2013 Bacon Shortage

[Socal 524]

He's not really on any official diet per-say. Taken a lot of research and articles and kind of put together his own thing on what's best for him. That's something he also tells me. Each person's body is different so it's always a bit tough to generalize what plan is best for everyone.

 

Well what's your opinion on the paragraph I posted in reply to Zach's post?

 

I'm not trying to instigate you into a debate, just wondering because I know you're studying nutrition...

 

First, what is the source of that paragraph, something your relative said? There is nothing inaccurate stated in that paragraph, other than the line that says if you "eat a high carb diet you will most likely lack the energy needed for exercise", it's actually the exact opposite.

 

Without going into too much detail your body needs glucose (from carbohydrates) and stored glucose in muscle (called glycogen) to be able to produce muscular contraction to produce work.

 

I have to get to school, then teach class so I have to go, but ill add to this later tonight.

[Maverick 791]

First, what is the source of that paragraph, something your relative said? There is nothing inaccurate stated in that paragraph, other than the line that says if you "eat a high carb diet you will most likely lack the energy needed for exercise", it's actually the exact opposite.

 

Without going into too much detail your body needs glucose (from carbohydrates) and stored glucose in muscle (called glycogen) to be able to produce muscular contraction to produce work.

 

I have to get to school, then teach class so I have to go, but ill add to this later tonight.

 

The author's name is Lori Lipinski, a Certified Nutritional Consultant, lecturer and writer - whose articles have been published and quoted in highly respected national and international health journals and books.

 

And not entirely true, check this article out: http://www.marksdail.../#axzz29OkRbwpZ

[Socal 524]

The author's name is Lori Lipinski, a Certified Nutritional Consultant, lecturer and writer - whose articles have been published and quoted in highly respected national and international health journals and books.

 

And not entirely true, check this article out: http://www.marksdail.../#axzz29OkRbwpZ

 

C.N.C. doesn't mean much to me, anyone with a GED can obtain one. Like I said, nothing in that paragraph was inaccurate save for saying a high carb diet leads to a lack of energy for exercise.

 

There's also nothing wrong with the article you linked, but I am not arguing that, I didn't say that glucose is the only fuel source nor did I say it was the preferred source of fuel for the body.

 

I don't have an issue with low carb diets, I have an issue with the statement "carbs are bad for you"

 

I'm going to watch this MNF game then get back to this later.

Edited October 16, 2012 by Socal

[Socal 524]

Ok so this post may be rather lengthy, and may be confusing to understand, but I will attempt to clearly explain the processes that are involved.

 

Let's first start off looking into why some have come to conclusion that carbs are bad for you, Mav and his relative are not the first to come to this conclusion, and they won't be the last. The logic isn't flawed, in fact it's based on hard scientific evidence, the problem is that the physiological processes of the body don't occur in a vacuum.

 

Glucose, it's one of several sources of fuel the body uses to produce ATP (adenosine triphosphate) which is a high energy phosphate used in muscle contraction. We will skip how glucose is made and head straight to where it circulates, in the blood stream. Blood glucose, commonly referred to as blood sugar, needs to be transported from the blood stream to the muscles where it can be used or stored.

 

This is where insulin comes into play, insulin is a regulatory hormone responsible for blood glucose regulation and in turn plays a large role in the regulation of carbohydrate and fat metabolism. On muscle and fat tissue, are proteins called GLUT 4 transporters, the protein, activated by insulin is responsible for glucose translocation into the cell.

 

So to recap: blood glucose(sugar) rises due to consumption of carbohydrates --- insulin is secreted by the pancreas to respond and regulate blood sugar levels --- insulin activates GLUT 4 protein to transfer glucose into cells.

 

Before we move on, lets briefly discuss what is called the glycemic index. The index was developed to measure the effect that individual foods have on the body's blood sugar levels. Foods with carbs that break down and digest quickly, rapidly releasing glucose into circulation are typically high GI foods. On the other hand, foods that digest slowly and have a slower release into circulation are typically low GI foods. The index was developed for people suffering from diabetes as a way to better control their blood glucose levels.

 

Now we can move on to why insulin gets a bad rap and why subsequently high carbohydrate consumption does as well. Other than blood glucose regulation, insulin has an anti-lypolitic effect, meaning that it inhibits the break down of stored fat and circulating fat.

 

In the body we have two enzymes (an enzyme is responsible for increasing the rate of a particular chemical reaction) called Lipoprotein Lipase (LPL) and Hormone Sensitive Lipase (HSL), the ase at the end of each name indicates its responsible for the break down of something. LPL breaks down circulating triglycerides (fat) while HSL breaks down triglycerides stored in adipose tissue.

 

High levels of circulating insulin stimulates the enzyme phosphodiesterase (PD3) which inhibits the activation of HSL, and therefore stored fat is unable to be broken down and delivered to the blood stream for use. PD3 is actually deactivated by caffeine, which is why we see caffeine sources as potential aids in fat oxidation. One other way insulin inhibits the use of fat is by activating the enzyme phosphofructokinase (PFK) which has a large role in glycolysis which uses glucose to produce other substrates for energy use. This causes the body to favor the use of glucose over fat oxidation by inhibiting LPL.

 

So high ingestion of carbs and therefore insulin is bad for you, right? It stops you from utilizing fat as a fuel source and it makes you fat, right? According to the evidence it does, but the good thing is that this isn't the end of the line. Here in lies the importance of physical activity or exercise in hormone and metabolism regulation, and therefore your health.

