Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

[Guest guest]

Some say 5 meals a day whereas others say 3 meals a day. I feel you want three

meals a day with read meat 8 hours apart from each other, and two " raw milk "

meals inbetween them. For ex.: 6AM, 2PM, 10PM

 

From what I heard it takes 5 hours for fat to metabolize. You want a slow

digesting protein source all throughout the day so red meat is the best choice

for that. Red meat takes 8 hours to digest. Even when you sleep. So your energy

levels will be consistant throughout the day. Raw milk and eggs are also good

protein sources. They are also rich in fat. Protein from raw milk takes 2.5

hours to digest from cows. Protein from goats milk takes a half hour to digest.

Protein from eggs also take 30 minutes to digest. You could make the raw milk

drink a raw milk/raw egg blend. Mix in cinnamon, unrefined unheated

honey, nutmeg, and vanilla extract for extra flavor. It's very filling and

delicious.  

You want to eat a consistant level of calories everyday. It's based on your

activity level. Most people usually keep the same routine everyday. Do you work

an office job? Do you work monday-friday? How many hours. Do you often go out to

the mall/shopping? Do you ride bike, exercise, hike, walk? This affects your

activity level.

 

If you don't take in enough calories your hormones become suppressed, and your

body switches to burning your lean body mass as energy while storing fatty

adipose tissue for perceived famine.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W5tJskeuVaw & feature=player_embedded

http://180degreehealth.blogspot.com/2010/03/poor-poor-jimmy-moore.html

 

 

You need to figure out your bodyfat and bodyweight to figure out your base

metabolic rate. Take your lean body mass, excluding bodyfat weight, and multiply

it by 14. Your base metabolic rate is basicly your calorie expenditure when you

are sleeping, eating, and sitting without much mental activity.

 

Depending on your activity level you want to multiply your base metabolic rate

by 1.25, 1.5, or 2 and that's your daily caloric intake.

 

If you don't want to do all this stuff you can just get a bodybugg which

figures out your caloric expenditure for you. It's 90% accurate which is really

good.

 

http://www.bodybugg.com/

 

Don't take in more than 0.62g of protein per a pound of bodyweight a day. Taken

in the rest of your calories as 50% fat/50% carbs.

 

Sally Fallon's Stock based bone broth aids in absorption. Have that with your 3

solid meals. Her recipe produces 25 gallons of bone broth. Keep the unused

portions in the freezer.

 

Dan Holt

From: Ernst <rachelernst.com@...>

Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

 

Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

weight this way)

eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

[Guest guest]

A caloric deficit of 500 calories a day is known to be an effective approach.

 

Dan Holt

From: Ernst <rachelernst.com@...>

Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

 

Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

weight this way)

eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

[Guest guest]

1 gram of fat is 9 calories. 1 gram of carbohydrate is 4 calories. 1 gram of

protein is 4 calories.

 

The meat in a medium sized coconut contains 155g of fat and 60g of carb. I

don't count the protein content from vegetables, only the protein content from

animal meat, dairy, and eggs.

 

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/dairy-and-egg-products/111/2

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/beef-products/3477/2

http://www.organicpastures.com/products_milk.html

http://www.organicpastures.com/products_butter.html

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/vegetables-and-vegetable-products/2770/2

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/cereal-grains-and-pasta/5707/2

http://www.nutritiondata.com/facts/sweets/5568/2

 

Vegetables are low in calories so I don't factor them in. Fruits aren't really

that good to eat. Not necessary for a balanced diet. Except maybe berries,

cherries, and strawberries. However, those are very low in calories. Starches

are where you should get your bulk carbohydrates from.

 

Dan Holt

From: Ernst <rachelernst. comgmail (DOT) com>

Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

 

Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

weight this way)

eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

[Guest guest]

,

Two good books to read on this subject are " Good Calories, Bad Calories " by

Taubes and " The Liberation Diet " by Brown.

Here is a brief summary:

Every person has a unique metabolic rate, this sets your daily resting caloric

requirement. Daily activity, like exercise, raises your caloric requirement.

