Tatyana

Absolutely fantastic mate! DEtox is hell, but beer and alcohol are like (said in a slavic accent) "liquid bread"

I am not a big fan of the ATkins diet, think it is a good way to kick start, however most BBers don't do one and manage to cut fat quite well. They do cut the dairy though, as dairy makes you look soft!!

You and me mate both in the detox with the interrupted sleep patterns!

Team Detox and Truth, that's us that is

Big Hug and Kiss

BL1

Hacks mate thats excellent progress - well done for sticking do it and cutting the beer down. !0.5lbs loss/3inchs off the waist - bet the jeans are fitting a bit nicer now !!!
I'm assuming your still doing no cardio ?? Are you having any cheap or carb up days ??

hackskii

I up the carbs some but still no cardio and now I am 11 lbs lighter today.

What I think is nice last time I dieted I lost 1" for every 5 lbs of weight.
I am above that at the moment with 3" for 11 lbs.
Hey what better indication for fat loss that measuring the waist?
I feel fantastic too.

So as people think atkins type diet is not for weight lifters I am not sure but I do think there is a way of doing it (replacing glycogen stores) following a workout and this might be better than the carbup days.
I have not put it to the test as I have to go buy some stuff but I do have something I am thinking about.

Actually some protein does get converted into blood sugars. I have the numbers and will post them later (I have to find them).

__________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." - George Carlin


Scott


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

DB

gotta be almost pic time hacks?

__________________
DB
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
often imitated never duplicated
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


DB sleeps with a night light. Not because DB is
afraid of the dark, but the dark is afraid of DB.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

big

Nice going dude. But how is your strength holding up?

__________________


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.



To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

hackskii

Not bad, last week I hit another personal best in dead lifts.
I pretty much just started them though about 4-5 months ago so I must proably am getting stronger as I have not hit a plateau yet.

Other than that I was a tad bit sick and still am, kindof run down some.
Now If I was drinking and smoking I would be full blown sick right now but it is kindof lingering.
I felt too achy yesterday to do shoulders so I just kindof got a little pump.

Today is Friday and I have arms but I do want to go out tonight bad.
Although I dont want to run myself down any more, I love Fridays.
Cheat day and this is the only day I get out without feeling guilt for doing that.

But all in all, lost some strength in upper body but none really in legs.

Now if I only had some cash for some HGH, oh man, that would be nice right about now.
Positive nitrogen ballance during a high protein diet
Oh and not to mention excellerated fat loss with that:smoke:

Ah well, best I kept my money in my pocket anyway.
I am still losing nicely and I cant have any probs with that.
Why mess with success anyway?
It is going good right now.

Picks will be in another 10-15 lbs, DB, maybe if I get the right lighting and a good photo editing program I will get them sooner....haaaa haaaa

__________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." - George Carlin


Scott


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Tatyana

Hackskii man,

our bodies can turn bloody anything into sugars, glucose is the only thing our brains will 'eat'. our bodies can also turn any of the macronutrients, in excess, into fat! The easiest one to turn to fat is fat, and as the Atkins diet calls for high levels of fat!

IMO taking out an entire food group is not the way to go, I do think if you need a kick up (big fat ) butt, then yes have a go at the Atkins diet.

Is this keto diet the kind of thing you can maintain for life? IMO it is more important to learn how to eat 'clean' and healthy in a way that you can have a lean, mean, eating machine (that's me) for life. I can eat up to 3000 kcals day and not get fat! It is just the foods I eat and when I eat some of them. So who do you think is having more fun on their diet now?

And I am NOT constipated with smelly keto breath!

Did I tell you that I am a biomedical scientist in BIOCHEMISTRY! So I know the glycolysis/gluconeogenesis thing like the back of my hand big buddy!

