General Poker Discussion Poker Forums

Steppin Razor I suspect I know the reason you feel not so great on your low quality meat no vegetable diet.

It's not low quality meat. Houston has a lot of good food. When I eat a burger, it's not a McDonald's burger. I mostly eat out, and I usually have a simple peanut butter and jelly sandwich for a snack.

And I didn't say I don't feel good, I feel fine. Only if I skip a meal does it mess with me but I solved that by not skipping meals.

I just don't see the wonderful magicness of LCHF. It's fine but it's not going to turn you into Superman.

and I usually have a simple peanut butter and jelly sandwich for a snack [...]
I just don't see the wonderful magicness of LCHF. It's fine but it's not going to turn you into Superman.

that's because you're not actually doing it, sir. you're eating PB&J sandwiches (albeit on low carb bread, but bread is bread), which is basically the antithesis of what LCHF is because it spikes your blood sugars with the bread and the sugar in the jelly and then complaining that LCHF doesn't work.

that's like me saying i'm eating vegan but eating a hamburger every day and then ... well, actually, that would be a great improvement on a vegan diet.


if you do want to try LCHF/paleo, maybe more explicit instructions would be better suited to your temperment:
http://whole9life.com/2012/01/whole-30-v2012/

and maybe this is partly my fault because i'm saying i eat LCHF but seem to cheat a lot. but when i say i pick at the bun when eating my hamburger, i literally leave a pile of bread crumbs (80-90% of the bread) on the tray.

i can also eat a hamburger from the inside out, like sucking out a meaty freezer pop.

I wonder where you picked up that trick.

Posted a pic of a typical meal in my blog for those interested

Why have people been hating on legumes so bad? I don't get it.

One thing i think is kinda funny is that the average person could probably just eat what he or she thinks looks healthy, and be eating very healthy. Most people will think that vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meat, fish, eggs, etc. look very healthy. While white bread, fast food, crisps, frozen foods like pizza, etc. won't look healthy. After that it's just portion control.

exacty
most people make it way harder then it is.

If you are way to fat, you just need to eat less and eat clean food and excerise

Cal in, cal out
and a cal is not just a cal

calculate your intake, calculate your need for protein, fat and carb

Do some form of sport where you sweat and have to work hard

lose fat.
books sold: 100.000

thank you, im rich

One thing i think is kinda funny is that the average person could probably just eat what he or she thinks looks healthy, and be eating very healthy. Most people will think that vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meat, fish, eggs, etc. look very healthy. While white bread, fast food, crisps, frozen foods like pizza, etc. won't look healthy. After that it's just portion control.

the one problem with this is that a HUGE percentage of people think low fat = healthy. Take for example yogurt. I guarantee you that 95+% of people would say that yoplait yogurt is healthy, when it's like 2g fat, 8g pro and like 35g carbs (almost all sugar). A cup of non-greek yogurt is normally the equivalent of a can of coke, but the yogurt is "healthy". Same goes for bread/pasta.

No problem eating healthy on a relatively low fat diet.Saying that people are idiots for thinking that low fat = healthy makes just as much sense as saying that people are idiots for thinking that high fat = healthy, which seems to be the case with a lot of people who champion the various low-carb diets. To say that you can eat healthy with a relatively high fat diet is a lot more reasonable.

I agree that in my "eat what you think looks healthy" plan there are exceptions. I don't share the same fear of pasta/bread that you apparently have, but I must admit I hadn't thought about yogurt. For some reason yogurt was always marketed as very healthy, at least where I live, which explains why people would think it is.

It's an easy diet really. It's just being discussed so much because it breaks what the government and nutritional experts have been telling us is the 'right way' to eat for about 50 years.

Basically avoid sugar, avoid carbs, avoid processed stuff, eat pretty much anything else.

In general just avoiding sugar would improve most peoples diets tremendously. This should be fairly non-controversial and is a view shared by both sides of the low-carb/low-fat divide (if there is such a thing).

