72 replies to this topic

[The Immortalist]

Thanks for bringing this thread up, I'm trying to reach a 6 pack for a while now and it's fucking hard. I initially believed that by simply going paleo and eating low carbs (aka only vegetables and no fruits and sweet potatoes...) I would melt the fat off and reach under 10% body fat quickly. Sadly after like 4 months that never happened... Even if I skip a meal every now and then for IF. Anyway, now I'm controlling a lot more my calorie intake and raising carbs a bit and trying to reduce fat a lot (more chicken instead of porc, sometimes removing the yolk of the eggs). not sure yet if I will reach my under 10% body fat goal but I've lost about 8 pounds in the last 1-2 months thanks to controlling my caloric intake (going to ~2,000 calories/day) and doing 24 hours that cause major calorie deficits every 3-4 days.

I'm doing strength training once a week every week and I've been having slow gains, so I most likely am not losing muscle.

anyway ya, I was kinda in the Gary Taulbe idea of if I have low carb intake --> losing fat quickly but it's obviously not true of me... Even when I ditch fruits and starchy foods. Gotta go back to personal trainer basics (but still gonna avoid grains... I started adding a bit of yogurt/cheese/blueberries again though).

You gotta be on a calorie deficit to get that low bf%. Just not eating carbs won't cut it.

[The Immortalist]

I think the most important think to remember is that ultimately it doesn't matter what your macro nutrient ratios are - the only thing that really matters for losing body fat is being in a caloric deficit.

Although I have read that keto diets are the most superior for losing fat because it is also muscle sparring so that you don't lose as much muscle when your losing weight as you would do in other diets.

[The Immortalist]

Most elite level bodybuilders are never placed on diets which are conducive to long term health. That is an observed fact. How the hell could a 5000k diet be conducive to longevity in the first place?

No, my statement about guys seeing results on diets other than paleo was not a reference to 5000K diets, it was a reference to diets in which the macronutrient ration was not always (and in fact was VERY seldom) in favor of fats over carbs. This was not about elite level bodybuilders, whose diets and training regimen could use some moral guidance lessons, but the results of average men.

Yes I know that, on the average, most of those fat pigs we are discussing could benefit from a paleo diet. But the implication here is that those evil carbs are the cause of their obesity, ignoring context and the fact that, as another user stated, most junk foods are just as high in fat as they are in sugars. Yes, I will always criticize a diet high in refined sugar and bleached grain products. But how exactly does this entitle me (or anybody else) to the opinion that carbs are the ultimate cause of weight gain in individuals with no gene mutation or receptor abnormalities?

Unfortunately the Gary Taubes phenomenon has given rise to a certain arrogance in this community in which a lot of people believe they know best because they can keep up with the latest bloggers and read a few books referenced in GCBC. And as pointed out before, Gary Taubes fundamental lack of understanding with regard to how insulin works in healthy individuals has already been pointed out here...


http://wholehealthso...esity.html#more

From what i gathered from the blog that you linked to was that a diet high in fat and carbs will cause increased storage of fat. A diet extremely low in fat, high in carbs and moderate in protein will result in leanness. A diet high in fat moderate in protein and extremely low in carbs will also result in leanness. This is all assuming you are not consuming more calories than you need.

Also I hypothesize that a diet high in fat and carbs and moderate in protein BUT with the calories at maintenance will cause a condition what we know as "Skinny fat" (being a normal or below normal weight but having it so that your bf% is high).

[The Immortalist]

Hey TheFountain explain this: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Diabulimia

Some people with type 1 diabetes deliberately stop taking their insulin so they can lose weight. This obviously means insulin plays a role in fat storage.

[niner]

I think the most important think to remember is that ultimately it doesn't matter what your macro nutrient ratios are - the only thing that really matters for losing body fat is being in a caloric deficit.

This is essentially saying "a calorie is a calorie". Thermodynamically, that's true, but in practice, it's more complicated. Some substances, like fructose or gluten, may be toxic in various ways that are more important than their caloric impact, but in general, a low fat diet will make it harder to stick to a low calorie level.

