OrthodoxChristianity.net
December 21, 2014, 11:54:59 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 »   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Nutrition and Diet  (Read 63699 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #450 on: May 17, 2012, 10:39:51 AM »

It is not "bullying" to demand that someone establish qualifications before speaking on a subject. If you cannot wrap your brain around this rather simple concept, I do not know what can be done for you.
Please don't forgive me for refusing to embrace your definitions of words.

I am merely a native speaker of English.

Actually, yes he does have the right to an uninformed opinion. If he's wrong, then correct him; your audience can actually stand to benefit from receiving the correct information on the subject. If you spend all your time, though, trying to shut down your opponent because you think him ignorant and unqualified to speak, then who benefits? You're not sharing any facts that can improve our understanding.

Actually, no one has that right. Beyond that, it is the height of arrogance to speak upon matters where one has no knowledge.

However, I do appreciate your admission that when it comes to discussing thermodynamics, your internet client is an unarmed man.
I said no such thing specifically about Marc.

But you did. Oops!

Actually not. If you want to read his arguments in a way that disagrees with my reading, that's fine. You have the right to do that, but you also have the right to be wrong.

I simply read his arguments as a native speaker of English.

But you have no case, so how can you close it?

Oh burn!

And I am giving a very good reason why Marc's opinion on this subject should not be taken seriously.
Okay. That's a legitimate pursuit if you wish to do that (not to pass any judgment yea or nay on Marc's opinion, since I really don't care). Just don't tell him to shut up, because I will defend his right to say anything he wants, as long as he stays within the rules of this forum.

Who cares what you will defend?

Well, for one thing, I never called Marc an unarmed man, and if you think I said that, then you have misunderstood my "unarmed man" comment and failed to recognize that I offered it only as general advice. So let me expand my comment. If you see a man you think is intellectually unarmed, you don't have to engage him in an argument. You can just walk away and allow him the freedom to say whatever stupid thing he wants to say.

If you cannot say what you mean, you will never mean what you say.

And, my response to your expanded comment remains the same. The reason is that it is very dangerous to allow untruth to be spoken.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #451 on: May 17, 2012, 11:11:24 AM »

And who elected you again? I must have missed the vote.

I'm on a mission from God.

Quote
FYI..I get to say any dumb thing i want as long as it is within the rules of this forum..

Are you having a reading comprehension problem?

Let's try again.. No one has said that energy in energy out is "wrong"..

The application of that principle to Diet and Nutrition has led to some bad practices that are of no value.


Yeah, you still don't get it. Since you lack even the most basic knowledge of what energy is and how it works, you don't get to talk about thermodynamics. The reason is that you don't know what you are talking about.





I am not claiming any special knowledge, far from it. I posted a lecture from a Journalist who has a degree in Physics from Harvard. You must have read through that part.

I would think you would like Gary Taubes. His special interest is exposing "Bad Science". You may enjoy reading his books or listening to him on a Youtube. That would be better time spent than trying to pick fights over nothing. IMHO
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #452 on: May 17, 2012, 11:23:25 AM »

And, until you can solve the paltry physics dilemma I presented you, you do not get to talk about thermodynamics.
There you go again with your bully tactics. Marc can talk about thermodynamics if he wants.

You don't know what "bully" means, then.
But in fact I do. You have a nasty habit of trying to shut down all conversation with which you disagree on the grounds that someone who can't answer your questions isn't qualified to talk. That's bullying.

It is not "bullying" to demand that someone establish qualifications before speaking on a subject. If you cannot wrap your brain around this rather simple concept, I do not know what can be done for you.
Please don't forgive me for refusing to embrace your definitions of words.

This concept is quite simple, and I hope I can help you to understand. If your internet client wants to hold an opinion, he needs to make sure it is an informed one.
No, he doesn't. This isn't a court of law. If you don't want to argue with an unarmed man, then don't join the discussion.

Yes, he does. No one has any right to an uninformed opinion.
Actually, yes he does have the right to an uninformed opinion. If he's wrong, then correct him; your audience can actually stand to benefit from receiving the correct information on the subject. If you spend all your time, though, trying to shut down your opponent because you think him ignorant and unqualified to speak, then who benefits? You're not sharing any facts that can improve our understanding.

However, I do appreciate your admission that when it comes to discussing thermodynamics, your internet client is an unarmed man.
I said no such thing specifically about Marc.

No, he doesn't, especially considering that his talk about the laws of thermodynamics is peripheral to his arguments.

Yes, he does, and the thermodynamics talk is rather essential to his argument.
Actually not. If you want to read his arguments in a way that disagrees with my reading, that's fine. You have the right to do that, but you also have the right to be wrong.

To this end, I posed a question that can be answered by anyone who has taken about one month of his first high school physics class. If he can't figure that out, he lacks even the most fundamental understanding of what energy is and how it works, making him incompetent to discuss thermodynamics in any sense.
You're the only one making a big deal of thermodynamics on this thread.

Actually, I am the only one making a big deal of the fact that when it comes to thermodynamics and energy balance, Marc is an "unarmed man". I am glad you admit that. Case closed!
But you have no case, so how can you close it?

Honestly, I don't want to think like you do. This forum is about the free exchange of ideas. Let Marc express his ideas and let us decide if they're worth taking seriously.