No problem eating healthy on a relatively low fat diet.Saying that people are idiots for thinking that low fat = healthy makes just as much sense as saying that people are idiots for thinking that high fat = healthy, which seems to be the case with a lot of people who champion the various low-carb diets. To say that you can eat healthy with a relatively high fat diet is a lot more reasonable.

I could have said a few words differently, but you completely missed my point. Fruits and vegetables don't have much/any fat and are perfectly fine. Things that have the fat taken out of them and have that fat replaced with sugar (read: any food item on earth that is called reduced fat) are not healthy. . I'm know there are plenty of vegetarians that do fine, but avoiding fat by eating dannon yogurt and reduced fat oreos isn't going to make anyone healthier.

'Vegetables growing above ground: All kinds of cabbage, such as cauliflower, broccoli, cabbage, Brussels sprouts. Asparagus, zucchini, eggplant, olives, spinach, mushrooms, cucumber, lettuce, avocado, onions, peppers, tomatoes and more.'

Whats wrong with carrots and parsnips ?

The target is under 5g of carbs per 100g of intake or <30g of carbs per day. Carrots are low at under 5g of carbs per 100g. Parsnips are around 12g carbs per 100g. Source: http://www.low-carbdiet.co.uk/carbcount.asp?id=16 the before after pics are good http://www.low-carbdiet.co.uk/Pictures.asp 1 stone = 14 pounds = 6.35 kilograms

'Vegetables growing above ground: All kinds of cabbage, such as cauliflower, broccoli, cabbage, Brussels sprouts. Asparagus, zucchini, eggplant, olives, spinach, mushrooms, cucumber, lettuce, avocado, onions, peppers, tomatoes and more.'

Whats wrong with carrots and parsnips ?

They dont grow above ground?

One thing i think is kinda funny is that the average person could probably just eat what he or she thinks looks healthy, and be eating very healthy. Most people will think that vegetables, fruits, nuts, lean meat, fish, eggs, etc. look very healthy. While white bread, fast food, crisps, frozen foods like pizza, etc. won't look healthy. After that it's just portion control.

your assumptions are wrong, sir. i see obese coworkers everyday whose idea of a healthy lunch (and i've been seeing them eat for years) is a low fat chicken sandwich on wheat with apple sauce and a diet coke. they are never going to lose weight and get healthy following conventional advice unless they starve themselves miserably.

i am surrounded by middle-aged, working class Americans every day, good people who are trying to do the best they can. they obviously have enough willpower and discipline to hold down a 9-to-5 job and not be drug addicts, but according to conventional wisdom, they're lazy, undisciplined, slobs when they eat. and i'd estimate 90% of them are biological wrecks, and this is a fucking tragedy.

and i've been putting up page after page of clinical studies to support LCHF eating, but i guess that was all for naught. if you're going to criticize, at least take the time to scan through these studies so you can come to some kind of logical argument rather than just rambling about your beliefs.

"People would rather believe than know, and take for granted rather than find out."
- James Thurber

don't mind me, i got it. EPTPE.

Yeahhh... kitney failure. And that all to create a six pack.

the coconot and olive oil looks good. it all sounds really healthy.

as for me, i already mentioned i eat junk/fast food basically. sometimes breakfast at McDonald's, just the eggs and sausage with coffee. maybe eat breakfast 2/3 of time. breakfast is a ritual more than "gotta eat or else no energy" type thing. just ate Chipotle for lunch 2 days in a row: steak, guac, brown rice, but threw away most of the rice. mexican again last night, steak tortillas (i just eat it with a fork) with 2 glasses of red wine. night before, steak, no sauce. night before, chicken wings, again no sauce, (it wasn't that great, not enough fat, and i was hungry in the morning). there's also a ton of scrambled eggs in there somewhere.

i don't really have a set diet and i eat out a lot. it might be completely different next week. i just eat animals and baby animals and leave most of the carbs on the plate. so, basically i eat unhealthy according to conventional wisdom (and paleo also), and why i don't say i eat paleo anymore.

i might actually be more keto than anything right now. the only real paleo thing i do is go for extended periods without eating sometimes to keep my body guessing.

and i'm at my high school weight right now but with more muscle mass, and i get in some roadwork (hate treadmills) 1-2 times a week, but that's mostly for fun.

so that's my anecdotal data point. but all you have to do is look at the clinical trial data to see this is not all that extraordinary.