[TheFountain]

Hey TheFountain explain this: http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Diabulimia

Some people with type 1 diabetes deliberately stop taking their insulin so they can lose weight. This obviously means insulin plays a role in fat storage.

In diabetics! What causes diabetes? hmm, a gene abnormality that makes it difficult for the body to metabolize sugar properly! See gary taubes took how diabetics process insulin and incorrectly applied it to the entire population! Bad science there.

And if you re-read that blog entry it actually tells you, point for point, how insulin actually regulates body weight in HEALTHY (I.E NON DIABETIC) people.

Edited by TheFountain, 19 September 2011 - 03:44 AM.

[Logan]

But by the above logic, you can gain results on ANY DIET! That's right. ANY diet! And I have seen countless examples of guys on extremely high carb diets losing pound after pound of body fat, and gaining pound after pound in muscle.

How old are these guys???

[Logan]

In diabetics! What causes diabetes? hmm, a gene abnormality that makes it difficult for the body to metabolize sugar properly! See gary taubes took how diabetics process insulin and incorrectly applied it to the entire population! Bad science there.

And if you re-read that blog entry it actually tells you, point for point, how insulin actually regulates body weight in HEALTHY (I.E NON DIABETIC) people.

The right amount of insulin over time sure. We need insulin. Are you manic at all???

[Logan]

I like to flip the coin. There's too much extremism on this site.

But my point about personal trainers was results, results, results!

What are you talking about? Yu are extremist too, you just can't see it. Besides, I hear many people talking about balance and not going hardcore with things like paleo type diets.

[TheFountain]

How old are these guys???

All different ages. I don't think the majority of them are younger, older or in between.

[Logan]

Come on biased cowards who keep voting me down, show yourselves and explain your positions.

You're such a fucking drama queen. Get a fucking social life dude, you're too fucking young to be spending this kind of time arguing such shit on the internet.

[TheFountain]

What are you talking about? Yu are extremist too, you just can't see it. Besides, I hear many people talking about balance and not going hardcore with things like paleo type diets.

You obviously have not read my posts about diet. I have tried many different variations of diets. I am simply reporting my experience with the different macronutrient ratios of them. Can't handle a truth that contradicts yours? Oh well.

[Logan]

All different ages. I don't think the majority of them are younger, older or in between.

And where is this evidence???

[Logan]

You obviously have not read my posts about diet. I have tried many different variations of diets. I am simply reporting my experience with the different macronutrient ratios of them. Can't handle a truth that contradicts yours? Oh well.

You are an extremist in that you have to take the other extreme of what people believe in. You also have to argue everything instead of being content with the fact that what you believe is best for you and makes you feel best is good enough.
.
I still eat grains, I just limit them to certain types and after workouts. I believe in a balanced approach, but I do not think a high grain diet will be good for anyone long term.

[Logan]

Hey sorry for the comments Fountain, but you gotta understand, my idea of living life to it's fullest in youth is not wasting time making worthless arguments on some internet forum. Hell, will be 39 in 2 months and I'm starting to spend less time on the internet because I'm getting back to truly enjoying life with friends and romantic interests, and getting out and meeting new people. I also will be getting out in more natural settings more next spring, doing fun things near the potomac in great falls with friends and getting out to the blue ridge mountains. These things, along with reading books, going to school if the time is right, spending time with family, and participating if our favorite mind expanding and stimulating hobbies are what we should be spending most of our time doing. It's ironic, so many people on sites like this spend so much of their time here and other places on the net, while all along thes people are here because they want a longer, much fuller, and much healthier life.

[Brainbox]

You're such a fucking drama queen

It's time for the paleo life style intervention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxhcGnltXU

[Logan]

It's time for the paleo life style intervention.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxhcGnltXU

That's a great commercial

[TheFountain]

And where is this evidence???

You mean like the evidence that insulin causes weight gain in healthy individuals? lol

[TheFountain]

You are an extremist in that you have to take the other extreme of what people believe in. You also have to argue everything instead of being content with the fact that what you believe is best for you and makes you feel best is good enough.
.
I still eat grains, I just limit them to certain types and after workouts. I believe in a balanced approach, but I do not think a high grain diet will be good for anyone long term.

