Comments on: Interview with Gary Taubes (part 8) http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/ Self-Experimentation, Scientific Method, the Shangri-La Diet, etc. Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:37:32 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: Eric http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-218981 Wed, 10 Sep 2008 14:42:43 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-218981 Well, after 2 years on the Esselstyn diet, not counting calories at all, and eating as much as I want, I'm still 50 pounds lighter than I was when I started, my exercise endurance is better than it was 20 years ago, and I'm off all medecines. Lipid panel for those who believe in these numbers are well below Esselstyn's target of sub 159 TC. I have no idea if Taube's and the low carb crowd are on to anything, but I see no reason to question whether Esselstyn's diet works or not when it's been so easy to maintain results. Really, if you doubt that this kind of weight loss is possible, just try it for a month and see what happens. Well, after 2 years on the Esselstyn diet, not counting calories at all, and eating as much as I want, I’m still 50 pounds lighter than I was when I started, my exercise endurance is better than it was 20 years ago, and I’m off all medecines. Lipid panel for those who believe in these numbers are well below Esselstyn’s target of sub 159 TC. I have no idea if Taube’s and the low carb crowd are on to anything, but I see no reason to question whether Esselstyn’s diet works or not when it’s been so easy to maintain results. Really, if you doubt that this kind of weight loss is possible, just try it for a month and see what happens.

]]> by: Sue http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-187201 Thu, 03 Jul 2008 10:45:18 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-187201 Must have been a lot of lean body mass loss with the McDougall diet as low-carb is muscle sparing. Must have been a lot of lean body mass loss with the McDougall diet as low-carb is muscle sparing.

]]> by: Varangy http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-183337 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:32:48 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-183337 @Eric I find .33 to .5 lbs of fat/day extremely hard to believe. I suspect a not insignificant portion was initial water weight. Regarding my diet, I do eat so-called 'whole foods' as I have recently started eating hyperlipid* (majority of calories from fat, moderate amount from protein, little from carbs) and have had fantastic results. My average weight loss per day was about .12 lbs per day. My sleep has dramatically improved as well. *And no, I don't believe the lipid hypothesis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis ). :) @Eric

I find .33 to .5 lbs of fat/day extremely hard to believe. I suspect a not insignificant portion was initial water weight.

Regarding my diet, I do eat so-called ‘whole foods’ as I have recently started eating hyperlipid* (majority of calories from fat, moderate amount from protein, little from carbs) and have had fantastic results. My average weight loss per day was about .12 lbs per day. My sleep has dramatically improved as well.

*And no, I don’t believe the lipid hypothesis ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lipid_hypothesis ).

:)

]]> by: Eric http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-183057 Tue, 24 Jun 2008 02:57:10 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-183057 Varangy, It's not far-fetched at all. I lost 50 lbs over 5 months following McDougall/Esselstyn's plans, with much of the loss coming in the first 3 months. I've kept it off for over a year and a half and have never counted a calorie. If you take out extremely calorie dense foods (oils, meats, dairy) and substitute them with bulky less calorie dense foods, you will feel full on far fewer calories than ever before. If you doubt it so much, why don't you just try it for a month and see? Don't worry, eating lots of veggies and whole foods won't hurt you. Varangy, It’s not far-fetched at all. I lost 50 lbs over 5 months following McDougall/Esselstyn’s plans, with much of the loss coming in the first 3 months. I’ve kept it off for over a year and a half and have never counted a calorie. If you take out extremely calorie dense foods (oils, meats, dairy) and substitute them with bulky less calorie dense foods, you will feel full on far fewer calories than ever before. If you doubt it so much, why don’t you just try it for a month and see? Don’t worry, eating lots of veggies and whole foods won’t hurt you.

]]> by: Neil Wilkinson http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-107091 Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:30:23 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-107091 Whatever the diet, a loss of 4lbs of fat equates to a 'loss' of approx 14000 calories. Much of initial large scale loss has to be more than just fat loss(which is the only thing that people actually want to lose) Losing even a pound of fat (3500 cal) over the long term would seem a pretty demanding target. Whatever the diet, a loss of 4lbs of fat equates to a ‘loss’ of approx 14000 calories. Much of initial large scale loss has to be more than just fat loss(which is the only thing that people actually want to lose) Losing even a pound of fat (3500 cal) over the long term would seem a pretty demanding target.

]]> by: Kevin C http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-105065 Mon, 14 Jan 2008 05:01:51 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-105065 Actually, Varangy, I don't think it's outrageous at all. I experienced a similar rapid weight loss years ago, and it was on a very low fat diet. At the time I was following a plan very similar to the low-fat diet outlined in "Eat More, Weigh Less" by Dr. Dean Ornish. 4 pounds a week for an extended period of time seems unlikely, but 4 or 5 pounds during the first week of a program is not unusual. Of course, much of that weight might be from water loss and from your bowels and not really body fat loss. Actually, Varangy, I don’t think it’s outrageous at all. I experienced a similar rapid weight loss years ago, and it was on a very low fat diet. At the time I was following a plan very similar to the low-fat diet outlined in “Eat More, Weigh Less” by Dr. Dean Ornish. 4 pounds a week for an extended period of time seems unlikely, but 4 or 5 pounds during the first week of a program is not unusual. Of course, much of that weight might be from water loss and from your bowels and not really body fat loss.

