Latest posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
27,671
Posts
543,550
Members
28,601
Latest Member
Margo-89
What's New?

How many other lies?

macgyver

macgyver

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 24, 2011
1,997
1,672
@MR. BMJ posted a great article by Lyle McDonald. One of the most respected and revolutionary thinkers on sports nutrition and bodybuilding for the past 20+ years. Picking up where Dan Duchane left off and combining a mixture of observing what actually works with ACTUAL scientific study. (not cherry picked data trying to prove a pre-conceived notion)

If eating dog sh!t would have worked to gain LBM he would have been the first to be a proponent. His stuff is all based in real results, not dogma. By most accounts, kind of a prick and not looking to be 'social media' famous. He is a guy that follows science and ACTUAL competitors operating at the highest levels of sport, to see where dietary, supplementation, and training can make impacts.

He does a great job (with science) of kind of putting a fork in this debate. Not some idiot dr on isntagram saying food is "matter" and not carlories.

Anyway, I will be the first to say that MANY things will work. For me individually, a carnivore diet would have to be like Unicorn magic rainbow in a bottle. (which it is not). Obviously some follow for other health reasons which makes sense for underlying physical conditions. If I had cancer, I would probably be eating keto. But barring any reasons outside necessity for disease or some other ailment, I can see no compelling evidence to follow such a lifestyle. Not saying it wont work, but eating and enjoying food is a big part of what I enjoy about life as well. Just not worth it for me, especially when results equal to (or greater) can be had with any number of other intake strategies without such restrictive parameters.

 
gunslinger

gunslinger

VIP Member
Sep 19, 2010
1,911
1,159
@MR. BMJ posted a great article by Lyle McDonald. One of the most respected and revolutionary thinkers on sports nutrition and bodybuilding for the past 20+ years. Picking up where Dan Duchane left off and combining a mixture of observing what actually works with ACTUAL scientific study. (not cherry picked data trying to prove a pre-conceived notion)

If eating dog sh!t would have worked to gain LBM he would have been the first to be a proponent. His stuff is all based in real results, not dogma. By most accounts, kind of a prick and not looking to be 'social media' famous. He is a guy that follows science and ACTUAL competitors operating at the highest levels of sport, to see where dietary, supplementation, and training can make impacts.

He does a great job (with science) of kind of putting a fork in this debate. Not some idiot dr on isntagram saying food is "matter" and not carlories.

Anyway, I will be the first to say that MANY things will work. For me individually, a carnivore diet would have to be like Unicorn magic rainbow in a bottle. (which it is not). Obviously some follow for other health reasons which makes sense for underlying physical conditions. If I had cancer, I would probably be eating keto. But barring any reasons outside necessity for disease or some other ailment, I can see no compelling evidence to follow such a lifestyle. Not saying it wont work, but eating and enjoying food is a big part of what I enjoy about life as well. Just not worth it for me, especially when results equal to (or greater) can be had with any number of other intake strategies without such restrictive parameters.

Your entire post and those of all the other anti-carnivore people could really just be summed up in one sentence you wrote.

"Not saying it wont work, but eating and enjoying food is a big part of what I enjoy about life as well. Just not worth it for me"

Thats it! Thats all anyone really has to say and I completely respect that. If you enjoy your carbs and you can look and feel the way you want while eating them than by all means do so. Instead of coming up with long winded pseudo-science explanations of why it just can't be possible for this kind of eating to work. Just be honest like you were here.
 
macgyver

macgyver

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 24, 2011
1,997
1,672
Instead of coming up with long winded pseudo-science explanations of why it just can't be possible for this kind of eating to work. Just be honest like you were here.
With all due respect, you dont really read (or comprehend) what many are posting. If you look back at what I have written in this thread, I say that I spent over 2 years on a keto based diet in the past. I say how 'easy' it was and yes effective for me. BUT this was before I actually learned how to eat properly. At the time, I did not understand how simple IIFYM was and could work and keto SEEMED magical.

No 'pseudo-science'. I am actually quite the opposite. Diets like 'carnivore', 'paleo' are based in so much dogmatic, seemingly non-sensical parameters, it is the definition of 'pseudo science'.

I still 100% maintain (within parameters worth measuring) a cal is a cal. And cals in, cals out is the method I follow. (with the full acknowledgement that isolated down in a lab there are differences in cals). But in all practical terms, certainly at levels that can be effectively measured with a food scale, the simple 'laws' work.

Again, my example of Newtonian mechanics still being relevant for calculations even though it falls apart at a quantum level. No one using General Relativity to calculate engineering equations. Yes....even for launching a rocket and landing on the moon, Newton's laws still work just fine. (even though they are technically 'wrong')

There has been no one who has demonstrated anything in this thread that following such a restrictive diet is worth while. (other than for individuals with other underlying medical issues unrelated to what you are saying the benefits of Carnivore are) .....Or possibly people who are too undisciplined to actually control their intake.