All the calories you eat in a day go into four different " buckets " :

1. Heat

2. Motion

3. Muscle

4. Fat

Each person has a unique distribution of calories into these buckets. This

explains all the people you've ever met. The fat guy that claims he doesn't over

eat has most of his calories go into fat. Even when he exercises, he eats more

calories, but most go to fat. The skinny guy that eats like a horse and never

gains weight. The Jock that eats like a horse and seems to grow muscles. There

doesn't appear to be much you can do to change your distribution. Although

eating a lot of carbs keeps your insulin levels too high for your body to ever

burn fat which is why carbs make you fat and low-carb diets are the most

effective at losing weight. (See Standford A-Z study).

If you just want to lose weight, go on a low carb diet. If you want to also

build muscle make sure you eat more protein.

Brown offers the addition advice which has been very successful with many

people following his program:

1. Eat fewer meals per day, like 1-3, not 3-6.

2. Eat plenty of fat as it keeps you from feeling hungry.

3. Intermittent fasting is okay. For example, don't eat on Friday.

4. Don't eat and then go to sleep.

5. Don't eat 3 hours before bed time.

6. If you can, do your exercise in the morning, before breakfast.

The last two points are designed to help maximize your " ketogenic window " .

Virtually everyone goes into ketosis when they sleep (1/3 of their lives). Not

eating 3 hours before bed expands the window to 11 hours and exercising before

breakfast forces your body to get all it's energy from fat and expands the

window by another hour or two.

Cheers,

--- In , Ernst <rachelernst.com@...>

wrote:

>

> Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

>

> What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> weight this way)

> eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

>

> Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dan,

Everyone's GI transit speed is unique and as a whole GI transit time can vary by

a factor of 3 from one person to the next.

My son and I for example can eat large amounts of food and have rapid transit

times. And we don't easily gain weight. My wife and daughter on the other hand

have much slower transit times.

Another example is my buddy. We ride bikes together. He has a hard time eating

any solid foods on rides because his transit time is very slow and gets an upset

stomach. He has to consume simpler carbs to get energy. On the other hand I can

eat virtually anything on a ride.

Cheers,

>

>

> From: Ernst <rachelernst.com@...>

> Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

>

> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

>

> What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> weight this way)

> eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

>

> Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Transit time is not genetic. It is based on your activity level and your health

status. So if you're not that active your transity time would likely be slower.

Probably because you don't have as much lean body mass so you don't burn as many

calories a minute.

 

Another reason could be suppressed metabolism from not taking in enough

calories. So if you get active but you don't take in enough calories to support

lean body mass your metabolism slows down, your performance suffers, and you put

on more adipose tissue.

 

If it's a health problem maybe it could be digestive issues, the types of foods

you are eating or are not eating could cause the problems. They're not eating

the right balance of nutrients. It took years to get that way and it's hard to

say how long it would take to recover.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 7:52 PM

 

Dan,

Everyone's GI transit speed is unique and as a whole GI transit time can vary by

a factor of 3 from one person to the next.

My son and I for example can eat large amounts of food and have rapid transit

times. And we don't easily gain weight. My wife and daughter on the other hand

have much slower transit times.

Another example is my buddy. We ride bikes together. He has a hard time eating

any solid foods on rides because his transit time is very slow and gets an upset

stomach. He has to consume simpler carbs to get energy. On the other hand I can

eat virtually anything on a ride.

Cheers,

>

>

> From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@...>

> Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

>

> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

>

> What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> weight this way)

> eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

>

> Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

>

>

[Guest guest]

Athletic people especially will have far faster metabolisms. Because they carry

more lean body mass so there's more caloric demand.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 7:52 PM

 

Dan,

Everyone's GI transit speed is unique and as a whole GI transit time can vary by

a factor of 3 from one person to the next.

My son and I for example can eat large amounts of food and have rapid transit

times. And we don't easily gain weight. My wife and daughter on the other hand

have much slower transit times.

Another example is my buddy. We ride bikes together. He has a hard time eating

any solid foods on rides because his transit time is very slow and gets an upset

stomach. He has to consume simpler carbs to get energy. On the other hand I can

eat virtually anything on a ride.