I just look like a bit of a dumb blonde, I quite like the contrast, keeps you lads on your toes. As Tiny Tom said, don't be fooled by the bikini! :o

hackskii

Actually this statement is not true. It is far easier to turn carbohydrates into that then fat into fat. Reason being is two fold.
First you can only store about 400 grams of glycogen in the muscles and about 70 grams of glycogen in the liver.
ANY excess and it is stored as fat. Now granted weightlifters and people that exercise will have depletion of glycogen stores and less apt to store but ANY excess is again stored as fat
Secondly, spiking blood sugars regardless of how much as said above has an effect on insulin; insulin is a transport/storage hormone. Spiking insulin can cause blood sugars to be stored as fat.
Fat has little or almost no response on insulin so the mechanism of storage is shut down. Now I am not saying eat a pound of fat and lose weight but there are fats like Omega 3’s that actually can ramp up fat loss.
So using the wide brush of fat as claimed above is not actually wrong but adding Omega 3s to ones diet can promote fat loss.

Dietary Fat Does Not Make You Fat!
The solution to this apparent riddle might surprise you, but the explanation is simple. Eating fat in the proper amounts does not make you fat. I will take this one step farther. Eating fat does not make you fat. This sounds like nutritional heresy, but there’s scientific proof. In the 1950’s, Kekwick and Pawan at the University of London in England published a landmark study. They put patients on a diet that was low in calories (1000) but high in fat. In fact, fat supplied 90 percent of the total calories. What happened? Those patients lost significant amounts of weight. When the same patients were put on a high-carbohydrate diet (90% of the calories form carbs) with the same number of calories, there was virtually no weight loss.

So your above statement is not true.


Actually this statement is incorrect too.
The body can use ketones for fuel for the brain but glucose is the preferred fuel.
People that used to suffer from epilepsy used to be put on a ketogenic diet to control seizures and 100 years ago when meds were not available to stop the seizures this was the only method of surviving a normal life with epilepsy.
They did studies on this and the people lived normal healthy lives and one of the side effects from this diet for epilepsy was fat loss.
So again, I am correcting your statement as it actually is not correct.


I never said I was doing this for life number one, I said I was on a diet.
Diets are one of my passions and I follow this pretty deep.
I have used the Zone 40/30/30 diet with good success.
I have used the Atkins diet with good success.
I am kindof testing the difference as when I was doing zone type dieting I lost 1” around my waist for every 5 lbs of weight.
I am actually exceeding that right now, so I can’t say either one is better nor worse than the other.
I am 46 years old and have been reading, studying, and actively participating in diets for over 20 years. This is nothing new to me and I have as much knowledge or more than most people I know.
Eating clean? I am very aware of eating clean and which nutrients come from which foods. It is all about balance.
This is something I am just doing for right now.

Good for you babe, glad I can have someone to have a deep conversation with.
Now if you don’t mind I will give you a little lesson.
Ready?
Let’s go!

Fat burning

Lets look at some research that supports the fat burning theory, this time from the Oakland Navel Hospital. Impressed with the Kekwick and Pawan success, Frederick Beoit and his associates decided to compare a 1000 calorie, 10-grams-of-carbohydrate, high-fat diet with fasting. Using seven men weighing between 230 and 290 pounds. They used state of the art body composition technology. After ten days, the fasting subjects lost 21 pounds on average, but most of that was lean body weight; only 7.5 pounds was body fat. However on the controlled carbohydrate regimen over the same period of time, 10 of the 14.5 pounds lost was body fat. Think of it. By eating foods low in carbohydrate and high in dietary fat, subjects burned their fat stores almost twice as fast as when they ate nothing at all!

Benoit’s other exciting discovery was that on a fat burning regimen, subjects maintained their potassium levels, while subjects who fasted experienced major potassium losses. (potassium depletion can cause heart arrhythmia, which in severe cases, can be fatal.)

Still not convinced?
Try this one. Charlotte Young, professor of clinical nutrition at Cornell University, compared the results of overweight young men placed on three diets, all providing 1800 calories, but with varying degrees of carbohydrate restriction. The regimens contained 30, 60, and 104 grams of carbohydrate, and subjects followed them for nine weeks. Young and her colleagues calculated body fat through a widely accepted technique involving immersion underwater.