When you exercise your body released catecholamines, nor-epinephrine and epinephrine (called nor-adrenaline and adrenaline as well). When you are exercising, your body is focused on the task at hand, it is focusing on releasing energy (primarily in the form of glucose and fat) to be use to produce work. The body is not concerned with the storage of glucose or fat which is what insulin is responsible for. So in order to suppress insulin levels, the body releases NE and E which enables HSL and LPL to do their jobs.

 

What can be gathered from this information is that yes, high carbohydrate diets, particularly those containing a large amount of simple carbohydrates can be detrimental to your health, given that you remain a sedentary individual that refrains from exercise. However, even low to moderate exercise intensity 3-5 days a week goes a long way in remediating the majority of these complications. Eat in moderation, focus your carb intake on complex carbohydrates and stay active.

 

I hope that was informative and helpful to those who read it.

[rzb+ 367]

So eat more bacon. Got it.

 

[Maverick 791]

Well-written. I think most of what you said is spot on. Although, I don't give much credence to the glycemic index - as once you add fat to the carbs you're digesting, it skews the numbers.

 

I was surprised you left out Leptin - as I suspect its cause and effect on these processes plays a bigger role than the current science we have shows.

[Socal 524]

Well-written. I think most of what you said is spot on. Although, I don't give much credence to the glycemic index - as once you add fat to the carbs you're digesting, it skews the numbers.

 

I was surprised you left out Leptin - as I suspect its cause and effect on these processes plays a bigger role than the current science we have shows.

 

Like I said in my post, the glycemic index was originally developed to test the glucose response of various foods. The index is inherently flawed as it does not account for the amount of food ingested, nor does it measure blood glucose response >2 hours postprandial (after meal). Additionally, as you noted, fat and protein content of the meal would significantly effect the GI. I only referenced the GI because it's commonly used as a source for those arguing against high carbohydrate consumption.

 

Leptin and Insulin are the only two known hormones that act as a signal on adipose tissue. Leptin's main role is in inducing satiety, it's hand in fat metabolism is more long term. The difference between the two is insulin is directly related to carbohydrate ingestion, which is the reason I did not mention leptin in this discussion.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Socal have you heard the theory—and I stress theory, that a high grain diet (due to his nutritionists advice) led to Steve Job's development of cancer and it supplementing it's growth until he finally was a dead man? It's an interesting theory about the dangers of high grain intake (and thus high carbs.) I mean, we don't know how much he exercised either, so like you said, a sedentary lifestyle with high carb diets is a nightmare waiting to manifest itself.

 

I've tried out a few different diets myself, vegetarianism, Paleo, neither worked with my body. Had lethargic (veggie) or weird (paleo, mostly joint issues) bodily changes with each. I'm an even fat, protein, carb guy. I need to even it out, though I still keep carbs the lowest. Something like 40% fat, 40% protein, 20% carbs is my wheelhouse for optimum health and how I feel.

[Socal 524]

Socal have you heard the theory—and I stress theory, that a high grain diet (due to his nutritionists advice) led to Steve Job's development of cancer and it supplementing it's growth until he finally was a dead man? It's an interesting theory about the dangers of high grain intake (and thus high carbs.) I mean, we don't know how much he exercised either, so like you said, a sedentary lifestyle with high carb diets is a nightmare waiting to manifest itself.

 

I've tried out a few different diets myself, vegetarianism, Paleo, neither worked with my body. Had lethargic (veggie) or weird (paleo, mostly joint issues) bodily changes with each. I'm an even fat, protein, carb guy. I need to even it out, though I still keep carbs the lowest. Something like 40% fat, 40% protein, 20% carbs is my wheelhouse for optimum health and how I feel.

 

I have not heard that theory, where was it that you heard it from? It's something that I will have to look into, I haven't really seen cases of high carb diets leading to the development of cancer, at least not directly. Steve Jobs was obviously a very intelligent man, I would assume he had at least a basic understanding of the importance of exercise, or had someone tell him such. But he was also very busy with a business that doesn't particularly lend itself to finding time for physical activity.

 

Either way it's not something I can really comment much on, although very interesting, I am nowhere near an expert in epidemiology. One place where I have seen a relation in the development in cancer partly due to nutrition is the relationship of soy and breast cancer. Most people assume the reason breast cancer is almost exclusively present in females is because of the abundance of breast tissue itself, but the bigger culprit is the hormone estrogen. Soy beans contain phytoestrogens which mimic the hormone estrogen and therefore soy has become a concern.

 

Just like in my other post above, this claim that 'a soy diet can increase the risk in breast cancer' is a lot like the claim that 'a high carb diet is bad because it leads to high blood glucose levels and subsequent high levels of insulin secretion'. They are both conclusions based on science, but when both are examined through meticulous studies, the claims don't hold up. While soy beans do increase estrogen levels, the evidence is not there to support the claim it increases the risk of developing breast cancer. In science you can't jump to conclusions, you have to crawl to them, so to speak.

 

It's good that you have found what works best for you in terms of macronutrient mix, the science suggests several things in regards to macro percentages and different combinations, but in the end your body will tell you what is best.

[CampinWithaMissingPerson 2,025]

Yeah, actually you just reminded me he had a lot of soy intake as well. His doctor pushed a heavy grain and soy diet. Their theory is that too heavy of a diet made up of grains causes hypertrophy of the pancreas, tissue degeneration, and eventually cancer of the pancreas (what Jobs had.) Soy had something to do with the thyroid gland.

 

Another doctor, who is a staunch vegetarian/heavy grain & starch diet enthusiast claims Jobs had the cancer for awhile due to his proximity to metals when he used to soldering circuit boards in the beginnings of Apple, or building frequency counters for HP.

 

Wild stuff.