Cheers,

>

>

> From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@...>

> Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

>

> Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

>

>

>  

>

>

>

> Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

>

> What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> weight this way)

> eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

>

> Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

>

>

[Guest guest]

True, but do they have faster metabolisms because they are athletic or are they

athletic because they have faster metabolisms.

Or

Do skinny people move a lot because they are skinny or are they skinny because

they move a lot

Or

Do fat people move less because they are fat or are they fat because they don't

move a lot?

Cheers,

> >

> >

> > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> >

> > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> >

> >

> >  

> >

> >

> >

> > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> >

> > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > weight this way)

> > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> >

> > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Actually heavy people can have a higher metabolism (BMR) per height AND move

around less than people of average weight. There are two kinds of high

metabolism - the one where everthing works and you're just running the engine at

high speed (the athletes), or, the one where everything doesn't work very well

and there is extra work, extra cycles just to get a wee bit of energy going

(the obese).

C

> > >

> > >

> > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > >

> > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >  

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > >

> > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > weight this way)

> > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > >

> > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

you could try Fast-5

http://www.fast-5.com/

--- In , Ernst <rachelernst.com@...>

wrote:

>

> Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

>

> What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> weight this way)

> eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

>

> Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

where is her recipe that produces 25 gallons? her recipe in NT only uses 4

quarts of water or one gallon.

> Sally Fallon's Stock based bone broth aids in absorption. Have that with your

3 solid meals. Her recipe produces 25 gallons of bone broth. Keep the unused

portions in the freezer.

[Guest guest]

It really depends how much lean body mass that heavy person has. So if someone

is 250 pounds but they have 180 pounds of lean body mass their metabolism will

be faster than someone that is 150 pounds but has 130 pounds of lean body mass.

However, if someone is 220 pounds but they have 200 pounds of lean body mass

their metabolism will be faster than the person that is 250 pounds with 180

pounds of lean body mass.

 

Lean body mass determines your base metabolic rate.

 

Dan Holt

From: cbrown2008 <cbrown2008@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 9:15 AM

 

Actually heavy people can have a higher metabolism (BMR) per height AND move

around less than people of average weight. There are two kinds of high

metabolism - the one where everthing works and you're just running the engine at

high speed (the athletes), or, the one where everything doesn't work very well

and there is extra work, extra cycles just to get a wee bit of energy going (the

obese).

C

> > >

> > >

> > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > >

> > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >  

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > >

> > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > weight this way)

> > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > >

> > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Fat people are fat because they don't move around a lot. Their are those rare

cases where you get a fat person that is also highly athletic. However, they

will usually have a lot more muscle tone than your average fat person. An

athletic fat person is fat because they eat a massive level of calories, but

aren't intensely active enough to have more muscle rather than fat.

 

A " skinny " person usually just doesn't eat much or do much. Other skinny people

don't eat much but move around a lot. A lean person, can't really call them

skinny as that would mean no muscle tone, would likely be active and eat alot

because they have more lean body mass.

 

Athletic people have more lean body mass. The more lean body mass you have the

faster your metabolism will be. Their athletic activities, whether they had been

doing it recently or since childhood, promote more development of lean body mass

so they will have faster metabolisms.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 8:40 AM

 

True, but do they have faster metabolisms because they are athletic or are they

athletic because they have faster metabolisms.

Or

Do skinny people move a lot because they are skinny or are they skinny because

they move a lot

Or

Do fat people move less because they are fat or are they fat because they don't

move a lot?

Cheers,

> >

> >

> > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> >

> > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> >

> >

> >  

> >

> >

> >

> > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> >

> > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > weight this way)

> > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but still

> > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> >

> > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

Yeah, it's only one gallon of water. I didn't realize there was so little water

for such a huge amount of bones put in. So the bones must eventually become

liquid then through the 24-72 hours of making it. wow.

 

Dan Holt

From: carolyn_graff <zgraff@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Thursday, March 25, 2010, 11:22 AM

 

where is her recipe that produces 25 gallons? her recipe in NT only uses 4

quarts of water or one gallon.