Those on the 104 grams of carbs lost slightly better than 2 pounds of fat per week out of 2.73 pounds of total weight loss-not bad for 1800 calories.

Those on 60 grams of carbs lost nearly 2.5 pounds of fat per week out of 3 pounds of actual weight loss-better.

But those on 30 grams of carbs, the only situation that produced lipolysis and the secondary process of ketosis lost 3.73 pounds of fat per week approximately one hundred percent of their total weight loss.

Several other studies have shown that you can consume more calories and lose more weight than on low fat programs.

One study done in Glasgow described overweight women who after three months had lost 14.5 pounds on a thirty-five-percent carbohydrate diet of 1200 calories and 12.3 pounds on a fifty-eight percent carbohydrate diet of 1200 calories. That’s fairly slow weight loss and pretty strict caloric deprivation. The advantage went to the lower-carbohydrate diet as always, but the lesson is that stricter carbohydrate control makes for an even more successful weight loss plan.

Two facts should be noted: first, in all cases, the lower carbohydrate group did lose more weight than the higher-carbohydrate group. Second, in two of the studies cardiovascular risk factors improved significantly but only in the subjects who were on a lower carbohydrate intake. The folks who got put on a high-carbohydrate diet showed no significant improvements in these health indicatiors.

That leaves one last study, which was really a blowout. Published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2000, it reported on a group of obese adolescents put on a controlled carbohydrate diet with no restriction on calories for three months and meticulously monitored throughout that period. By design the regimen was based on the Atkins approach. The group was compared with a control group put on a low fat diet.

The results? Well, naturally the adolescents lost significantly more weight on the controlled carbohydrate diet than on the low fat diet. The written records indicated that at the end of the trial the adolescents in the controlled carbohydrate group had averaged 1830 calories daily, while the adolescents in the low fat group had consumed 1100 calories. The controlled carbohydrate group averaged 21.7 pounds lost, compared to 9.1 pounds for the low-fat group, and a significant improvement in body mass index (BMI), compared with the low-fat dieters.

As studies like this become increasingly common, opposition to a controlled carbohydrate nutritional approach should fall away even more quickly than has already been the case in recent years.


Another study:

Published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in 2000, it reported on a group of obese adolescents put on a controlled carbohydrate diet with no restriction on calories for three months and meticulously monitored throughout that period. By design the regimen was based on the Atkins approach. The group was compared with a control group put on a low fat diet.

The results? Well, naturally the adolescents lost significantly more weight on the controlled carbohydrate diet than on the low fat diet. The written records indicated that at the end of the trial the adolescents in the controlled carbohydrate group had averaged 1830 calories daily, while the adolescents in the low fat group had consumed 1100 calories. The controlled carbohydrate group averaged 21.7 pounds lost, compared to 9.1 pounds for the low-fat group, and a significant improvement in body mass index (BMI), compared with the low-fat dieters.


Another study:

One study done in Glasgow described overweight women who after three months had lost 14.5 pounds on a thirty-five-percent carbohydrate diet of 1200 calories and 12.3 pounds on a fifty-eight percent carbohydrate diet of 1200 calories. That’s fairly slow weight loss and pretty strict caloric deprivation. The advantage went to the lower-carbohydrate diet as always, but the lesson is that stricter carbohydrate control makes for an even more successful weight loss plan.

Two facts should be noted: first, in all cases, the lower carbohydrate group did lose more weight than the higher-carbohydrate group. Second, in two of the studies cardiovascular risk factors improved significantly but only in the subjects who were on a lower carbohydrate intake. The folks who got put on a high-carbohydrate diet showed no significant improvements in these health indicators.

Still not convinced?
Try this one. Charlotte Young, professor of clinical nutrition at Cornell University, compared the results of overweight young men placed on three diets, all providing 1800 calories, but with varying degrees of carbohydrate restriction. The regimens contained 30, 60, and 104 grams of carbohydrate, and subjects followed them for nine weeks. Young and her colleagues calculated body fat through a widely accepted technique involving immersion underwater.