And I am giving a very good reason why Marc's opinion on this subject should not be taken seriously.
Okay. That's a legitimate pursuit if you wish to do that (not to pass any judgment yea or nay on Marc's opinion, since I really don't care). Just don't tell him to shut up, because I will defend his right to say anything he wants, as long as he stays within the rules of this forum.

You admit that your client is an intellectually unarmed man in this topic. Care to explain why such a man's opinion matters?
Well, for one thing, I never called Marc an unarmed man, and if you think I said that, then you have misunderstood my "unarmed man" comment and failed to recognize that I offered it only as general advice. So let me expand my comment. If you see a man you think is intellectually unarmed, you don't have to engage him in an argument. You can just walk away and allow him the freedom to say whatever stupid thing he wants to say.


Actually, yes he does have the right to an uninformed opinion

Ummm..Point of personal privilege..

I was not expressing my own opinion. I was trying to summarize what Gary Taubes said in his lecture. Mr. Taubes is a well credentialed Physicist.
That lecture is over an hour long so I thought I would give a summery for those who didnt have a hour and ten minutes to invest.. No good deed goes unpunished apparently.

So the only thing I could have been guilty of is not repeating his points correctly. Just for the record  Smiley

Does Sauron have a degree in Physics like Gary Taubes does? Or any field of Science? My understanding is that he has a Law Degree.

My wife had a J.D. We would talk about the future of our kids and I would sometimes mention Law School. She said that Law School can ruin your personality. They make you over into someone overly aggressive, nit picky and always ready to throw down a glove. She didnt want that for her kids. Sounds insightful in this case.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #453 on: May 17, 2012, 12:16:32 PM »

Actually, yes he does have the right to an uninformed opinion

Ummm..Point of personal privilege..

I was not expressing my own opinion. I was trying to summarize what Gary Taubes said in his lecture. Mr. Taubes is a well credentialed Physicist.
That lecture is over an hour long so I thought I would give a summery for those who didnt have a hour and ten minutes to invest.. No good deed goes unpunished apparently.

So the only thing I could have been guilty of is not repeating his points correctly. Just for the record  Smiley
For the record, I didn't mean to imply that you were voicing an uninformed opinion. Wink
Logged
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #454 on: May 17, 2012, 12:26:28 PM »

I was not expressing my own opinion. I was trying to summarize what Gary Taubes said in his lecture. Mr. Taubes is a well credentialed Physicist.
That lecture is over an hour long so I thought I would give a summery for those who didnt have a hour and ten minutes to invest.. No good deed goes unpunished apparently.

So the only thing I could have been guilty of is not repeating his points correctly. Just for the record  Smiley

Does Sauron have a degree in Physics like Gary Taubes does? Or any field of Science? My understanding is that he has a Law Degree.

Yes, I do have a law degree. I unfortunately did not double-major in physics as an undergraduate, although I did enter college having already passed college physics. His folksy analogy about people in an auditorium was simply wrong.

The point is you lack the foundation to critically evaluate his writings and therefore will believe whatever "sounds good" to you.

Quote
My wife had a J.D. We would talk about the future of our kids and I would sometimes mention Law School. She said that Law School can ruin your personality.

Maybe that's why she chose you?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #455 on: May 17, 2012, 12:37:18 PM »

And, my response to your expanded comment remains the same. The reason is that it is very dangerous to allow untruth to be spoken.
If Marc (or anyone) is speaking untruth, there are three things you can do:

1. Challenge him to prove himself right.
2. Prove him wrong.
3. Ask questions to elicit more information.
   
If you're unwilling to do any of the above, then I advise you to just turn around, walk away, and leave him alone.
Logged
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #456 on: May 17, 2012, 12:56:31 PM »

And, my response to your expanded comment remains the same. The reason is that it is very dangerous to allow untruth to be spoken.
If Marc (or anyone) is speaking untruth, there are three things you can do:

1. Challenge him to prove himself right.
2. Prove him wrong.
3. Ask questions to elicit more information.
   
If you're unwilling to do any of the above, then I advise you to just turn around, walk away, and leave him alone.


That is what I have been doing but you have been too busy playing e-Perry Mason to notice.

Allow me to summarize briefly, using your three steps above:

1. Marc, explain why dU=δQ+δW doesn't apply. Show your work.
2. Marc, dU=δQ+δW proves you wrong.
3. Marc, can you understand dU=δQ+δW?

Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #457 on: May 17, 2012, 04:19:13 PM »

I was not expressing my own opinion. I was trying to summarize what Gary Taubes said in his lecture. Mr. Taubes is a well credentialed Physicist.
That lecture is over an hour long so I thought I would give a summery for those who didnt have a hour and ten minutes to invest.. No good deed goes unpunished apparently.

So the only thing I could have been guilty of is not repeating his points correctly. Just for the record  Smiley

Does Sauron have a degree in Physics like Gary Taubes does? Or any field of Science? My understanding is that he has a Law Degree.

Yes, I do have a law degree. I unfortunately did not double-major in physics as an undergraduate, although I did enter college having already passed college physics. His folksy analogy about people in an auditorium was simply wrong.