This thread was created for people who are having problems burning fat on a paleo diet. The title of it was meant to be controversial to attract people to it. I wanted a debate. I got one. That pleases me.

If you look at my history on the diet section of this forum you will see that I have attempted a higher fat paleo style pescetarian diet, which ultimately made me skinny fat. I am one of those people who has some sort of receptor abnormality which prevents my body from metabolizing dietary fat the way some other's can.

Why this offends certain people, I do not know. But I do know that I am not the only one with this problem.

Step 1 is to figure out why some of us cannot process as much dietary fat as other's can and step 2 is toget on the right program.

[TheFountain]

Hey sorry for the comments Fountain, but you gotta understand, my idea of living life to it's fullest in youth is not wasting time making worthless arguments on some internet forum. Hell, will be 39 in 2 months and I'm starting to spend less time on the internet because I'm getting back to truly enjoying life with friends and romantic interests, and getting out and meeting new people. I also will be getting out in more natural settings more next spring, doing fun things near the potomac in great falls with friends and getting out to the blue ridge mountains. These things, along with reading books, going to school if the time is right, spending time with family, and participating if our favorite mind expanding and stimulating hobbies are what we should be spending most of our time doing. It's ironic, so many people on sites like this spend so much of their time here and other places on the net, while all along thes people are here because they want a longer, much fuller, and much healthier life.

I don't consider tackling an issue that plagues certain people a 'worthless argument'.

I think I have been spending about 25-40 minutes a day on this forum as of late. That to me is acceptable.

I tend to not speak about my private life very much, but this does not equate to me not having one. I simply choose not to advertise what I spend my quality down time doing.

Longevity is a commitment we all are making. That includes participating in the continued acquisition of knowledge, even if part of that process is experimental and still in formation. See, we are creating a future here, not obeying one that is pre-written. That's why I trust no one diet and am open to experimentation.

Edited by TheFountain, 20 September 2011 - 08:09 AM.

[TheFountain]

In diabetics! What causes diabetes? hmm, a gene abnormality that makes it difficult for the body to metabolize sugar properly! See gary taubes took how diabetics process insulin and incorrectly applied it to the entire population! Bad science there.

And if you re-read that blog entry it actually tells you, point for point, how insulin actually regulates body weight in HEALTHY (I.E NON DIABETIC) people.

Would the person who voted this post down (presumably morgan or immortal) please explain WHY they voted it down? Thanks.

By the way, this kind of misuse of the voting system is precisely why it should be regulated better. Ya dig?

[TheFountain]

You're such a fucking drama queen. Get a fucking social life dude, you're too fucking young to be spending this kind of time arguing such shit on the internet.

Hey thanks for the advice.

But i've been exercising pretty hard as of late to compensate for all this drama! Exercise is the anti-drama, ya see.

[Skötkonung]

As has been previously stated, it is not contingent that a paleo diet be high fat / low carbohydrate. Similar to the vegan or vegetarian labels, the paleo label identifies what foods are excluded. Specifically that means no dairy, legumes, grains and processed foods. Within paleo, there are various groups that utilize vastly different macro-nutrient ratios. TheFountain: it seems you have a problem with is low-carb diets. I recall you mentioning you had issues with a vegetarian low-carb as well. You have a problem with dietary fat, not paleo.

I think Stephan of WHSource has a good point. Obesity is not necessarily about macro-nutrient ratios... its about the foods you are eating. A healthy body wants to be lean. If you eat too much, you should ideally spontaneously reduce your energy intake until the energy unbalance is corrected. A body that is gaining fat has a disrupted homeostatic mechanisms.

Stephan seems to think that reward value has more to do with obesity than anything else. Combined, fat and carbohydrate increase reward value and that leads to increased energy intake. That's why people who eat both higher fat AND higher carb diets tend to be the most obese. Removing / reducing either fat or carbohydrate reduces reward value and causes people to lose fat. At least that is what the science seems to indicate. Stephan mentioned that he keeps his diet very simple... foods stay in a close-to-natural form -- no added salt or seasonings, fat is eaten away from carbohydrate. It's a principle that is covered quite well in the The Shangri-La Diet. And it works.