Those on the 104 grams of carbs lost slightly better than 2 pounds of fat per week out of 2.73 pounds of total weight loss-not bad for 1800 calories.

Those on 60 grams of carbs lost nearly 2.5 pounds of fat per week out of 3 pounds of actual weight loss-better.

But those on 30 grams of carbs, the only situation that produced lipolysis and the secondary process of ketosis lost 3.73 pounds of fat per week approximately one hundred percent of their total weight loss.


I wanted to wait till the end to type the problems that I have with fats in the diet compared to carbohydrates I have in the body.

1. Animal fats I feel might not be good because toxins and chemicals are stored in the fats of animals. So by eating the fat from animals you are ingesting the same toxins as the animal that had them.
2. With lowering the consumption of carbs in the diet and replacing them with fats you hav a nutritional void in the vitamins and minerals in the body.
3. This is something that most people have never heard of and this is something called Acid ashing and alkaline ashing. Proteins tend to lower PH (more acidic) and depending on the carbs can raise PH (alkaline). The body is healthier in the alkaline state and many sick people are on the acidic side. A simple test can pe PH or litmus paper. Used first **** in the morning will tell you where you stand ph wise. You can also test you ph using saliva. Between the two can tell you pretty much where you stand.
Fats are neutral on the acid or alkaline.

In carbohydrates especially vegetables where minerals are present the body can change its ph through food selections. This can be beneficial for people who get sick a lot.

If you want to find more about acid ashing and alkaline ashing then you can do a search on the internet. This is kind of out of the box as well as traditional nutrition. I wont tell you what it is but it is informative reading.

Lastly, saturated fats and alcohol can cause deficiencies in GLA.

__________________
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." - George Carlin


Scott


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Felicite

I am so glad fats are in vogue now!!!
I love butter!

__________________
Success is just disciplined action towards a committed goal.

Peg

My two cents if I may:
A wise nutritionist once told me the following:
The human body is a complex profound brilliant example of design.
Everything about it is interrelated. To take one aspect of the biochemistry and say do this and another aspect and say do that, both are correct so far as each aspect is concerned, but they do not speak to the whole.

I can say take 3000mg of vitamin C for your cold and you will get better, but if you do not have the other macro and micronutrients needed along side the vitamin C then the C will do its part as best it can with the lacking of the other nutrients needed, but the body will not be able to do anything more than what it is given to combat the cold.

Each diet will take a part of the biochemistry and make it the cureall for fat loss and make huge profits off of it. People will swear by it because it works for them...

But I will say this, the better way is to take the whole spectrum of biochemistry into account, listen to your own body and its own particular needs, and change the lifestyle to meet those needs. You are what you feed yourself.

The bottom line is that the body needs certain nutrients to function properly in a certain quantity and quality. If we do not supply the body with those nutrients then we are affecting the delicate balance of its biochemistry.

It is an awesome machine and adapts and survives. When we understand this process of adaptation and survival, fat loss is a simple thing, building muscle mass is a simple thing...

I think our delimma is that we want to manipulate it to be faster. It took 5 years to put it on but I want it off in 2 months.

Not to say we can't take it off faster and not to say that the body is hurt if we do take it off faster. I am just speaking about the mind set towards dieting here.

The body adapts to what we do to it. That is why it is such a profound design. The question becomes for the one adaptation we are looking for quickly will it cause a depletion or lack in another area of the design to compensate for our quick fixes....

Science tells me yes, if the whole of the nutritional needs are not met or we add or compound those that are.

I've been on the diet yo you for a long time all with some degree of success but never kept the weight off until I changed the way I looked at weight loss and instead of focusing on just one part of the biochemistry I set out to discover the beauty and glory of the design and learn to respect it and listen to it instead of trying to get it to listen to me. It's paid off big time both physically and mentally.

__________________
"21st century man is not conquered by guns, nor by oppression, but by seduction."

"Pride to the human heart is like lard to the pig." Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

"The best punch is the one that is both first, last, and ends the fight."