The point is you lack the foundation to critically evaluate his writings and therefore will believe whatever "sounds good" to you.

Quote
My wife had a J.D. We would talk about the future of our kids and I would sometimes mention Law School. She said that Law School can ruin your personality.

Maybe that's why she chose you?


So you have High School physics with an AP course and he has a degree in Physics from Harvard.. Got it.. As long as we are all clear.

Plus, you just take pot shots. You ddint seem to read/view the material and what you did read, as I pointed out , you agreed with but you are so hot to fight you didn't even notice...  

I dont think you are critically analyzing anything. I think you get off on fighting.  

  
« Last Edit: May 17, 2012, 04:19:50 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #458 on: May 17, 2012, 04:29:05 PM »

And, my response to your expanded comment remains the same. The reason is that it is very dangerous to allow untruth to be spoken.
If Marc (or anyone) is speaking untruth, there are three things you can do:

1. Challenge him to prove himself right.
2. Prove him wrong.
3. Ask questions to elicit more information.
   
If you're unwilling to do any of the above, then I advise you to just turn around, walk away, and leave him alone.


That is what I have been doing but you have been too busy playing e-Perry Mason to notice.

Allow me to summarize briefly, using your three steps above:

1. Marc, explain why dU=δQ+δW doesn't apply. Show your work.
2. Marc, dU=δQ+δW proves you wrong.
3. Marc, can you understand dU=δQ+δW?



1. Marc, explain why dU=δQ+δW doesn't apply. Show your work.

Buzzt..That is not what was said.. Did you take reading comprehension in High School?

3rd time:

The first Law of Thermodynamics is always True. But when used to justify  a specific Dietary Practice ( eat less, exercise more) it turns out to be a very weak strategy.  He cites multiple example of why this strategy fails people. Maybe you should actually watch the youtube before commenting so aggressively that it's false.

As both you and Taubes  mentioned ( you didnt notice your agreement with him) there is no information about WHY fat is retained or released...
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #459 on: May 17, 2012, 04:37:28 PM »

And, my response to your expanded comment remains the same. The reason is that it is very dangerous to allow untruth to be spoken.
If Marc (or anyone) is speaking untruth, there are three things you can do:

1. Challenge him to prove himself right.
2. Prove him wrong.
3. Ask questions to elicit more information.
   
If you're unwilling to do any of the above, then I advise you to just turn around, walk away, and leave him alone.


That is what I have been doing but you have been too busy playing e-Perry Mason to notice.
If you're walking away, why aren't you gone yet?
Logged
Schultz
Christian. Guitarist. Zymurgist. Librarian.
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,494


Scion of the McKeesport Becks.


WWW
« Reply #460 on: May 17, 2012, 04:44:47 PM »

If this were a party, the rest of the partygoers would be in the corners of the room, speaking quietly amongst themselves while staring, pointing, and wondering who the hell invited you people.
Logged

"Hearing a nun's confession is like being stoned to death with popcorn." --Abp. Fulton Sheen
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #461 on: May 17, 2012, 05:23:12 PM »

The first Law of Thermodynamics is always True. But when used to justify  a specific Dietary Practice ( eat less, exercise more) it turns out to be a very weak strategy.  He cites multiple example of why this strategy fails people. Maybe you should actually watch the youtube before commenting so aggressively that it's false.

Really? He cites how the human body alone, of all systems in the universe, can create energy? He should publish his findings immediately so he can win the Nobel Prize in physics and go down in history as one of the greatest scientists of all time.



Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #462 on: May 17, 2012, 10:50:22 PM »

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gary Taubes (born April 30, 1956) is an American science writer.

He is the author of Nobel Dreams (1987), Bad Science: The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion (1993), and Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007), titled The Diet Delusion (2008) in the UK and Australia. His book Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It was released in December 2010. In December 2010 Taubes launched his own blog at GaryTaubes.com to promote the book's release and to respond to critics.

Born in Rochester, New York, Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard University and aerospace engineering at Stanford University (MS, 1978). After receiving a master's degree in journalism at Columbia University in 1981, Taubes joined Discover magazine as a staff reporter in 1982. Since then he has written numerous articles for Discover, Science and other magazines. Originally focusing on physics issues, his interests have more recently turned to medicine and nutrition.

Taubes's books have all dealt with scientific controversies. Nobel Dreams takes a critical look at the politics and experimental techniques behind the Nobel Prize-winning work of physicist Carlo Rubbia. Bad Science is a chronicle of the short-lived media frenzy surrounding the Pons-Fleischmann cold fusion experiments of 1989.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #463 on: May 18, 2012, 10:21:32 AM »

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gary Taubes (born April 30, 1956) is an American science writer.

He is the author of Nobel Dreams (1987), Bad Science: The Short Life and Weird Times of Cold Fusion (1993), and Good Calories, Bad Calories (2007), titled The Diet Delusion (2008) in the UK and Australia. His book Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It was released in December 2010. In December 2010 Taubes launched his own blog at GaryTaubes.com to promote the book's release and to respond to critics.

Born in Rochester, New York, Taubes studied applied physics at Harvard University and aerospace engineering at Stanford University (MS, 1978). After receiving a master's degree in journalism at Columbia University in 1981, Taubes joined Discover magazine as a staff reporter in 1982. Since then he has written numerous articles for Discover, Science and other magazines. Originally focusing on physics issues, his interests have more recently turned to medicine and nutrition.

