates drive insulin drives fat accumulation: Cut the carbohydrates.
Exercise makes us hungry so we eat more so fat loss stalls: Stay in bed.
A priori, the brain can't function properly when it's malnourished: Eat fat.
Cancer eats glucose: Don't feed it.

These four statements represent quite a bit of reading and subsequent analysis over at least a year on my part. It's obvious that I hold carbohydrate in no high regard. The first is what I got from Taubes GCBC. I got more but that's the main part. The second I got from personal experience. I tested a hypothesis I got from an article by Taubes in the New York Mag. The third I got by deduction of several articles about brain function disorders (i.e. epilepsy, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's, Autism, dementia, etc). All of these improved by cutting out carbohydrate and eating a very high fat diet (said ketogenic, basically, only fat meat). The last one I got from the Warburg hypothesis. Never mind that his hypothesis is flawed, I only looked at what cancerous cells feed on.

Because of the way I think and all that I've read, I have no choice but to consider carbohydrate poisonous to humans. See how many ways we can poison ourselves with it. Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, the various brain disorders, the various eating disorders, dental caries, skeletal deformation, fetal defects of all kinds and miscarriage due to this, birth defects in the event of a viable fetus anyway, cancer, all the diseases of civilization. The list is long.

To put my point across, I ask you, do you have crooked teeth and if not did you wear braces to straighten them out? Did you have your tonsils removed? Did you have your appendix removed? Did you grow fat? Did you develop dental caries? I don't need to know the answers, I only asked to make you think about that.

If you suffered any of the diseases of civilization, how then can you consider carbohydrate as food when it's carbohydrate that caused these diseases? Again I don't need the answer, I only want to make you think about it. Food is not supposed to poison us. It's not supposed to make us fat, sick, stupid or weak. Food is supposed to nourish us, to make us lean, muscular, strong, smart and healthy.

Either you believe carbohydrate is food or you believe carbohydrate is poisonous. We can't have it both ways. These two statements can't ever agree:

1. Carbohydrate is food.
2. Carbohydrate is responsible for our disease.

The next question becomes, what is food then? The answer is obvious once we cut out all carbohydrate. Food is animal flesh. More specifically, fat animal flesh. Saying it's healthy in the short term but doubtful in the long term is an argument frequently used against Atkins. Why then would a proponent of Atkins use this same argument against zero carb? All the arguments in favor of low carb are used in favor of zero carb. (Indeed, Atkins has something very close to zero carb called the fat fast.) The only difference is how we see carbohydrate. Atkins says it's food. Zero carb says no.


By my own reckoning, I'm in perfect health. I've been eating ZC for about 6 months or so. I see no unhealthful effect whatsoever. On the contrary, I'm getting leaner although not getting lighter anymore. Even if I don't do much exercise. There's more but I won't go into detail here. Cutting out carbs returned me to good health.
Reply With Quote
  #93   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 13:53
Jacymac's Avatar
Jacymac Jacymac is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 43
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 238/220.4/178 Female 6ft1in
BF:40%/39%/??
Progress: 29%
Location: London, UK
Default

Martin
I understand your point, but I struggle with the all or nothing approach. To say something is a poison and therefore to be avoided is difficult, how to you reconcile that logic with an example like oxygen? It is deadly and can kill humans, but is necessary to human life. Sometimes things that are toxic in large amounts are desirable, necessary or harmless in smaller amounts.

ETA. It is this rationale that it is not all or nothing (for me anyway) in terms of carbs being bad for you that allows me to have the short term/long term concern, because the question in my mind is one of degree. So I do totally believe that carbs are the cause of obesity, and other ill-health, as well as eating disorders which I am all too familiar with. However, a bit like oxygen, I don't believe that they are bad in any quantity, only in excess. Having said that, what counts as excess varies from person to person, and for some people may be 100g and for some people may be 1g, and anything in between. I just don't think that there is a definitive boundary that fits everyone.

Last edited by Jacymac : Fri, Jan-16-09 at 14:05.
Reply With Quote
  #94   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 13:53
Cajunboy47 Cajunboy47 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,900
 
Plan: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Stats: 212/162/155 Male 68 "
BF:32/23.5/23.5
Progress: 88%
Location: Breaux Bridge, La
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
Cutting out carbs returned me to good health.


You make it sound like no one can return to good health without cutting out carbs.

Is my impression correct?
Reply With Quote
  #95   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 13:57
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cajunboy47
You make it sound like no one can return to good health without cutting out carbs.