Tatyana

Scott does know his stuff and his correction on brain eating ketones is correct, my bad, however, you really do not want to be getting to the starvation state where the brain has to eat ketones, you will feel as sick as a D.O.G.

I skimmed a lot of the studies, will read them in a bit, however, I said the Atkins diet is not my fav for this reason, NOT ALL FATS ARE CREATED EQUAL!

Omega-3s are good, (and there is some debate about 6 interferring with the use of omega-9) however, butter in excess is not all that great!

In a macrobiotic diet, small amounts of butter are used, in the spring to help cleanse the liver.

Butter is not one of the fats to focus on, fats that are liquid at room temperature are preferred!

Tatyana

Scott,
I would like to see the full papers please that you have reference, send me the abstracts or copies as there are a number of issues I think need to be addresses.

Firstly, in a number of 'physiological studies' in which people are used for diet and exercise, the sample sizes are quite small, often around 10, and for science to be statistically robust, sample sizes of 30 are required! It is a BIG problem because scientific funding is often limited, especially in the areas of nutrition.

Large populations samples are required as there is also a HUGE issue with participant compliance, people may be paid to participate in studies, and as we all know, people lie about their diets, how much they are eating.................................

I also need to figure out how you do that quote thing..

In the Benoit study, I would call this an absolutely B*llux study, comparing fasting and high fat!!!!!! Of course the people who actually bloody ate were going to fare better! DOH! I think that there would be BIG issues with compliance unless all the participants were kept in the lab, and how long did they make these poor buggers fast for? I really want to see the method on this one (and the ethics approval as well!). It is well established that fasting is the same as starvation, and starvations makes the body go into fat storage mode.

Charlotte Young, well again a really mean diet, so calorie restrictive, YUCK.
AGain how many participants, and the difference in the weight loss, comparing 2.73 lbs to 3.73 lbs or even if it is in Kg, that is only a 1-2 lb difference, not really significant. That difference could easily be accounted for in normal physiological variation, or ONE BIG DUMP! LOL

Also the Charlotte Young obese woman study, the weight difference of 12.31-14.51 lbs, again not a huge difference. 2 pounds or 1 kg. One litre of water weighs 1 kg, and in all honesty, I have seen my weight jump up and down by 1-2 kg from one day to the next.

There is so much BAD SCIENCE out there that is being published (old boy's network, sponserd by big business, drug companies), one of the major things that we are taught in science is how to read a bloody paper, scientific literacy, which is very similar to media literacy. Just because it is print does not make it valid. We rip the s*it out of papers almost every week in my masters, dodgy statistics, bad control groups, not large enough sample sizes.

Man just look what bloody Andrew Wakefield did with his autism/MMR jab study of 12 kids! He also had conflicting interests as he was a part of the group that was trying to sue the manufacturer of the immunisation. It has now taken untold amounts of money to perform HUGE population studies all over the world to demonstrate that his paper was basically BAD SCIENCE and should have NEVER BEEN PUBLISHED.

THe untold amount of damage to his paper is still to be seen as one of the only known causes of autism in intrauterine assault (damage to the baby while in mom's tum) if she has a rubella infection!!!!!! And MMR stands for measles, mumps and rubella! People forget in this day and age just how hideous, dangereous and lethal these childhood infections can be because immunisations has been so successful.

Don't get me wrong, I do think that it is a bit unnatural for the immune system to encounter so many infectious diseases at once, rubella is not really needed until pre-adolescense, and there are issues with some of the substances that the tenuated viruses are suspended in, but for the better part of an entire generation of children to unprotected from these diseases!

I am not opposed to low carb diets, in fact I use carb cycling, which means I do have some low carb days in my competition diet, I also use carb tapering.

The insulin thing you have spoken of is important, yes, however, NOT ALL CARBOHYDRATES ARE EQUAL EITHER! Complex carbohydrates in combination with protein do not create the severe insulin spike that you speak of!

Eat some brown rice man!!!!

Yah know I love yah you fat middle aged fc-uker (just so wanted to use that smilie) LOL


So let the debate continue!

Respect

Big Love

T
x
x
x

hackskii