Taubes's books have all dealt with scientific controversies. Nobel Dreams takes a critical look at the politics and experimental techniques behind the Nobel Prize-winning work of physicist Carlo Rubbia. Bad Science is a chronicle of the short-lived media frenzy surrounding the Pons-Fleischmann cold fusion experiments of 1989.

I am not sure what the purpose of your post is.

Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #464 on: May 18, 2012, 10:44:18 AM »

I got his book last night "Why we get fat and what to do about it"

Btw..Kindle is great. Push a button or two and FLASH you have the book you want instantly. And cheap too. This book cost me just $7.99 and I see his longer edition ( 500 pages) was under $11.00

I think Sauron would like this guy if only for the fact that he published two books on the same subject. "Good Calories, Bad Calories" is the 500 page tome written for those who can navigate around specialized Scientific Jargon and long proofs.

But for the rest of us fools he recognized that we would shy away from an investment of our time that the first book requires. He was urged by Doctors and researchers to produce a layman's version that they could give to their patients and non-scientist friends etc. hence the book "Why we get fat"  

His case boils down to this: For the last fifty years or so obesity has been explained by an imbalance of energy. Too many calories in and not enough going out. "Calories in Calories out". This has led to a weak dietary strategy which says you must try to balance your calories between what you take in and what you expend. If you want to lose weight you restrict calories going in and/or increase calories going out via exercise..... The base assumption is that all Calories are the same. "A Calorie is a Calorie is a Calorie"  

Concurrently, obesity is now at  epidemic proportions and with the global spread of the standard American Diet a pandemic. With Obesity comes diabetes, heart disease, cancer and dementia.

Taubes believes that the better analysis of Obesity and diet came from European Scientists prior to World War Two. As you can imagine their work was lost due to the War and German Scientists ( with the exception of Physicists) were discredited.

Rather than describing obesity as an energy imbalance they made a painfully simple observation. "Obesity is when there is the presence of too much fat in the body".........Well Duh ?

Now we can ask, what causes the body to retain too much fat? Finally the WHY question can be asked. The answer seems to not to be an energy imbalance so much as a hormonal imbalance. Insulin is the main culprit.

It was commonly understood up through the 1960's that high carb foods make you fat. Bread , Pasta, Sweets and Beer for example.  But the medical establishment changed their recommendations for diet to "Low Fat, High Carb" ( whole grains these days).   Obesity became an epidemic.

 In short; Carbs drive insulin. Insulin drives fat. Control your consumption of Carbohydrates and your insulin level will return to normal. You will feel better and excess weight will drop off.

If you wish to slog through all the Science and all the evidence get "Good Calories Bad Calories". If you prefer the short version, get "Why we get fat" He also has numerous lectures posted on You Tube and several shorter articles like "What if it's all been a big fat lie".
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 10:48:28 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #465 on: May 18, 2012, 10:57:30 AM »

Monks are all really fat because of their high carbohydrate, vegetarian diet based around non-paleo foods. True story.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #466 on: May 18, 2012, 11:06:10 AM »

Monks are all really fat because of their high carbohydrate, vegetarian diet based around non-paleo foods. True story.

Have you seen a picture of or ever been with +Met Jonah or +Met Hilarion ?. ( with apologies, I love both of them)

Go watch the 60 minutes story on Mt. Athos. It appears to me that the younger monks are thin and the older ones have become too heavy.

Nice try.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWzyvBzBpPA&feature=related

Good lecture too.

+Met Hilarion has undergone multiple knee surgeries due to his overweight:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/OrthodoxNews/message/16105
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 11:12:57 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #467 on: May 18, 2012, 12:11:42 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

They also dont eat any sugar or highly refined foods at all. No cup cakes, candy or sweet hamburger rolls. They do eat Peas, Beans and Lentils, lots of Vegetables and as their main source of Protein they eat fish. They also eat bread and drink wine.

Nearly all vegetables are grown in local gardens. All fish are freshly caught. None of the bread is sweetened up with high fructose corn syrup. No margarine.

The very fresh fish they eat ensures that have high levels of Omega 3 fat. Their carbs come mostly from vegetables that are locally grown so they have not wasted away their nutrients on shelves and in trucks.

Not a particularly bad diet. Too may Carbs from the bread and starches but this is offset by near starvation calorie restriction that few of us could ever hope to emulate..It is a WEAK strategy for the public. And still many Monks appear to get chubby as they age.

Now let's look at Monks in the World, our Bishops, who simply eat a high carb sugary diet as it is given to them. Many of them are obese and have health problems. And it's not due to sloth. Bishops and Mets live a very active and busy life as we all know. it's the crappy high carb diet that is hurting them. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #468 on: May 18, 2012, 12:28:59 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?

Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #469 on: May 18, 2012, 12:45:12 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?



No argument from me. Near starvation caloric restriction will have an effect on weight. It has also been shown that sever caloric intake restriction may extend life expediency.  So what's your point? Is sever calorie restriction the solution to the Obesity epidemic? Are you really suggesting that the general public be told to go on a two day water only fast each week... Are you?