--- In , Holt <danthemanholt@ ...>

wrote:

> Sally Fallon's Stock based bone broth aids in absorption. Have that with your

3 solid meals. Her recipe produces 25 gallons of bone broth. Keep the unused

portions in the freezer.

[Guest guest]

Dan,

Fat people don't move a lot because they are fat. This means that a larger

proportion of their energy goes into fat so less is available for motion. The

mainstream perception of this phenomena is that " fat people are lazy " . But the

reality is that they just simply don't have the energy available to move as much

as normal or skinny people.

Skinny people move more because they are skinny. This means that a larger

proportion of their energy goes into motion so less is available for fat

storage.

You see even if you make the fat person move more, they won't lose much if any

weight. The reason is that making them move more increases their caloric

requirements so they eat more. But since their energy distribution favors fat

storage, most of the extra calories will go into fat and not into motion and

thus you will never get them to be as active as other people.

If you make the skinny person move less and eat more, they will not add fat

efficiently because their energy distribution doesn't favor fat accumulation.

The primary problem with a calorie in is a calorie out, is that it assumes that

a uniform environment (human body) is in the middle. And there is lots of data

to show that each human body is unique in how it processes calories into heat,

work, fat and muscle.

Have you read " Good Calories, Bad Calories " ?

Cheers,

I know these notions fly in the face of mainstream thoughts on weight control

and exercise, but Taubes does a good job of explaining the results of numerous

studies that support this conclusion.

> > >

> > >

> > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > >

> > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >  

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > >

> > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > weight this way)

> > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > >

> > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

I base mine off of the understanding of base metabolic rate, ketogenics,

biochemistry, and exercise physiology. Obesity is caused by taking in too many

calories without the active lifestyle. However, as they do begin exercise they

generally don't take in enough calories for muscle growth so they then end up in

the yoyo diet cycle. At times they end up losing the lean mass they originally

had and become more obese.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Friday, March 26, 2010, 10:30 AM

 

Dan,

Fat people don't move a lot because they are fat. This means that a larger

proportion of their energy goes into fat so less is available for motion. The

mainstream perception of this phenomena is that " fat people are lazy " . But the

reality is that they just simply don't have the energy available to move as much

as normal or skinny people.

Skinny people move more because they are skinny. This means that a larger

proportion of their energy goes into motion so less is available for fat

storage.

You see even if you make the fat person move more, they won't lose much if any

weight. The reason is that making them move more increases their caloric

requirements so they eat more. But since their energy distribution favors fat

storage, most of the extra calories will go into fat and not into motion and

thus you will never get them to be as active as other people.

If you make the skinny person move less and eat more, they will not add fat

efficiently because their energy distribution doesn't favor fat accumulation.

The primary problem with a calorie in is a calorie out, is that it assumes that

a uniform environment (human body) is in the middle. And there is lots of data

to show that each human body is unique in how it processes calories into heat,

work, fat and muscle.

Have you read " Good Calories, Bad Calories " ?

Cheers,

I know these notions fly in the face of mainstream thoughts on weight control

and exercise, but Taubes does a good job of explaining the results of numerous

studies that support this conclusion.

> > >

> > >

> > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > >

> > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > >

> > >

> > >  

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get me

> > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > >

> > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2 snacks

> > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > weight this way)

> > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get slow

> > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > >

> > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > >

> > >

[Guest guest]

Dan,

With all due respect, there is very little sound science to support the notion

of " eat less, do more " .

If you want to understand all the technical details, I would strongly suggest

reading " Good Calories, Bad Calories " . Taubes spends several hundred pages

explaining in detail the problems with the current body of work in the field of

obesity research. His citation list is quite impressive if you want to review

his source material yourself.

If eat less, do more worked, we wouldn't have an obesity problem in this country

as there is more low calorie food and exercise opportunities than ever.