Even a LCHF diets suggest a good amount of intake of vegetables. What vegetables do you eat? or do you eat any?

your assumptions are wrong, sir. i see obese coworkers everyday whose idea of a healthy lunch (and i've been seeing them eat for years) is a low fat chicken sandwich on wheat with apple sauce and a diet coke. they are never going to lose weight and get healthy following conventional advice unless they starve themselves miserably.

i am surrounded by middle-aged, working class Americans every day, good people who are trying to do the best they can. they obviously have enough willpower and discipline to hold down a 9-to-5 job and not be drug addicts, but according to conventional wisdom, they're lazy, undisciplined, slobs when they eat. and i'd estimate 90% of them are biological wrecks, and this is a fucking tragedy.

and i've been putting up page after page of clinical studies to support LCHF eating, but i guess that was all for naught. if you're going to criticize, at least take the time to scan through these studies so you can come to some kind of logical argument rather than just rambling about your beliefs.

"People would rather believe than know, and take for granted rather than find out."
- James Thurber

What more is there to say, but... LOL

I went on weight watchers back in the day- total starvation the whole way- super low fat, something like 1500 calories a day (I was 340 lbs). I made it 2 weeks, lost 1 pound, and said fuck it obviously I couldn't keep that going.

Went on Atkins, lost about 4 lbs per week eating bacon, eggs, cheese, steak, dark veggies etc... and never looked back.

Low fat isn't going to hurt you, but I'll be damned if someone can lose a significant amount of weight eating like that.

Acombofosho how is your LC going?

Even a LCHF diets suggest a good amount of intake of vegetables. What vegetables do you eat? or do you eat any?

i consider veggies garnish. i go for most bang for the buck, and that's animal protein and fat. some people like the taste of vegetables, and i might eat some here and there, but i think it's kind of pointless.

i believe there's no biological need for vegetables in the presence of better energy sources, namely animals. this is one of the more pseudoscientific paleo mindsets that i've kept. basically, you can live your whole life eating nothing but animals, i.e. Inuit diet (but i do supplement with vitamins since i don't have easy access to offal). if you were to try the same thing using non-animal sources, you'd have to do what vegans do, which is have this complex store of different plants from around the world year-round to fill out your nutritional requirements.

and since paleolithic man's diet was limited by the seasons, he wouldn't have had access to edible plants year-round, so vegetables (if paleo man could find them) were basically something they ate to keep from dying when there was nothing else, not something they ate for robust health.

and this:
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/low-carb-library/are-we-meat-eaters-or-vegetarians-part-ii/

I went on weight watchers back in the day- total starvation the whole way- super low fat, something like 1500 calories a day (I was 340 lbs). I made it 2 weeks, lost 1 pound, and said fuck it obviously I couldn't keep that going.

exactly. low-fat is a fad and a failed theory based on bad science that's wrecked the health of hundreds of millions of people (as well as the psychological pain it's caused) for the past 30 years.

Isn't paleolithic man's diet also limited to what he could actually catch? We aren't the most athletically gifted species on the planet.

we're not so good on an individual physical level (except running long distances), but we're still the most effective predator species on this planet.

but this is getting into points i'll not defend in this thread as i've already mentioned it's unprovable and pseudoscientific. we can eat a lot of things, that's true enough.

whether one is metabolically better than the other is a better question, and those can be answered by the clinical studies on LCHF.