Better solution: Eat more fat, less carbs.

Questions?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 12:45:42 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #470 on: May 18, 2012, 01:05:15 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?



No argument from me. Near starvation caloric restriction will have an effect on weight. It has also been shown that sever caloric intake restriction may extend life expediency.  So what's your point? Is sever calorie restriction the solution to the Obesity epidemic? Are you really suggesting that the general public be told to go on a two day water only fast each week... Are you?

Better solution: Eat more fat, less carbs.

Questions?

My point was to respond to your wisecrack of "Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you."

Logged
orthonorm
Moderated
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,670



« Reply #471 on: May 18, 2012, 02:05:56 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?



No argument from me. Near starvation caloric restriction will have an effect on weight. It has also been shown that sever caloric intake restriction may extend life expediency.  So what's your point? Is sever calorie restriction the solution to the Obesity epidemic? Are you really suggesting that the general public be told to go on a two day water only fast each week... Are you?

Better solution: Eat more fat, less carbs.

Questions?

My point was to respond to your wisecrack of "Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you."



Sauron, Marc believes in magic. Let it go.

Every fast, I must in virtue of food choice and amount of food consumed reduce my caloric intake. For the longer fasts, I lose about 18-20 pounds.

I've spent a lot of my life having to gain or lose weight for sport and have helped others gain or lose weight.

Eating more or fewer calories, whether much more or fewer or slightly more or fewer always works.

ALWAYS*.

I don't need any scientific studies to prove this to anyone. Neither does anyone with that sorta background.

Macronutrient ratios will impact performance in certain activities and perhaps body comp or "health" or MIGHT allow people with pathological eating patterns more easily eat fewer calories. But again, most Americans get lost in this minutiae and forget their primary goal: weigh less. Which means eat less. You can forget the exercise.

*Folks with certain hormonal problems will probably have to have medical assistance in adjusting their weight under certain circumstances.

 
« Last Edit: May 18, 2012, 02:06:45 PM by orthonorm » Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #472 on: May 18, 2012, 07:17:36 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?



No argument from me. Near starvation caloric restriction will have an effect on weight. It has also been shown that sever caloric intake restriction may extend life expediency.  So what's your point? Is sever calorie restriction the solution to the Obesity epidemic? Are you really suggesting that the general public be told to go on a two day water only fast each week... Are you?

Better solution: Eat more fat, less carbs.

Questions?

My point was to respond to your wisecrack of "Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you."



Clearly, it makes you very cranky
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #473 on: May 18, 2012, 07:23:28 PM »

Macronutrient ratios will impact performance in certain activities and perhaps body comp or "health" or MIGHT allow people with pathological eating patterns more easily eat fewer calories. But again, most Americans get lost in this minutiae and forget their primary goal: weigh less. Which means eat less. You can forget the exercise.

I agree with the smaller portions, but what stuck out to me is you say forget excercise. Are you saying that metabolism, or if you even believe that, would just take over in weight reduction by the loss in calories?

I hope you are not diminishing the value of excercising here, which is very good for you. Not only is it good for you but it's so easy to do.

But let's say you are on a 3000 calorie diet and transition to a 1200 calorie diet overnight. The body wouldn't lose so much of the weight because it would think its starving no?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #474 on: May 18, 2012, 07:34:03 PM »

I think what monks eat is interesting.

Let's take the monks on Athos for example. By in large they eat one time per day. As they get older or have manual labor duties they may eat a second meal. In other words, they severely restrict calories and under a highly controlled setting ( no snacking).

No one said sever calorie restriction wont cause weight loss, it is just a very weak, nearly impossible strategy for the general public. Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you.

If you must know, I water-fast two days each week. Today is one of them. I have also done extended PSMFs with similar caloric intake.

Try again?



No argument from me. Near starvation caloric restriction will have an effect on weight. It has also been shown that sever caloric intake restriction may extend life expediency.  So what's your point? Is sever calorie restriction the solution to the Obesity epidemic? Are you really suggesting that the general public be told to go on a two day water only fast each week... Are you?

Better solution: Eat more fat, less carbs.

Questions?

My point was to respond to your wisecrack of "Go ahead and try eating 600 calories once per day and let me know how it goes for you."



Sauron, Marc believes in magic. Let it go.

Every fast, I must in virtue of food choice and amount of food consumed reduce my caloric intake. For the longer fasts, I lose about 18-20 pounds.

I've spent a lot of my life having to gain or lose weight for sport and have helped others gain or lose weight.

Eating more or fewer calories, whether much more or fewer or slightly more or fewer always works.

ALWAYS*.

I don't need any scientific studies to prove this to anyone. Neither does anyone with that sorta background.

Macronutrient ratios will impact performance in certain activities and perhaps body comp or "health" or MIGHT allow people with pathological eating patterns more easily eat fewer calories. But again, most Americans get lost in this minutiae and forget their primary goal: weigh less. Which means eat less. You can forget the exercise.

*Folks with certain hormonal problems will probably have to have medical assistance in adjusting their weight under certain circumstances.

 

or the longer fasts, I lose about 18-20 pounds.


and then you gain it back, right? Or are you saying you lose 18-20 lbs every long fast and now you weigh 45 lbs? Smiley

Once again, there may be smarter easier strategies that will have permanent solutions for people not willing to consume just water two days per week. Call me crazy.