I don't know why TheFountain can't handle dietary fat. Maybe genetics? He's probably APOE4/4 or something. I'm APOE3/3 and my body does just fine on low-carb and low-fat. If TheFountain does have a APOE4 geneotype, it is probably good that he eats low fat as dietary fat will cause him to have advanced CVD at a young age.

Dr Davis, an advocate of low-carb for prevention of heart disease, says that people APOE4 genotype are the exception. They also comprise up to 25% of the population. He has a great article on it:
http://www.trackyour...o-low-carb.html

Edited by Skötkonung, 20 September 2011 - 06:42 PM.

[TheFountain]

I think the most important think to remember is that ultimately it doesn't matter what your macro nutrient ratios are - the only thing that really matters for losing body fat is being in a caloric deficit.

This is essentially saying "a calorie is a calorie". Thermodynamically, that's true, but in practice, it's more complicated. Some substances, like fructose or gluten, may be toxic in various ways that are more important than their caloric impact, but in general, a low fat diet will make it harder to stick to a low calorie level.

Chemically, wouldn't something like fructose only detrimentally effect an already compromised metabolism where the glucose stores cannot be accessed from the muscles and the tissues are already storing excess fat?

Edited by TheFountain, 21 September 2011 - 05:38 AM.

[TheFountain]

As has been previously stated, it is not contingent that a paleo diet be high fat / low carbohydrate. Similar to the vegan or vegetarian labels, the paleo label identifies what foods are excluded. Specifically that means no dairy, legumes, grains and processed foods. Within paleo, there are various groups that utilize vastly different macro-nutrient ratios. TheFountain: it seems you have a problem with is low-carb diets. I recall you mentioning you had issues with a vegetarian low-carb as well. You have a problem with dietary fat, not paleo.

I think Stephan of WHSource has a good point. Obesity is not necessarily about macro-nutrient ratios... its about the foods you are eating. A healthy body wants to be lean. If you eat too much, you should ideally spontaneously reduce your energy intake until the energy unbalance is corrected. A body that is gaining fat has a disrupted homeostatic mechanisms.

Stephan seems to think that reward value has more to do with obesity than anything else. Combined, fat and carbohydrate increase reward value and that leads to increased energy intake. That's why people who eat both higher fat AND higher carb diets tend to be the most obese. Removing / reducing either fat or carbohydrate reduces reward value and causes people to lose fat. At least that is what the science seems to indicate. Stephan mentioned that he keeps his diet very simple... foods stay in a close-to-natural form -- no added salt or seasonings, fat is eaten away from carbohydrate. It's a principle that is covered quite well in the The Shangri-La Diet. And it works.

I don't know why TheFountain can't handle dietary fat. Maybe genetics? He's probably APOE4/4 or something. I'm APOE3/3 and my body does just fine on low-carb and low-fat. If TheFountain does have a APOE4 geneotype, it is probably good that he eats low fat as dietary fat will cause him to have advanced CVD at a young age.

Dr Davis, an advocate of low-carb for prevention of heart disease, says that people APOE4 genotype are the exception. They also comprise up to 25% of the population. He has a great article on it:
http://www.trackyour...o-low-carb.html

Isn't, to a large degree, excess energy in still effective toward fat/tissue storage regardless of ones phenotype?

Unless someone is telling me that they can eat 150 grams of fat a day, without working out for months, and still be as lean and muscular as a cromagnon type. I don't think you're saying that, because the latter would make you a genetically perfect specimen, right?

And it's not that I can't handle dietary fat, It's that I cannot handle fat intake in excess of about 80 grams a day max. I attribute some of this to the energy cycle and adaptation. High fat and very low carb leaves me less energy for adaptive work outs, therefor the energy cycle is disrupted, I don't push myself as hard as I otherwise would, and my metabolism is not kick started like a normal, vigorous work out should do.