The other problem with eat less, do more is that it ignores the profoundly

different effects of different macro nutrients. As one example, carbohydrates

cause insulin levels to rise and insulin is a powerful appetite stimulating

hormone. Two diets of equal calories where one is 80% fat calories and the other

is 80% carb calories will produce dramatically different weight loss outcomes.

Further, the high fat diet will be far easier to stick to because it will

produce less feelings of hunger.

Cheers,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > > >

> > > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ÃÆ'‚ 

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get

me

> > > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > > >

> > > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2

snacks

> > > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > > weight this way)

> > > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get

slow

> > > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > > >

> > > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

What I am really saying is if you do less, eat less. If you do more, then eat

more. Eat specifically for your lifestyle and your choices.

 

There's fatigue in a high carb diet because there's more conversion involved

with carbs. With a high fat diet the body just adapts to using ketones and then

free fatty acids as it's primary energy source.

 

Depending on your lifestyle a high fat diet may be more ideal. However, if

you're an athlete a high fat isn't realistic. Still, for many athletes a 50/50

carb to fat ratio is perfect.

 

Fat adaptation sounds trickey because the books say it takes 12 hours for a body

to completely adapt. So then it sounds like it takes a lot of work to keep going

back and forth from a moderate fat to a high fat. Athletes absolutely need more

carbs for higher performance activities such as weights, sports, etc.

Fat burning is in the aerobic training zone whereas high levels of carb burning

is in the anaerobic training zone.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Friday, March 26, 2010, 11:09 AM

 

Dan,

With all due respect, there is very little sound science to support the notion

of " eat less, do more " .

If you want to understand all the technical details, I would strongly suggest

reading " Good Calories, Bad Calories " . Taubes spends several hundred pages

explaining in detail the problems with the current body of work in the field of

obesity research. His citation list is quite impressive if you want to review

his source material yourself.

If eat less, do more worked, we wouldn't have an obesity problem in this country

as there is more low calorie food and exercise opportunities than ever.

The other problem with eat less, do more is that it ignores the profoundly

different effects of different macro nutrients. As one example, carbohydrates

cause insulin levels to rise and insulin is a powerful appetite stimulating

hormone. Two diets of equal calories where one is 80% fat calories and the other

is 80% carb calories will produce dramatically different weight loss outcomes.

Further, the high fat diet will be far easier to stick to because it will

produce less feelings of hunger.

Cheers,

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > > >

> > > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > ÃÆ'‚ 

> > > >

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get

me

> > > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > > >

> > > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2

snacks

> > > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is losing

> > > > weight this way)

> > > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and small

> > > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get

slow

> > > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other day)

> > > >

> > > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > > >

> > > >

[Guest guest]

> What I am really saying is if you do less, eat less. If you do more, then eat

more. Eat specifically for your lifestyle and your choices.

What is saying - if you amend this to say, if you are not doing much

exercise, then don't each much carb energy, then that is more likely to work for

more people. The best use for starch and sugar above about 60 grams per day, is

for exercise more intense than an easy walk. I am not talking about fiber-rich

vegetables just plain old starch and sugar grams.

The problem with " eat less " is that often people make unfortunate choices on

which nutrient to eat less of. In particular women - if you say for example,

eat 45% carbs as a percent of calories, then a woman who doesn't exercise much

will eat not enough protein and fat and then lose even more LBM.

C

[Guest guest]

, don't bother. He won't read that book and he'll insist on always repeating

the same old falsehoods that Taubes has debunked.

>

> Dan,

>

> With all due respect, there is very little sound science to support the notion

of " eat less, do more " .

>

> If you want to understand all the technical details, I would strongly suggest

reading " Good Calories, Bad Calories " . Taubes spends several hundred pages

explaining in detail the problems with the current body of work in the field of

obesity research. His citation list is quite impressive if you want to review

his source material yourself.

>

> If eat less, do more worked, we wouldn't have an obesity problem in this

country as there is more low calorie food and exercise opportunities than ever.

>

> The other problem with eat less, do more is that it ignores the profoundly

different effects of different macro nutrients. As one example, carbohydrates

cause insulin levels to rise and insulin is a powerful appetite stimulating

hormone. Two diets of equal calories where one is 80% fat calories and the other

is 80% carb calories will produce dramatically different weight loss outcomes.