Is my impression correct?

Yes, it is.
Reply With Quote
  #96   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:00
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacymac
Martin
I understand your point, but I struggle with the all or nothing approach. To say something is a poison and therefore to be avoided is difficult, how to you reconcile that logic with an example like oxygen It is deadly and can kill humans, but is necessary to human life. Sometimes things that are toxic in large amounts are desirable, necessary or harmless in smaller amounts.

That depends on the substance. In toxicology, they say the dose makes the poison. With blood glucose, anything above normal is toxic. Any dietary carbohydrate causes blood glucose to rise above normal. Therefore, any dietary carbohydrate is toxic. That's the logic that makes it all or nothing. If you believe carbohydrate is food, you must also believe that raising blood glucose is normal and suffering the damage from high blood glucose is also normal.
Reply With Quote
  #97   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:01
Cajunboy47 Cajunboy47 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,900
 
Plan: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Stats: 212/162/155 Male 68 "
BF:32/23.5/23.5
Progress: 88%
Location: Breaux Bridge, La
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
Yes, it is.


Martini,

How do you expain that there are healthy people who eat carbs?
Reply With Quote
  #98   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:11
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cajunboy47
Martini,

How do you expain that there are healthy people who eat carbs?

How do you explain that there are healthy people who smoke tobacco and drink alcohol?
Reply With Quote
  #99   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:16
Jacymac's Avatar
Jacymac Jacymac is offline
Registered Member
Posts: 43
 
Plan: LCHF
Stats: 238/220.4/178 Female 6ft1in
BF:40%/39%/??
Progress: 29%
Location: London, UK
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
That depends on the substance. In toxicology, they say the dose makes the poison. With blood glucose, anything above normal is toxic. Any dietary carbohydrate causes blood glucose to rise above normal. Therefore, any dietary carbohydrate is toxic. That's the logic that makes it all or nothing. If you believe carbohydrate is food, you must also believe that raising blood glucose is normal and suffering the damage from high blood glucose is also normal.


I suppose the question remaining in my mind is whether in solving the problem of raising blood glucose there is a risk of causing other problems, considering Regina's research and other things. I don't know that answer to this, but I suppose the other question in my mind is actually what the title of this thread is...is it sustainable. For you it seems to be, and I wish you luck with your choices and WOE. I don't think my willpower would stand up to not having some flexibility and for me that can lead down dangerous paths (previous eating disorder). So the question, valid or otherwise, over health is one thing, but the other question of how their eating fits in with their lifestyle is for each individual to determine for themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #100   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:20
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacymac
I suppose the question remaining in my mind is whether in solving the problem of raising blood glucose there is a risk of causing other problems, considering Regina's research and other things. I don't know that answer to this, but I suppose the other question in my mind is actually what the title of this thread is...is it sustainable. For you it seems to be, and I wish you luck with your choices and WOE. I don't think my willpower would stand up to not having some flexibility and for me that can lead down dangerous paths (previous eating disorder). So the question, valid or otherwise, over health is one thing, but the other question of how their eating fits in with their lifestyle is for each individual to determine for themselves.

My willpower is nil or just about. But then because I eat no carb whatsoever, I don't get any craving whatsoever so I don't have to deal with my lack of willpower.
Reply With Quote
  #101   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 14:25
Cajunboy47 Cajunboy47 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,900
 
Plan: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Stats: 212/162/155 Male 68 "
BF:32/23.5/23.5
Progress: 88%
Location: Breaux Bridge, La
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
How do you explain that there are healthy people who smoke tobacco and drink alcohol?


It depends on tolerance level and the amount of intake of either, if harm is done. It also depends on what else a person does, such as their diet, exercise and other lifestyle choices...

You answered my question with a question. I'm sure you can do better than that.

I'll also answer my answer with an answer:

Using my logic about tobacco and alcohol coonsumption, I would suppose eating carbs won't harm anyone if they consume it in moderation, which is probably key to any diet.
Reply With Quote
  #102   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 15:13
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cajunboy47
It depends on tolerance level and the amount of intake of either, if harm is done. It also depends on what else a person does, such as their diet, exercise and other lifestyle choices...

You answered my question with a question. I'm sure you can do better than that.

I'll also answer my answer with an answer:

Using my logic about tobacco and alcohol coonsumption, I would suppose eating carbs won't harm anyone if they consume it in moderation, which is probably key to any diet.