Speaking of which, I know a lot of paleo dieters add carbs in the form of sweet potatoes and other things before work outs, but I was wondering if that is because they aren't partaking of the kind of work outs that would be conducive to optimal adaptation on said diet (which apparently takes 7 days, according to doug Mcguff MD). Apparently the work out should consist of an even 4/4 pattern of movement at 60% of ones max output to achieve total adaptation, which means it should only be performed once a week for 15 or so minutes. What I am asking is, are the carbs necessitated on said regimen because of improper adaptation techniques which alter energy metabolism on said diet? In other words do a lot of people on very high fat diets find that, unless they perform maximum adaptation technique exercises, they will not see the results and thus require more work out, thus more energy in (in this case in the form of carbs)?

^^ Complicated question I know.

And about what Dr Davis says, It would suck to be a genetic freak. I am still working on getting my phenotype checked out via one of those web sites mentioned earlier.

[hggh]

As has been previously stated, it is not contingent that a paleo diet be high fat / low carbohydrate. Similar to the vegan or vegetarian labels, the paleo label identifies what foods are excluded. Specifically that means no dairy, legumes, grains and processed foods. Within paleo, there are various groups that utilize vastly different macro-nutrient ratios. TheFountain: it seems you have a problem with is low-carb diets. I recall you mentioning you had issues with a vegetarian low-carb as well. You have a problem with dietary fat, not paleo.
...
I don't know why TheFountain can't handle dietary fat. Maybe genetics? He's probably APOE4/4 or something. I'm APOE3/3 and my body does just fine on low-carb and low-fat. If TheFountain does have a APOE4 geneotype, it is probably good that he eats low fat as dietary fat will cause him to have advanced CVD at a young age.

What if it is the inclusion of meat that increases testosterone and also lack of carbohydrate that increases testosterone (keeping abdominal fat at bay -- Meat eating paleo vs vegetarian/vegan/plant/phytoestrogen paleo should be different).

GoodCalories, BadCalories (2007) on LPL and hormone testosterone:

http://paste2.org/p/1430577
[line 309]

Insulin, not surprisingly, is the primary regulator of LPL activity, although not the only one. This regulation functions
differently, as is the case with all hormones, from tissue to tissue and site to site. In fat tissue, insulin increases LPL
activity; in muscle tissue, it decreases activity. As a result, when insulin is secreted, fat is deposited in the fat tissue,
and the muscles have to burn glucose for energy. When insulin levels drop, the LPL activity on the fat cells decreases
and the LPL activity on the muscle cells increases—the fat cells release fatty acids, and the muscle cells take them up
and burn them.


It’s the orchestration of LPL activity by insulin and other hormones that accounts for why some areas of the body will
accumulate more fat than others, why the distribution of fat is different between men and women, and how these
distributions change with age and, in women, with reproductive needs. Women have greater LPL activity in their
adipose tissue than men do, for example, and this may be one reason why obesity and overweight are now more
common in women than in men. In men, the activity of LPL is higher in the fat tissue of the abdominal region than in
the fat tissue below the waist, which would explain why the typical male obesity takes the form of the beer belly.
Women have more adipose-tissue LPL activity in the hips and buttocks than in the abdominal region, although after
menopause the LPL activity in their abdominal region catches up to that of men.

These various fat deposits are also regulated over time by the changing flux of sex hormones, so LPL can be
considered the point at which insulin and sex hormones interact to determine how and when we fatten. The male sex
hormone testosterone, for instance, suppresses LPL activity in the abdominal fat, but has little or no effect on the LPL
in the fat of the hips and buttocks. Increasing fat accumulation in the abdomen as men age may therefore be a product
of both increasing insulin and decreasing testosterone. The female sex hormone progesterone increases the activity of
LPL, particularly in the hips and buttocks, but estrogen, another female sex hormone, decreases LPL activity.*120 It’s
the decrease in estrogen secretion during menopause—and so the increase in LPL activity—that may explain why
women frequently gain weight as they pass through menopause. The effect of decreasing estrogen secretion on LPL
activity would also explain why women typically fatten after the removal of the uterus in a hysterectomy. The change
in hormonal regulation of LPL also explains how and why fat deposition changes during pregnancy and, after birth,
with nursing.

and from a recent 2009 review on LPL

http://ajpendo.physi...297/2/E271.long


Growth hormone and sex steroid hormones such as testosterone and estrogen inhibit adipose tissue LPL activity and promote lipid mobilization (reviewed in Ref. 23) but increase heart and skeletal muscle LPL activities (181). The effect of these hormones is believed to be mediated by the androgen receptor, the density of which is higher in visceral than subcutaneous adipose tissue. In sedentary obese men, plasma testosterone and bioavailable testosterone levels are inversely correlated with femoral and abdominal wall adipose tissue LPL (207). Testosterone treatment of abdominally obese men also produces a decrease in visceral fat mass (216).
...