In the end, you live your best life. Glad you are happy.
 
gunslinger

gunslinger

VIP Member
Sep 19, 2010
1,911
1,159
With all due respect, you dont really read (or comprehend) what many are posting. If you look back at what I have written in this thread, I say that I spent over 2 years on a keto based diet in the past. I say how 'easy' it was and yes effective for me. BUT this was before I actually learned how to eat properly. At the time, I did not understand how simple IIFYM was and could work and keto SEEMED magical.

No 'pseudo-science'. I am actually quite the opposite. Diets like 'carnivore', 'paleo' are based in so much dogmatic, seemingly non-sensical parameters, it is the definition of 'pseudo science'.

I still 100% maintain (within parameters worth measuring) a cal is a cal. And cals in, cals out is the method I follow. (with the full acknowledgement that isolated down in a lab there are differences in cals). But in all practical terms, certainly at levels that can be effectively measured with a food scale, the simple 'laws' work.

Again, my example of Newtonian mechanics still being relevant for calculations even though it falls apart at a quantum level. No one using General Relativity to calculate engineering equations. Yes....even for launching a rocket and landing on the moon, Newton's laws still work just fine. (even though they are technically 'wrong')

There has been no one who has demonstrated anything in this thread that following such a restrictive diet is worth while. (other than for individuals with other underlying medical issues unrelated to what you are saying the benefits of Carnivore are) .....Or possibly people who are too undisciplined to actually control their intake.

In the end, you live your best life. Glad you are happy.
I am pretty happy with my diet and choices. That said when you say you follow "science" even though they say you will die without carbs and that fiber is "essential" its no longer actual science. THAT is dogma. When your way of eating says if I am 200 lbs at 3,000 calories per day and I completely change the macros ratios I'll stay the same weight because its about caloric intake and not macros when this is clearly an easily proven lie I question the label of "science" Real science gets questioned often and revamped based on new studies and data.


So in the end, eat carbs because you like them. But don't try to pass any of that off as actual science...its certainly not.

And with all due respect I read all the BS I just disagree with it because I have had a completely different experience as have tens of thousands of others. Just because I call out the bullshit being posted doesn't mean I don't read or comprehend whats being said. Its just factually wrong.

The bottom line is "Not saying it wont work, but eating and enjoying food is a big part of what I enjoy about life as well. Just not worth it for me" and you are trying to justify this by saying the "science" agrees with you.
 
Last edited:
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
1,492
1,812
@MR. BMJ posted a great article by Lyle McDonald. One of the most respected and revolutionary thinkers on sports nutrition and bodybuilding for the past 20+ years. Picking up where Dan Duchane left off and combining a mixture of observing what actually works with ACTUAL scientific study. (not cherry picked data trying to prove a pre-conceived notion)

If eating dog sh!t would have worked to gain LBM he would have been the first to be a proponent. His stuff is all based in real results, not dogma. By most accounts, kind of a prick and not looking to be 'social media' famous. He is a guy that follows science and ACTUAL competitors operating at the highest levels of sport, to see where dietary, supplementation, and training can make impacts.

He does a great job (with science) of kind of putting a fork in this debate. Not some idiot dr on isntagram saying food is "matter" and not carlories.

Anyway, I will be the first to say that MANY things will work. For me individually, a carnivore diet would have to be like Unicorn magic rainbow in a bottle. (which it is not). Obviously some follow for other health reasons which makes sense for underlying physical conditions. If I had cancer, I would probably be eating keto. But barring any reasons outside necessity for disease or some other ailment, I can see no compelling evidence to follow such a lifestyle. Not saying it wont work, but eating and enjoying food is a big part of what I enjoy about life as well. Just not worth it for me, especially when results equal to (or greater) can be had with any number of other intake strategies without such restrictive parameters.

Yes, truth — carbs are a useful tool / PED for specific uses like bodybuilding. No dispute there — Just like insulin, AAS and other misc drugs, carbs can be used goal specific.
But in terms of actual necessity (essential) and health — they’re more problematic (at some point).
 
gunslinger

gunslinger

VIP Member
Sep 19, 2010
1,911
1,159
Yes, truth — carbs are a useful tool / PED for specific uses like bodybuilding. No dispute there — Just like insulin, AAS and other misc drugs, carbs can be used goal specific.
But in terms of actual necessity (essential) and health — they’re more problematic (at some point).
This is EXACTLY what I have been saying but he doesn't like how I say it so he has to use his "science" to confirm his "need" for sweets...lol Ah well.
 
macgyver

macgyver

TID Board Of Directors
Nov 24, 2011
1,997
1,672
@testboner I am not one who ever said carbs are 'essential'. We all know 100% they are NOT essential. But 'essential' vs best general practice is still out. I think KETO can and does work well and is warranted in some cases, but still falls into 'fad' for me in most uses. (besides your own as it is 100% understandable why you utilize it).