I think people are looking at the epidemic of Obesity and trying to figure out what has gone wrong the past few decades..
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #475 on: May 18, 2012, 07:53:25 PM »

Macronutrient ratios will impact performance in certain activities and perhaps body comp or "health" or MIGHT allow people with pathological eating patterns more easily eat fewer calories. But again, most Americans get lost in this minutiae and forget their primary goal: weigh less. Which means eat less. You can forget the exercise.

I agree with the smaller portions, but what stuck out to me is you say forget excercise. Are you saying that metabolism, or if you even believe that, would just take over in weight reduction by the loss in calories?

I hope you are not diminishing the value of excercising here, which is very good for you. Not only is it good for you but it's so easy to do.

But let's say you are on a 3000 calorie diet and transition to a 1200 calorie diet overnight. The body wouldn't lose so much of the weight because it would think its starving no?

I will let orthonorm speak for himself, but while exercise has benefits in and of itself, when it comes to fat loss, food intake is a much bigger factor than exercise.

And the starvation mode myth is a myth.

Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #476 on: May 18, 2012, 08:44:14 PM »

I think a term to use, instead of weight loss, needs to be fat loss. Because when you excercise you are not exaclty burning weight, rather you are burning fat.

That said, I am not denying that changing one's diet will make dramatic changes to ones health, it does, but to think that excercise doesn't contribute to fat loss is garbage.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,519


« Reply #477 on: May 18, 2012, 08:47:23 PM »

I think a term to use, instead of weight loss, needs to be fat loss.

QFT.
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
ZealousZeal
Gainsaying Helpmeet
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: ✔
Posts: 2,764


look into my lovable alpaca eyes


« Reply #478 on: May 18, 2012, 09:17:05 PM »

Macronutrient ratios will impact performance in certain activities and perhaps body comp or "health" or MIGHT allow people with pathological eating patterns more easily eat fewer calories. But again, most Americans get lost in this minutiae and forget their primary goal: weigh less. Which means eat less. You can forget the exercise.

I agree with the smaller portions, but what stuck out to me is you say forget excercise. Are you saying that metabolism, or if you even believe that, would just take over in weight reduction by the loss in calories?

I hope you are not diminishing the value of excercising here, which is very good for you. Not only is it good for you but it's so easy to do.

But let's say you are on a 3000 calorie diet and transition to a 1200 calorie diet overnight. The body wouldn't lose so much of the weight because it would think its starving no?

I will let orthonorm speak for himself, but while exercise has benefits in and of itself, when it comes to fat loss, food intake is a much bigger factor than exercise.

And the starvation mode myth is a myth.



Totally. And yet, you hear it thrown around all the time. It mystefies me.
Logged

"For this God is our God forever and ever; He will be our guide, even to the end." Psalm 48:14
Sauron
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Posts: 844


« Reply #479 on: May 18, 2012, 09:19:08 PM »

I think a term to use, instead of weight loss, needs to be fat loss. Because when you excercise you are not exaclty burning weight, rather you are burning fat.

That said, I am not denying that changing one's diet will make dramatic changes to ones health, it does, but to think that excercise doesn't contribute to fat loss is garbage.

No one is saying that exercise does not contribute. However, its effect is minor. The reason is that exercise simply does not expend that much energy. I can cut 500 calories from a day's worth of food a lot easier than you can exercise off 500 calories. Plus, after your big workout, I bet you'll be pretty hungry.

Ever go to the gym? Ever notice that the same people are on the treadmills, stationary bikes, and elliptical machines? Ever notice that a lot of them aren't getting any smaller? Ever wonder why that is?
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #480 on: May 18, 2012, 11:49:23 PM »

I think a term to use, instead of weight loss, needs to be fat loss. Because when you excercise you are not exaclty burning weight, rather you are burning fat.

That said, I am not denying that changing one's diet will make dramatic changes to ones health, it does, but to think that excercise doesn't contribute to fat loss is garbage.

No one is saying that exercise does not contribute. However, its effect is minor. The reason is that exercise simply does not expend that much energy. I can cut 500 calories from a day's worth of food a lot easier than you can exercise off 500 calories. Plus, after your big workout, I bet you'll be pretty hungry.

Ever go to the gym? Ever notice that the same people are on the treadmills, stationary bikes, and elliptical machines? Ever notice that a lot of them aren't getting any smaller? Ever wonder why that is?
Because strenuous cardiovascular exercise is not as efficient at burning off fat as high-intensity resistance (weight) training?
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #481 on: May 19, 2012, 12:28:54 AM »

I think a term to use, instead of weight loss, needs to be fat loss. Because when you excercise you are not exaclty burning weight, rather you are burning fat.

That said, I am not denying that changing one's diet will make dramatic changes to ones health, it does, but to think that excercise doesn't contribute to fat loss is garbage.

No one is saying that exercise does not contribute. However, its effect is minor. The reason is that exercise simply does not expend that much energy. I can cut 500 calories from a day's worth of food a lot easier than you can exercise off 500 calories. Plus, after your big workout, I bet you'll be pretty hungry.

