"Life Without Bread"
- Thread starter Ellipse
- Start date
Harold
Jedi Council Member
SeekinTruth said:
Leonore.... you kind of described me then.... SeekinTruth.... you kind of describe me now.
The most amazing result (for me) is the realization of addiction to food through grain and how little I actually have to eat. Financially, my grocery bill is overall less. Socially, the idea that I am leaving more to eat for others is not lost on me and is a positive side affect too!
But the whole NOT having those weird hunger pains and blood sugar roller coaster ride all day is sooooo liberating. For me I see it as a sort of super hidden secret.... maybe the lost fountain of youth in a symbolic sense.
Also, having the personal experience of eating this way, I see how it can enhance one's understanding of reality. At the moment, I cannot describe it in more detail. I guess the phrase 'knowledge protects' is what I mean. Less illness/no pills. The ethical treatment of animals is part of it too. The whole machine and agriculture's part in it is also what I am talking about. I dont 'consume' the same way as I used to at all and this is part of little goals I have had most of my life.
Also it is enjoyable to have relationships, directly with those who produce my meat. From their hands to mine.... I like that.
Harold said:
I couldn't agree more, Harold. :) It's a transition from the quantity of food you eat to the quality of food you eat. And everything else follows, including saving money on food in the long run!
mcb
The Living Force
Laura said:
I am thinking that protein restriction is also best done after completing weight loss/gain. I found it difficult to do while losing weight because it left me hungry, and I increased my protein intake until I was satisfied. It's not a major increase. The difference seems to be roughly proportional to the amount of excess weight I still have.
Megan said:
Megan,
My experience has been somewhat different - hence the question about protein restriction.
I was on the very low carb regime for quite some time without shedding any excess pounds. But when I restricted protein somewhat (to about 25g per meal), the pounds were slowly starting to come off. It didn't leave me unsatisfied, as long as I was upping the amount of fat ingested - which, as I have mentioned, has its own set of problems. I have now lifted my protein restrictions again - just eating whatever I feel to - and stuff the weight!
I will just leave my body adapt to whatever it wants to.
Having said that, I actually feel very good at the moment. Friends have commented on my looking the healthiest they have known me ... Maybe the weight I am on is just my set weight (I am not grossly obese, just a few love handles, so I guess that is ok).
mcb
The Living Force
nicklebleu said:
You can certainly experiment with it to see what works best for you. I just don't want people to think that they have to restrict protein while starting out. Protein restriction (better known as caloric restriction) is a dietary optimization for adults (not children or teens, and not pregnant women) and should not become an obstacle to success, I don't think.
Caloric restriction could help with healing, and if you can do it from the outset then do! It works, however, through simulating famine conditions (which could have been much more common in our evolutionary past). You don't necessarily want to create those conditions, however, if you are trying to lose weight because it can impede weight loss. Primal Body, Primal Mind, where caloric restriction is discussed, didn't address this issue that I saw, but other references such as the Atkins books advise not going hungry while losing weight.
Caloric restriction, which I first heard about a good many years ago, correlates with improved longevity and that, as far as I know, is the main reason for doing it. PBPM goes into detail about why it works and what you can expect from it. One should certainly learn about it before attempting to do it rather than just following a rule that says "no more than x grams of protein a day." You calculate the protein amount from your ideal body weight. And as Gedgaudas puts it
Oxajil said:
I have the same comment as Oxajil, Megan ...
I wasn't restricting calories, I was restricting proteins. I only ate around 25g of protein per meal (which is around 1 g/kg/day) and ate enough fat to be satiated. I wasn't feeling hungry at all, far crom it. My concern has been the upregulation of the mTOR system and the lack of weightloss on the higher protein regime (presumably because excess protein was shunted into gluconeogenesis).
Will not restrict proteins for the moment and see how I go.
mcb
The Living Force
nicklebleu said:
The term "calorie restriction" might be a bit dated and even confusing, but I think it is useful to use it here for the simple reason that people researching the subject are more likely to come across this forum if we use the same terminology.
The books aren't clear about this (or I missed something), but from personal experimentation it appears that you can increase protein up to a point without impairing weight loss, to avoid feeling hungry.
I think that this is going to turn out to be a very individual thing, but you can play around with protein, fat, and even carb intake to find a mix that will allow you to lose weight without going hungry. If I increase fat intake, I stop losing weight. If I increase protein or carb intake or both, however, I not only do not go hungry but I am finding that I often only want to have two meals instead of three.
Neither increasing protein intake nor carb intake would be a particularly good long-term strategy, but minor increases can assist weight loss which, hopefully, is something you only need to do for a limited amount of time.
