RE: Nuts vs. carbs --AND-- CR (was Re: Cretans and Okinawans)

[Guest guest]

>> Yes, the point here is that fat is less filling than unrefined carbs, so if

you are not going to be careful and mathematically measuring

your macronutrient intakes, you are not going to be on a CR diet while eating

fat ad libitum. And you can't think of trying CR in

our " real world " if you are not going to prepare your meals.

As I have shown, eating food that are low in calorie density and high in

nutrient density does make it much easier and remove some of the emphasis of

micro management.

> but I have seen several papers where you can observe that what

improves health on NIDDM-II subjects is not always the same

that 'protects' healthy people for not getting it.

If you took someone with Insulin Resistance, or Metabolic Syndrome and fed them

what I call a healthy diet, is it possible that for about 1/4 -1/2 of them

would there post prandial numbers look worse? yes. But the problem isnt the

food, the problem is the IR. Remove the food, or change it to less healthy and

the IR is still there, you just dont see it show up in the numbers. IR is

not caused by carbs, but by inactivity, excess calories, and excess body fat,

expecially around the waist. So, if you continute this healthy diet that may

have a short term appearance of getting worse and they start losing weight, the

appearance of getting worse goes away quickly and you remove the real problem

causing the IR.

(On a side not, its similar with the GI/GL. It most of the studies it is only

relevant in the overweighht and obese. So, do you remove the whole natural

foods that have higher GI/GLs even if they are low in calorie density and high

in nutrient density? or do you work on removing the obesity. Remove the

offending foods and the obesity remains. Remove the obesity and the problem

dissapears.)

We see it hear all the time. Some people with Diabeter and Metabolic Syndrome

want to leave in the first week cause their numbers look worse. So, I got to

expalin the physiology of what is going on to them and encourgae them to stay

another week or two (usually involves heavily drugging them and tieing them down

to the bed), Lo and behold, usually by the beginning if not mid of the second

week, everything changes. Numbers start improving. Many end up staying 3-8

weeks cause they cant beleive the difference and how good they feel. By the

end of the third week around 70-80% are off their medications with normal

numbers. And we pubisihed the info several times with 3- yr follow ups

(already posted here).

>>On the other hand, I believe in your approach of low-fat, but on a CR

approach I am not trying to get less in a per-cent basis by energy,

You lost me. I preach getting in MORE per cent energy. Calorie density is more

food per calorie.

>>but trying to take a moderate (my personal point of view here) amount to my

BW. In this approach, I eat 1-1.5-3 grams of f-p-c per kilogram

of BW, what derives in a 33-22-44 f-p-c per-cent by energy. (My fiber is always

over 50 grams a day).

You lost me again. So, does that mean I sould eat more apples, berries or kale

to fit the numbers you are talking about? To complicated for me. I would

rather choose the healthiest whole foods that fit a much more simplier criteria,

and let the numbers fall where they may than shoot for some idealistic numbers

and try to make the foods fit. Otherwise, I would be going nuts!!!

>> Ok, I agree that ad libitum eating at a low fat diet almost always ends in a

CR diet, so that is what works.

Amen! Simplicity rules.

Thanks

Jeff