Ever go to the gym? Ever notice that the same people are on the treadmills, stationary bikes, and elliptical machines? Ever notice that a lot of them aren't getting any smaller? Ever wonder why that is?

It's called High Intensity Training. Yes hours on a treadmill is futile, you gotta work harder for a longer time and short breaks in between.

I'll get back the rest of your post tomorrow.
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #482 on: May 19, 2012, 11:16:53 AM »

Doesn't hard exercise increase you caloric burn rate for many hours after you stop exercising?

it's also true that it is much easier to figure out how many calories you take in than it is to figure out exactly how many you have used while exercising.

The fact remains that people exercise until the cows come home but remain heavy and or get heart disease.. The problem may really be their high carb diet..Just sayin  Smiley
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #483 on: May 19, 2012, 12:11:30 PM »

So we can observe that hard exercise doesnt do all that much in terms of weight loss. We have a nice young woman about 25 years old in our Parish who has started to put on weight. She has been going to the gym for about six months but the scale has not moved at all. She is very frustrated. And the fat stays in the same places on her ( belly and thighs).

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.

So if exercise doesn't work well and the theory we live by is "calories in calories out", then to short ourselves enough calories to lose weight and keep it off we  have to super short ourselves on what we eat.

Is that really possible for the general public? Aren't people who are already obese telling us that they cant reduce what they eat?  

Plus, we don't even really know to what extreme extent you must short your intake to stay thin? For example, Obesity is far more prevalent the lower on the socioeconomic scale you go. Scarcity of calories still does not determine whether or not you will become Obese.

MONKS BECOME OBESE... They live in strictly controlled settings and still many of them, as they age, get fat.

Why do monks get fat ?  ( Sounds like a good book title)

Because the key is what you eat, not how much you eat or how much you exercise, to a reasonable extent. If you eat a fattening diet, you may get fat even if you short your self on calories and exercise strenuously.  

Weight loss from a calories in calories out based program is often short lived putting you on a roller coaster of loss and gain, which has bad health implications in and of itself.

What you eat is the most important factor. Understanding what is fattening and what really isnt is the key. The establishment  advice ( Food Pyramid. now called the Food Plate) advice is wrong. Low fat diets are harmful. Fat in your diet does not make you fat. Carbs make you fat. Reduce your carbs and dont worry too much about balancing your calories and you will get your insulin under control and thereby how much fat your body holds.

"It's all been a big fat lie"   by Gary Taubes

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/07/07/magazine/what-if-it-s-all-been-a-big-fat-lie.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
« Last Edit: May 19, 2012, 12:15:26 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #484 on: May 19, 2012, 01:12:30 PM »

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.
The problem I see right here is that targeted exercise never burns off fat only in the area targeted.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #485 on: May 19, 2012, 02:56:15 PM »

What you eat is the most important factor.
According to recent research, what is most important is the times at which you eat, not what you eat.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/05/17/when-you-eat-may-trump-what-you-eat-for-weight-loss/
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #486 on: May 19, 2012, 02:59:43 PM »

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.
The problem I see right here is that targeted exercise never burns off fat only in the area targeted.

I understand that too. The scale didn't move at all though. She is upset because of her belly. That's the motivation. People keep asking her if she is pregnant so she joined a Gym.. No weight loss so far after 6 months.. So the question is if it's a good strategy.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #487 on: May 19, 2012, 10:30:57 PM »

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.
The problem I see right here is that targeted exercise never burns off fat only in the area targeted.

I understand that too. The scale didn't move at all though. She is upset because of her belly. That's the motivation. People keep asking her if she is pregnant so she joined a Gym.. No weight loss so far after 6 months.. So the question is if it's a good strategy.

I can see a lot of benefit in regular exercise, both cardiovascular and resistance training, even outside of any weight loss she may or may not experience. I'm therefore never going to knock a gym membership. I just wouldn't want her to be disappointed if exercise alone doesn't result in any significant weight loss.
« Last Edit: May 19, 2012, 10:31:30 PM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #488 on: May 20, 2012, 04:17:07 PM »

This sums up my views on food and nutrition, and I'd have to say Pollan has influenced my eating habits more than any other food writer.  Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.

Sauron's posting about intermittent fasting has piqued my curiosity.  I found this link about it.  Has anyone else done anything like this?  As far as I understand it, this is what the a regular Wed / Fri fast actually ought to look like if one is concerned about such matters. 
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #489 on: May 20, 2012, 05:16:50 PM »

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.
The problem I see right here is that targeted exercise never burns off fat only in the area targeted.

I understand that too. The scale didn't move at all though. She is upset because of her belly. That's the motivation. People keep asking her if she is pregnant so she joined a Gym.. No weight loss so far after 6 months.. So the question is if it's a good strategy.

I can see a lot of benefit in regular exercise, both cardiovascular and resistance training, even outside of any weight loss she may or may not experience. I'm therefore never going to knock a gym membership. I just wouldn't want her to be disappointed if exercise alone doesn't result in any significant weight loss.

I think that's right. Increased strength, flexability and endurance are all good things. it may also reduce stress etc.