]]> by: Varangy http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104874 Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:03:35 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104874 Does anyone else think that Dr. McDougall’s clinic's claim of weight loss seems totally, well, ridiculous? *******Our patients’ average weight loss is 4 pounds (2 Kg) in 7 days; that’s half a pound a day while eating unlimited amounts of delicious foods, served buffet-style.******* 1/2 pound a day? No f------- way! (Apologies for the unintentional rhyme). Does anyone else think that Dr. McDougall’s clinic’s claim of weight loss seems totally, well, ridiculous?

*******Our patients’ average weight loss is 4 pounds (2 Kg) in 7 days; that’s half a pound a day while eating unlimited amounts of delicious foods, served buffet-style.*******

1/2 pound a day? No f——- way! (Apologies for the unintentional rhyme).

]]> by: Seth’s blog » Blog Archive » Interview with Gary Taubes (directory) http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104400 Sat, 12 Jan 2008 23:57:18 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104400 [...] Interview with Gary Taubes (part 8) [...] […] Interview with Gary Taubes (part 8) […]

]]> by: David Brown http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104335 Sat, 12 Jan 2008 21:40:57 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104335 Oops: Forgot to include the address for the article. Here 'tis: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/85/8550cover.html Oops: Forgot to include the address for the article. Here ’tis: http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/85/8550cover.html

]]> by: David Brown http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104333 Sat, 12 Jan 2008 21:37:55 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2008/01/11/interview-with-gary-taubes-part-8/#comment-104333 Tom and Dennis, I imagine differences of opinion regarding what constitutes the "proper" approach to weight control could be resolved if more experts understood the importance of "Biochemical Individuality." That's the title of a book by Roger J. Williams that was published more than 30 years ago. Mainstream science is only now beginning to appreciate the range of variation in human metabolic makeup as manefested in individualized responses to food intake. Some people are really not all that sensitive to carbs. Others must strictly limit their intake to keep from gaining weight. There's some excellent discussion of this on pages 85-86 of "Nutrition Against Disease," also authored by Dr. Williams. For example: "Kuo and his coworkers found that the liver tissue of individuals with high blood fat levels took up fructose five times as rapidly as individuals whose blood-fat levels were lower. Fat tissue from individuals with high blood fat levels also took up fructose seven to eight times more rapidly than the fat tissues of individuals with low blood fat levels. This shows how biochemical individuality comes into the problem and gives us a lead as to how some individuals may be adversely affected by the fructose content of sucrose." The notes at the back of the book contain further comment: "In their study of eight “hyperlipidemic” patients, Kuo and colleagues found that dietary sugar (sucrose) administered to patients causes blood fats to increase, while starch tends to lower them. They found that individuals who had low blood fat levels were relatively resistant to the effects of sugar, and that 85 to 90 percent of the total calorie intake in sugar was required to produce hyperglyceridemia." Notice the difference between metabolic response to starches and sugar. For some, just reducing sugar intake while consuming all the unrefined carbs they want will result in weight loss. So Dr. McDougall's approach does work for some but not for others. I suggest you guys read a December 10, 2007 article by Carmen Drahl published in CE&N subtitled "The maturing field of metabolomics is taking steps toward guiding personalized nutrition." David brown Nutrition Education Project Tom and Dennis,

I imagine differences of opinion regarding what constitutes the “proper” approach to weight control could be resolved if more experts understood the importance of “Biochemical Individuality.” That’s the title of a book by Roger J. Williams that was published more than 30 years ago. Mainstream science is only now beginning to appreciate the range of variation in human metabolic makeup as manefested in individualized responses to food intake.

Some people are really not all that sensitive to carbs. Others must strictly limit their intake to keep from gaining weight. There’s some excellent discussion of this on pages 85-86 of “Nutrition Against Disease,” also authored by Dr. Williams. For example: “Kuo and his coworkers found that the liver tissue of individuals with high blood fat levels took up fructose five times as rapidly as individuals whose blood-fat levels were lower. Fat tissue from individuals with high blood fat levels also took up fructose seven to eight times more rapidly than the fat tissues of individuals with low blood fat levels. This shows how biochemical individuality comes into the problem and gives us a lead as to how some individuals may be adversely affected by the fructose content of sucrose.”
The notes at the back of the book contain further comment: “In their study of eight “hyperlipidemic” patients, Kuo and colleagues found that dietary sugar (sucrose) administered to patients causes blood fats to increase, while starch tends to lower them. They found that individuals who had low blood fat levels were relatively resistant to the effects of sugar, and that 85 to 90 percent of the total calorie intake in sugar was required to produce hyperglyceridemia.”

Notice the difference between metabolic response to starches and sugar. For some, just reducing sugar intake while consuming all the unrefined carbs they want will result in weight loss. So Dr. McDougall’s approach does work for some but not for others.

I suggest you guys read a December 10, 2007 article by Carmen Drahl published in CE&N subtitled “The maturing field of metabolomics is taking steps toward guiding personalized nutrition.”

David brown
Nutrition Education Project

]]>