Once my weight is about where I want it to be, I plan to restrict protein, with one possible exception. All my working life I have had problems with weight control when work-related stress was high. I seem to need to eat more in order to maintain my concentration and deal with the cause of the stress. So if I am experiencing a lot of stress, I may temporarily choose not to restrict protein. Fortunately with the low-carb diet, stress no longer causes me to gain weight. But being under stress and restricting food intake at the same time is a combination that just doesn't work well for me.
Carb restriction is still an issue as well. My housemate and I are planning to clear out a corner of the garage (moving the garden tools to a shed outside) to make room for a freezer so that we can buy local natural-diet meat in bulk. In the mean time our meat choices are extremely limited. Under these circumstances I am willing to consume more carbs and risk some anti-nutrient effects by obtaining more of my nutrients from plants.
If people find their way here and get up to speed with this thread, then calories becomes a 'red herring' - for all the reasons you give above - it is only about high protein (up to mTOR limit), high saturated fat, and relatively little carbohydrate and, introduced, as Laura has indicated earlier in a controlled manner to get to that state.Megan said:
I've found that this strategy works well, in fact, I've now got two small freezers, and that my fridge is mainly empty except for fats and cold meats.
Muxel
Dagobah Resident
My diet update:
I eat bacon, pork loin, and turkey. All prepackaged, from the supermarket. I save the lard and eat it. Sometimes I have catfish pieces. I drink only water, sometimes with a teabag in it. Somehow I find it hard to eat lard (too greasy for my taste?) and have to down it with water at the same time. I do the same with bacon. I guess I prefer my fat unrendered (it's sweeter that way). I have ACV but no salt or spices.
Wishlist:
Grass-fed meats. Chicken/duck liver. Pork ribs/stomach/intestine. Liver sausage. Beef brisket. Duckfat. Chicken/duck skins. Beef tallow. Pork bone broth. Venison & mutton. Cod. Shrimp & cuttlefish. Fish oil/blubber.
Problem:
Right now my main problem (aside from money) is that the meat-to-fat/organs ratio is too high. I worry that I am not fully in ketosis and that some protein is still getting converted to glucose to make up for the dietary fat deficiency.
Solution:
More fat/organs, less protein.
Supplements:
Vitamin C pills give me instant explosive diarrhea.
Hunger:
Has greatly diminished as expected. Needs very little to satiate. I wonder if it's even really necessary to worry about dietary restriction & TOR signaling. A proper fat-to-meat ratio would near-eliminate hunger, and maybe even allow one conscious control over it.
[quote author=C's]
A: It reflects a balance. That is, no gluttony, respect for the gifts of the goddess blood.
[/quote]
Unattainable:
Oysters, scallops, roe, lobster, sea cucumber...
I eat bacon, pork loin, and turkey. All prepackaged, from the supermarket. I save the lard and eat it. Sometimes I have catfish pieces. I drink only water, sometimes with a teabag in it. Somehow I find it hard to eat lard (too greasy for my taste?) and have to down it with water at the same time. I do the same with bacon. I guess I prefer my fat unrendered (it's sweeter that way). I have ACV but no salt or spices.
Wishlist:
Grass-fed meats. Chicken/duck liver. Pork ribs/stomach/intestine. Liver sausage. Beef brisket. Duckfat. Chicken/duck skins. Beef tallow. Pork bone broth. Venison & mutton. Cod. Shrimp & cuttlefish. Fish oil/blubber.
Problem:
Right now my main problem (aside from money) is that the meat-to-fat/organs ratio is too high. I worry that I am not fully in ketosis and that some protein is still getting converted to glucose to make up for the dietary fat deficiency.
Solution:
More fat/organs, less protein.
Supplements:
Vitamin C pills give me instant explosive diarrhea.
Hunger:
Has greatly diminished as expected. Needs very little to satiate. I wonder if it's even really necessary to worry about dietary restriction & TOR signaling. A proper fat-to-meat ratio would near-eliminate hunger, and maybe even allow one conscious control over it.
[quote author=C's]
A: It reflects a balance. That is, no gluttony, respect for the gifts of the goddess blood.
[/quote]
Unattainable:
Oysters, scallops, roe, lobster, sea cucumber...
It's time I joined the chorus of voices sharing favorable results from the low carb diet.
My parents and their siblings are good examples (unfortunately) of insulin related problems, with instances of type-2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, arthritis, alzheimer's, and congestive heart failure. Seeing this has encouraged me to look at supplements, exercise, and diets in an attempt to mitigate these potential outcomes.
This past year I gradually took out wheat and other glutens, dairy, coffee, starting smoking again, and reduced other carbs and sugar whenever possible. Breakfast is my big meal and dinner the lightest.
I could tell something was changing as my waist-belt migrated from the second to the fourth notch over the course of a few months. A couple of weeks back I had my annual checkup and was quite pleased to learn I lost 18 lbs since last year. I'm not a tall person (5'7"), and this weight takes me back about 15 years.