Fiber is again problematic. For MOST people (following western type diets) fiber is indeed essential. This has gotten critical over the past 30+ years as food consumed by MOST, tend be more process and we dont eat the fiber we used to.

I personally choose to supplement fiber. It has demonstrated positive benefits in my lipid panels. The supplementation also allows me even wider birth with choosing 'fun' carbs while still maintaining a decent fiber intake which is important for most people eating omnivore based diets.

It is also (for me) the perfect thing to mix with whey for an evening shake to slow the digestion down. I dont want to buy all kinds of different proteins. I just use 90% isolate. When I want an evening shake, which I have depending on my daily intake doing IF, I take 4-5g leucine, 1 scoop unflavored whey, 2 tbs psyllium fiber (target brand orange sugar free meta-mucil) and I add a squirt of orange crush drink flavor.

I will then go 16+ hours without intake. Without the fiber, the whey would go though too quickly. Lots of tools we can use in nutrition/intake. Fiber is just a tool for me. And also a contributor to good health overall with my type of intake.
 
testboner

testboner

VIP Member
Oct 10, 2010
1,492
1,812
@testboner I am not one who ever said carbs are 'essential'. We all know 100% they are NOT essential. But 'essential' vs best general practice is still out. I think KETO can and does work well and is warranted in some cases, but still falls into 'fad' for me in most uses. (besides your own as it is 100% understandable why you utilize it).

Fiber is again problematic. For MOST people (following western type diets) fiber is indeed essential. This has gotten critical over the past 30+ years as food consumed by MOST, tend be more process and we dont eat the fiber we used to.

I personally choose to supplement fiber. It has demonstrated positive benefits in my lipid panels. The supplementation also allows me even wider birth with choosing 'fun' carbs while still maintaining a decent fiber intake which is important for most people eating omnivore based diets.

It is also (for me) the perfect thing to mix with whey for an evening shake to slow the digestion down. I dont want to buy all kinds of different proteins. I just use 90% isolate. When I want an evening shake, which I have depending on my daily intake doing IF, I take 4-5g leucine, 1 scoop unflavored whey, 2 tbs psyllium fiber (target brand orange sugar free meta-mucil) and I add a squirt of orange crush drink flavor.

I will then go 16+ hours without intake. Without the fiber, the whey would go though too quickly. Lots of tools we can use in nutrition/intake. Fiber is just a tool for me. And also a contributor to good health overall with my type of intake.
I don’t take issue with that explanation so far as individual, personal application / reasoning. I would only differ perhaps with the use of the term “essential” if it’s applied to mean all people. Granted, with the common shitty SAD diet of Americans in particular, fiber is almost “essential” in the context that it becomes necessary as an aid for helping bulk and flush out shit (literally). It’s not essential to human (and healthy) existence though — which is the correct technical definition of “essential” in terms of nutrients / human nutrition for survival sake.
Fiber is very likely the #1 cause of the majority of digestive distress — next to shitty processed, modern industrial era foods.
Like you said, you use fiber as a tool, and that makes perfect sense.
Fiber, AAS, Insulin (exogenous), carbs (which fiber is a type of) are not universally “essential” to human survival and health. They are all examples of purpose specific tools.
 
beefnewton

beefnewton

VIP Member
Nov 11, 2022
1,300
1,509
@macgyver What are you using to supplement your fiber? My diet is pretty clean, but I despise vegetables. Get quite a bit of fruit, though. I personally need carbs, or I'll have fuel issues during workouts. Never tried to convert to keto because bonking sucks. The times I did do longer-term fasts, I felt great, but I have no idea if I could have sustained a workout.
 
MR. BMJ

MR. BMJ

Senior Moderators
Staff Member
Sep 21, 2011
2,545
2,605
It appears Layne is quite ego punched by Dr Fung’s ignoring of him.
Meanwhile, Fung continues to have great success in healing / reversing the diabetes of countless patients.
TB, the problem with that is that the things that Fung preaches against also show great success in healing and controlling diabetes. The debate wasn't that Fung's diet recommendations couldn't control blood sugar or health (it's just a lower carb-controlled diet), but rather his incorrect reasoning for it. When Fung is called out, he blocks people and refuses to debate them on it. I've seen it first-hand. It's hard to prove anybody wrong when they block you. There is nothing wrong with what Layne has stated. What he stated is not only backed in the literature, but it's been shown in clinical practice that many of us, myself included, have seen first-hand. It's funny, and i'm pro diet in any fashion as long as people are happy with it and follow it long-term with good health, is that everybody i've worked with in both a clinical setting or 'bro' setting, has been able to get in shape with good health markers, by doing the things that Fung states are wrong or unhealthy. He also confuses a lot of terms as pointed out by Layne.

For the record, i'm not always 100% in agreement with Layne either, there are a few minor things I disagree with him about, but the majority of the time he is very knowledgeable on the matters.
 
Who is viewing this thread?

There are currently 0 members watching this topic

Top