Further, the high fat diet will be far easier to stick to because it will

produce less feelings of hunger.

>

> Cheers,

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

, see, I told you...Same old nonsense repeated as he if was an expert

lecturing students.

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > > > >

> > > > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get

me

> > > > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > > > >

> > > > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2

snacks

> > > > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is

losing

> > > > > weight this way)

> > > > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and

small

> > > > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get

slow

> > > > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other

day)

> > > > >

> > > > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > > > >

> > > > >

[Guest guest]

Dan,

I work with people that feed professional athletes (NFL/NBA/NHL) and they have a

long and growing list of clients who are switching from high carb to high fat

and finding that it improves their performance.

You have to realize that most of science is heavily biased. Read Kuhn and you

will realize that science operates in paradigms and that much of the work of

scientists is manipulating data to fit a paradigm and not an objective and

isolated truth seeking process.

-

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > > > >

> > > > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ 

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get

me

> > > > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > > > >

> > > > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2

snacks

> > > > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is

losing

> > > > > weight this way)

> > > > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and

small

> > > > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get

slow

> > > > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other

day)

> > > > >

> > > > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > > > >

> > > > >

[Guest guest]

I have an understanding of how it works. The thing is that endurance sport and

weight training are atleast 50% anaerobic. Anaerobic activity burns a greater

amount of carbohydrates for energy. Your performance will suffer if you aren't

getting enough carbs in your system.

 

On the other hand there's a heavy bias towards going high carb, low fat. I don't

believe this approach is effective either. For that reason I recommend going 50%

carb and 50% fat for most activities. Only time you want to go higher carb is

far running and cycling. That's it. Even with sprinting you want to go 50/50

because even though you go high intensity there's a lot of down time will your

body burns more fat for energy. When you go a full sprint your VO2Max is around

150 as opposed to 70-90 with running. With weights it's at somewhere around 60.

With walking it's at 25. With sitting it's at 8.

Source: http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/kurilla1.htm

http://www.bodybuilding.com/fun/calories.htm

 

Read the entire article and play with the calorie menu and then tell me what you

come up with in your conclusion.

 

Dan Holt

From: paulsonntagericson <paulsonntagericson@...>

Subject: Re: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

Date: Sunday, March 28, 2010, 3:27 PM

 

Dan,

I work with people that feed professional athletes (NFL/NBA/NHL) and they have a

long and growing list of clients who are switching from high carb to high fat

and finding that it improves their performance.

You have to realize that most of science is heavily biased. Read Kuhn and you

will realize that science operates in paradigms and that much of the work of

scientists is manipulating data to fit a paradigm and not an objective and

isolated truth seeking process.

-

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > From: Ernst <rachelernst. com@>

> > > > > Subject: Need overview of Alternative eating times/amounts

> > > > >

> > > > > Date: Wednesday, March 24, 2010, 11:50 AM

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ÂÃ\

‚ 

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Couldn't think of a title for this one. I need an overview to just get

me

> > > > > started. Not even sure if this is off-topic or not.

> > > > >

> > > > > What are thoughts on changing eating patterns from the 3-meals + 2

snacks

> > > > > per day kind of standard American way to one of two other meal plans:

> > > > > A) one eating session per day, e.g. 1-4 p.m. (my father in law is

losing

> > > > > weight this way)

> > > > > eating differently from day to day, say more food on Monday and

small

> > > > > amount of food on Tuesday, the idea being your metabolism doesn't get

slow

> > > > > and lazy because it doesn't know what's coming next. How much of a

> > > > > difference in calories from one day to the next would be effective but

still

> > > > > healthy and doable for most people (i.e. not starvation every other

day)

> > > > >

> > > > > Are those better for weight loss but not as good for maintenance?

> > > > >

> > > > >

[Guest guest]

>

>

> If eat less, do more worked, we wouldn't have an obesity problem in this

country as there is more low calorie food and exercise opportunities than ever.

>