I was in something called "The Sergeant's Program" . We met at a park at the crack of doom early and did an hour of running, push ups, jumping jacks etc, the usual PT stuff. The instructor was a former Navy guy. The fun part was that they would yell  manly stuff at you like "YOU CALL THAT A PUSH UP Huh..( expletives deleted) . I would also come home with a replenished store of dirty jokes.

They weighed you when you joined. One day he pulled out a scale and decided to weigh the class and compare the results with when you joined.. No one had lost any weight and several guys had gained weight. He flipped out and asked what the hell were we all eating.

When the calories in calories out paradigm doesnt work too well the assumption is that you must be a glutton.  

Btw..The young woman in question is both beautiful and brainy. She is working on her PhD. I am convinced that both her brains and great beauty are directly inherited from her mother........who is a member of this forum..... And may have read this thread... sooo..ummmm
Amen
« Last Edit: May 20, 2012, 05:22:36 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,498


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #490 on: May 20, 2012, 05:46:18 PM »

This sums up my views on food and nutrition, and I'd have to say Pollan has influenced my eating habits more than any other food writer.  Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants.

Sauron's posting about intermittent fasting has piqued my curiosity.  I found this link about it.  Has anyone else done anything like this?  As far as I understand it, this is what the a regular Wed / Fri fast actually ought to look like if one is concerned about such matters.  

If you read his stuff carefully you will see a big overlap of agreement between him and Taubes and the others.

For example, he says, "Don't eat anything you see advertised". That's a great rule of thumb

He blames carbs for the increase of obesity

He understands that saturated fat does not make you fat nor does it promote hear disease.

He is grossed out by the Beef industry, as we all should be and the lack of quality  in factory raised beef.

Therefore, he recommends a plant based diet, plants as your main dish, locally grown if possible.

However, he has said good things about places like Polyface Farms that produce grass fed beef, chicken and eggs. Factory raised beef is inefficient and environmentally bad which is a big part of his objection. Grass based farms that raise beef are environmentally sound.

He understands that grass fed beef is good for you but doesn't seem to think it is available to a large enough extent, hence the advice to eat plants mainly, avoid sugar and refined carbs and all highly processed food. He wants you to avoid factory raised meat.

Slight differences.. all these people seem to be reaching similar conclusions.  
« Last Edit: May 20, 2012, 05:53:33 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #491 on: May 20, 2012, 08:10:34 PM »

I have a friend who was a really tough and disciplined guy, a Vietnam Vet. He has a large protuberance ( big belly). he told me he was doing 1000 sit ups and push ups every day to try to get rid of it. No progress. He joked that he must have the strongest fat in the World now from all the sit ups.
The problem I see right here is that targeted exercise never burns off fat only in the area targeted.

I understand that too. The scale didn't move at all though. She is upset because of her belly. That's the motivation. People keep asking her if she is pregnant so she joined a Gym.. No weight loss so far after 6 months.. So the question is if it's a good strategy.

I can see a lot of benefit in regular exercise, both cardiovascular and resistance training, even outside of any weight loss she may or may not experience. I'm therefore never going to knock a gym membership. I just wouldn't want her to be disappointed if exercise alone doesn't result in any significant weight loss.

I think that's right. Increased strength, flexability and endurance are all good things. it may also reduce stress etc.

I was in something called "The Sergeant's Program" . We met at a park at the crack of doom early and did an hour of running, push ups, jumping jacks etc, the usual PT stuff. The instructor was a former Navy guy. The fun part was that they would yell  manly stuff at you like "YOU CALL THAT A PUSH UP Huh..( expletives deleted) . I would also come home with a replenished store of dirty jokes.

They weighed you when you joined. One day he pulled out a scale and decided to weigh the class and compare the results with when you joined.. No one had lost any weight and several guys had gained weight. He flipped out and asked what the hell were we all eating.

When the calories in calories out paradigm doesnt work too well the assumption is that you must be a glutton.
Yeah, I gained something like 15 pounds during my three months in Marine Corps boot camp. Marine Corps PT is probably the most strenuous of any of the branches of the armed forces outside of special forces like the Navy Seals, but they made sure we ate well, if we didn't mind shoveling a large meal down our gullets in 10 minutes or less. I managed to shave about 3 minutes off my 3-mile run time, so the PT worked. Smiley
Logged
Shiny
Site Supporter
Moderated
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Groucho Marxist
Jurisdiction: Dahntahn Stoop Haus
Posts: 13,267


Paint It Red


« Reply #492 on: May 20, 2012, 08:50:18 PM »

I need smoeone to clarify something for me. So Marc believes in magic when it comes to nutrition and diet?
Logged

“There is your brother, naked, crying, and you stand there confused over the choice of an attractive floor covering.”

– St. Ambrose of Milan
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 30,519


« Reply #493 on: May 20, 2012, 08:57:40 PM »

He blames carbs for the increase of obesity

It's been a couple years since I read his stuff, but if memory serves, doesn't he say that pretty much any "traditional" diet is fairly healthy? His message is not so simple as the subtitle of his one book would imply.
Logged

Large Marge sent me...
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 33,156


Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!


« Reply #494 on: May 20, 2012, 09:00:29 PM »

I need smoeone to clarify something for me. So Marc believes in magic when it comes to nutrition and diet?
No.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 »   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.182 seconds with 73 queries.