Tolerance level or if harm is done? The two are not synonymous. We could tolerate poison even if harm is done. Indeed, I see a whole bunch of sick people walking around living their life in utter oblivion.

What we do elsewhere has little bearing on the toxic potential of carbohydrate. Carbohydrate remains toxic. We could exercise, eat "right", be happy and still die of heart disease because heart disease can't be prevented by anything we do. It can only be prevented by not ingesting the substance that is causing it.

Can we prevent snake bite (venom) poisoning with exercise or vitamins? No, we can only prevent it by not getting bitten by a snake.

The moderation argument fails when we eat only fat meat. We can eat as much as we want and still remain in perfect health. The moderation argument only works when we deal with toxic substances. In toxicology, they say the dose makes the poison. Indeed, a moderate dose of carbohydrate is probably harmless at first glance. Certain poisons accumulate. Take that dose for 20 years and it's just as toxic as if we ate the whole bottle all at once.

Have you ever wondered why a baby cried sometime when we feed it? Let me put it another way. Have you ever suffered from indigestion (cramps, bloat, flatulence, all painful even to an adult) after you ate some carbohydrate? What do you think it does to an infant then? So even then eating just a little bit of carbohydrate may be OK for an adult but it's that much more potent for an infant. The point is, the dose makes the poison.
Reply With Quote
  #103   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 15:35
Cajunboy47 Cajunboy47 is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 2,900
 
Plan: Eat Fat, Get Thin
Stats: 212/162/155 Male 68 "
BF:32/23.5/23.5
Progress: 88%
Location: Breaux Bridge, La
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M Levac
Tolerance level or if harm is done? The two are not synonymous. We could tolerate poison even if harm is done. Indeed, I see a whole bunch of sick people walking around living their life in utter oblivion.

What we do elsewhere has little bearing on the toxic potential of carbohydrate. Carbohydrate remains toxic. We could exercise, eat "right", be happy and still die of heart disease because heart disease can't be prevented by anything we do. It can only be prevented by not ingesting the substance that is causing it.

Can we prevent snake bite (venom) poisoning with exercise or vitamins? No, we can only prevent it by not getting bitten by a snake.

The moderation argument fails when we eat only fat meat. We can eat as much as we want and still remain in perfect health. The moderation argument only works when we deal with toxic substances. In toxicology, they say the dose makes the poison. Indeed, a moderate dose of carbohydrate is probably harmless at first glance. Certain poisons accumulate. Take that dose for 20 years and it's just as toxic as if we ate the whole bottle all at once.

Have you ever wondered why a baby cried sometime when we feed it? Let me put it another way. Have you ever suffered from indigestion (cramps, bloat, flatulence, all painful even to an adult) after you ate some carbohydrate? What do you think it does to an infant then? So even then eating just a little bit of carbohydrate may be OK for an adult but it's that much more potent for an infant. The point is, the dose makes the poison.


If the whole world would discover that it was only safe to eat beef meat and if the world population was about 4.5 billion people and the average person ate about 3 pounds of beef each day, do you realize how many heads of cattle would have to be killed and consumed daily to meet the demand????

I'm not sure of the exact number of cattle it would take to satisfy that demand, but I am certain that the final answer is exactly the same answer as your analogy about carbohydrates being poison.

Final answer: A whole lot of Bull!
Reply With Quote
  #104   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 15:42
M Levac M Levac is offline
Senior Member
Posts: 6,498
 
Plan: VLC, mostly meat
Stats: 202/200/165 Male 5' 7"
BF:
Progress: 5%
Location: Montreal, Quebec, Canada
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cajunboy47
If the whole world would discover that it was only safe to eat beef meat and if the world population was about 4.5 billion people and the average person ate about 3 pounds of beef each day, do you realize how many heads of cattle would have to be killed and consumed daily to meet the demand????

I'm not sure of the exact number of cattle it would take to satisfy that demand, but I am certain that the final answer is exactly the same answer as your analogy about carbohydrates being poison.

Final answer: A whole lot of Bull!

LOL! Well if that doesn't happen, I won't complain. It makes more beef for me.
Reply With Quote
  #105   ^
Old Fri, Jan-16-09, 15:52
rightnow's Avatar
rightnow rightnow is offline
Every moment is NOW.
Posts: 23,064
 
Plan: LC (ketogenic)
Stats: 520/381/280 Female 66 inches
BF: Why yes it is.
Progress: 58%
Location: Ozarks USA
Default

Overpopulation is only possible with grains. That's why.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:51.


Copyright © 2000-2024 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.