LPL activity has been reported to increase as a function of fat cell size (22, 57, 89, 230, 241), and sex differences seem to alter the relationship between LPL activity and fat cell size. Fat cell size is greater in females than males in the thigh and gluteal regions but not in the abdomen. Fasting LPL activity/fat cell correlates well with the fat cell size in females in all three areas, but only in the abdomen and thigh in men (270). This may relate to the fundamental differences in the regulation of TG uptake between males and females in different regions of adipose tissue.

Sidenote: After reading that... maybe physiologically, men have more to benefit in fat loss with high animal, testosterone diets than women. Also sidenote: women are less likely to adhere to low-carb diets:

http://www.socresonl....uk/16/2/8.html
I share the concerns of both these groups of critics, although both the obesity epidemic and low-carbohydrate movement have arguably weakened the association of dieting with women. Concern about obesity has shifted weight-loss coverage in the media away from women specifically (Boero 2007: 44n1), and low-carbohydrate diets seem to appeal particularly to men (Bentley 2005), with at least one survey showing that men are much more likely than women to follow a low-carbohydrate diet long-term (Blanck et al. 2006). Low-carbohydrate diets forego ‘appearance claims’ in favour of urgent warnings about the dangers of the modern Western diet (Mouton 2001: para 19). In this article I therefore take a somewhat different approach, examining the particular form of the cultural and discursive response to the obesity epidemic represented by the low-carbohydrate diet movement. I situate my critique in relation to previous work in sociology and food studies on themes of nostalgia and cultural identity (eg Pickering & Keightley 2006; Valentine 1999), which are especially relevant topics in the context of dietary change, both individual and cultural.

---

You're such a fucking drama queen. Get a fucking social life dude, you're too fucking young to be spending this kind of time arguing such shit on the internet.

Hey thanks for the advice.

But i've been exercising pretty hard as of late to compensate for all this drama! Exercise is the anti-drama, ya see.

Also over over-exercise training is linked to high cortisol. Robbwolf and his partners on podcast talk about gaining belly fat from their own overtraining all the time (listen to the older podcast sessions to hear it).

Quote from ThePaleoSolution 2010 book

Cortisol raises blood sugar levels, which can cause fat gain. Although many people don’t know this, cortisol release from stress and a lack of sleep
factors prominently in body fat gain, leading to that pesky spare tire around the midsection. Cortisol shouldn’t be feared, because it is a crucial antiinflamatory—
we just don’t want too much of it.
____________________________
Geek-Speak
Cortisol is often referred to as a “stress hormone,” given that it is released in response to stress and anxiety. Cortisol increases blood pressure and acts
as an anti-inflammatory by lowering the activity of the immune system. It will trigger the breakdown of muscle mass by converting protein (amino acids)
into glucose via gluconeogenesis. Cortisol decreases insulin sensitivity, lowers the rate of bone formation, and causes a loss of collagen in the skin and
other connective tissues. The following increase cortisol levels: intense or prolonged physical activity, caffeine, sleep deprivation, stress, subcutaneous fat
tissue, and certain contraceptives.

Sidenote: EdNorton (from Fightclub fame) recently admitted to gaining weight in other areas from chronic exercise with the Masai
http://www.youtube.c...u/0/F1p8Ttb3q4U

Edited by hggh, 21 September 2011 - 09:13 AM.

[Skötkonung]

Isn't, to a large degree, excess energy in still effective toward fat/tissue storage regardless of ones phenotype?

Yes, of course. I don't think there is a foolproof way of being gluttonous. If, on low-carb, you find that you can eat more calories without gaining weight that is because your body is requiring more calories while on low-carb. It could be that the body processes dietary fat less efficiently than dietary carbohydrate. We know that when on low-carb, processes like NEAT and futile cycling increase and that subsequently increases calorie expenditure.