I mentioned the low carb approach to my doctor and he seemed pleased and supportive. Then, a few days later the lab tests were in and everything was ok except cholesterol which was way up. HDL-C increased 30% from last year. Total Cholesterol was up about 60% which means LDL-C is much higher, given how they calculate it. Now the doctor wants me on Statin drugs.
But, as explained in The Art and Science of Low Carb Living (p92), "serum LDL-C may transiently increase during the rapid weight loss phase of a low carbohydrate diet". Also in chapter 8, Volek and Phinney present reasonable arguments that cholesterol (and LDL in particular) is not necessarily the right target when aiming for cardiovascular health. Their suggested focus among other things is insulin resistance. And one way they gauge that is the ratio of triglycerides to HDL-C which in my case improved 27% from last year. So I plan to give this more time before considering a prescription.
In my experience, the low carb approach is producing results, far better than anything else. My next step is to experiment with protein restriction as described in Primal Body, Primal Mind. Also I want to add that the books and comments in this and related threads have been incredibly useful and are greatly appreciated.
My parents and their siblings are good examples (unfortunately) of insulin related problems, with instances of type-2 diabetes, high blood pressure, obesity, arthritis, alzheimer's, and congestive heart failure. Seeing this has encouraged me to look at supplements, exercise, and diets in an attempt to mitigate these potential outcomes.
This past year I gradually took out wheat and other glutens, dairy, coffee, starting smoking again, and reduced other carbs and sugar whenever possible. Breakfast is my big meal and dinner the lightest.
I could tell something was changing as my waist-belt migrated from the second to the fourth notch over the course of a few months. A couple of weeks back I had my annual checkup and was quite pleased to learn I lost 18 lbs since last year. I'm not a tall person (5'7"), and this weight takes me back about 15 years.
I mentioned the low carb approach to my doctor and he seemed pleased and supportive. Then, a few days later the lab tests were in and everything was ok except cholesterol which was way up. HDL-C increased 30% from last year. Total Cholesterol was up about 60% which means LDL-C is much higher, given how they calculate it. Now the doctor wants me on Statin drugs.
But, as explained in The Art and Science of Low Carb Living (p92), "serum LDL-C may transiently increase during the rapid weight loss phase of a low carbohydrate diet". Also in chapter 8, Volek and Phinney present reasonable arguments that cholesterol (and LDL in particular) is not necessarily the right target when aiming for cardiovascular health. Their suggested focus among other things is insulin resistance. And one way they gauge that is the ratio of triglycerides to HDL-C which in my case improved 27% from last year. So I plan to give this more time before considering a prescription.
In my experience, the low carb approach is producing results, far better than anything else. My next step is to experiment with protein restriction as described in Primal Body, Primal Mind. Also I want to add that the books and comments in this and related threads have been incredibly useful and are greatly appreciated.
l_autre_d said:
l_autre_d,
I wouldn't be too worried about your cholesterol blood results, I personally don't care about the numbers. All you have to do is do the diet and you will be fine.
Did your doctor also measure triglycerides? I think, that this is a much more useful test - and typically in low-carb eaters it is LOW to VERY LOW (which is good).
Before you embark on a treatment with statins, you should read up on this group of drugs to be able to make and informed decision.
Things to consider (amongst others) are:
* Lowering cholesterol might not be beneficial, as recent studies have shown that the lower your cholesterol, the more likely you are to die of stroke
* Even cardiologists admit now, that the survival benefit that studies might have been able to show is not due to the cholesterol-lowering effect per se, but probably on an anti-inflammatory effect
* Statins are drugs with a potentially very serious side-effects profile
As Laura has advised earlier in this thread you probably shouldn't really restrict proteins if you are relatively new to this type of diet. Let your body adapt to this new way to fuel it and let it heal itself before you make another major change in the composition of your nutrition.
To me it looks like you are on the right track - so my advice to you would be to just relax and carry on like that ...
I agree with nicklebleu. All the meta-analysis, etc. for the last couple of decades has shown that cholesterol has a very important all around health protective effect. Consistently, these studies showed that those with the highest cholesterol levels had the lowest all-cause mortality rates and those with the lowest cholesterol had the highest all-cause mortality rates. So, it seems if you want to live longer, it's better to have high cholesterol. The only problem connected with cholesterol is if it becomes oxidized, and this is actually eliminated with this diet.
Triglycerides, as mentioned by nicklebleu are much more important to keep low and with this diet they tend to be quite low (and tend to improve with this diet compared to before the diet).
Triglycerides, as mentioned by nicklebleu are much more important to keep low and with this diet they tend to be quite low (and tend to improve with this diet compared to before the diet).