Unless someone is telling me that they can eat 150 grams of fat a day, without working out for months, and still be as lean and muscular as a cromagnon type. I don't think you're saying that, because the latter would make you a genetically perfect specimen, right?

I can eat 150g of fat without gaining weight. That's approx 1200 calories, way below my maintenance. The only time I start gaining weight is when I consume calories beyond my maintenance. That doesn't mean I will stay super lean and muscular, but I won't become overweight.

And it's not that I can't handle dietary fat, It's that I cannot handle fat intake in excess of about 80 grams a day max. I attribute some of this to the energy cycle and adaptation. High fat and very low carb leaves me less energy for adaptive work outs, therefor the energy cycle is disrupted, I don't push myself as hard as I otherwise would, and my metabolism is not kick started like a normal, vigorous work out should do.

That's possible. It could also be that your body processes fat in a less than ideal way due to its genotype. Getting a genetic test is the only way to tell for sure.

And about what Dr Davis says, It would suck to be a genetic freak. I am still working on getting my phenotype checked out via one of those web sites mentioned earlier.

25% of the population does not make you a genetic freak if you are e4/4.

[The Immortalist]

If you look at my history on the diet section of this forum you will see that I have attempted a higher fat paleo style pescetarian diet, which ultimately made me skinny fat. I am one of those people who has some sort of receptor abnormality which prevents my body from metabolizing dietary fat the way some other's can.

Were you on a caloric deficit? Were you eating 1 gram of protein per pound of body weight? Were you weight training at least 3 times a week?

If the answer is no to any one of those questions I can see why you gotSkinny-Fat-itis

[The Immortalist]

In diabetics! What causes diabetes? hmm, a gene abnormality that makes it difficult for the body to metabolize sugar properly! See gary taubes took how diabetics process insulin and incorrectly applied it to the entire population! Bad science there.

And if you re-read that blog entry it actually tells you, point for point, how insulin actually regulates body weight in HEALTHY (I.E NON DIABETIC) people.

Would the person who voted this post down (presumably morgan or immortal) please explain WHY they voted it down? Thanks.

By the way, this kind of misuse of the voting system is precisely why it should be regulated better. Ya dig?

I don't vote people down, I only vote people up not that it matters to me.

Edited by The Immortalist, 23 September 2011 - 01:56 AM.

[nowayout]

What if it is the inclusion of meat that increases testosterone and also lack of carbohydrate that increases testosterone (keeping abdominal fat at bay

YOu have it the wrong way around. There has been research showing that high protein diets tend to decrease testosterone and increase cortisol.

Diet-hormone interactions: Protein/carbohydrate ratio alters reciprocally the plasma levels of testosterone and cortisol and their respective binding globulins in man


Karl E. Anderson et al.



Abstract

The aim of this study was to determine if a change in protein/carbohydrate ratio influences plasma steroid hormone concentrations. There is little information about the effects of specific dietary components on steroid hormone metabolism in humans. Testosterone concentrations in seven normal men were consistently higher after ten days on a high carbohydrate diet (468 ± 34 ng/dl, mean ± S.E.) than during a high protein diet (3.71 ± 23 ng/d1, p<0.05) and were accompanied by parallel changes in sex hormone binding globulin (32.5 ± 2.8 nmol/1 vs. 23.4 ± 1.6 nmol/1 respectively, p<0.01). By contrast, cortisol concentrations were consistently lower during the high carbohydrate diet than during the high protein diet (7.74 ± 0.71 μg/d1 vs. 10.6 ± 0.4 μg/d1 respectively, p<0.05), and there were parallel changes in corticosteroid binding globulin concentrations (635 ± 60 nmol/1 vs. 754 ± 31 nmol/1 respectively p<0.05). The diets were equal in total calories and fat. These consistent and reciprocal changes suggest that the ratio of protein to carbohydrate in the human diet is an important regulatory factor for steroid hormone plasma levels and for liver-derived hormone binding proteins.

Edited by viveutvivas, 23 September 2011 - 08:43 AM.