Decided against the Palumbo diet.

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

24-01-2010, 09:43 PM
devo09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praetorian

THERE ARE MANY....IF YOU DOUBT WHAT I POSTED ASK JOHN MEADOWS (Mountaindog on this board) FOR THAT MATTER, OR ASK NUTRITIONIST...THE INFORMATION IS READILY AVAILABLE....AND NO PLEASE DO NOT MISINTERPRET WHAT I POSTED....I NEVER SAID CARBOHYDRATES CAUSE ILLNESS OR DISEASE...I SAID WITH THE ADVENT OF PROCESSED CARBOHYDRATE MAINLY HFCS THE INCIDENCE OF DISEASE HAS RISEN DRAMATICALLY...TO THINK OTHERWISE IS TO PUT YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND AND PRETEND IT DOESNT EXIST BECAUSE YOU CANT SEE IT.
P
Caps are used only to differentiate my comments.

You are not looking at the BIG picture
Carbohydrate intake (processed or not) is not the cause for obesity/CV disease/etc
It is a result of inactivity+food abundance. Simply we move less and eat more becasue food is easily accessible
And actually studies show we only consume 50calories more today than 50 yeras ago. So clearly the problem is inactivity, which leads to obesity; and once you're obese you are pretty much metabolically ****ed
And the HFCS leading to disease is also kinda silly, it's more of a correlation rather than a causation, people that eat a ton of fast food (with HFCS) will inevitably be consuming a shitload of calories and inevitably be obese

Quote:

Originally Posted by Praetorian

Ritch as I posted above I never said carbs cause disease etc...the term carbs is being generalized on here when I have been completely specific. I posted the increase of processed carbohydrate correlates specifically to the increase in disease in the NA population...namely obesity, type 2 diabetes (in children which is scary..not seen till a few years ago) and cholesterol and heart issues.

Again this isn't due to processed carbohydrate. It's a result of lower activity levels (energy output) and increased calorie intake (energy input)

Quote:

People tend to speak in extremes when they talk keto but that is just not the case. The keto diet as I have posted before has been used quite successfully by the medical community to treat a variety of disease for the last 50 years or more,epilepsy, obesity, heart disease, etc People actually become healthier on the diet by a vast number of markers...LDL. HDL, liver, glucose, etc.

Again you're thinking "small picture"
The only medical benefit of a keto diet is for people with epilepsy. In which they don't follow a diet that is remotely close to what is recommended on the board here (they follow 90% fat 10% protein)
As for the general population being treated for disease with a keto diet, there isn't anything magical about a keto diet. If someone with poor health was put on a keto diet and improved their internal health (BP, lipids, etc) it was because they lost bodyweight/fat.

Quote:

Its not carbs in general we are talking here it is specific types of carbs that cause issues as I have posted. The main point of the discussion is that yes there are many types of diets to use to lose weight...etc and the keto is one of them which is not unhealthy nor extreme....just another viable option.
P

Eliminating a macronutrient group IS extreme.

I love discussing nutrition/dietetics/health sciences because it's the field I'll be entering within about 18 months :)
24-01-2010, 09:46 PM
tiramisu

Quote:

Originally Posted by devo09

You are not looking at the BIG picture
Carbohydrate intake (processed or not) is not the cause for obesity/CV disease/etc
It is a result of inactivity+food abundance. Simply we move less and eat more becasue food is easily accessible
And actually studies show we only consume 50calories more today than 50 yeras ago. So clearly the problem is inactivity, which leads to obesity; and once you're obese you are pretty much metabolically ****ed
And the HFCS leading to disease is also kinda silly, it's more of a correlation rather than a causation, people that eat a ton of fast food (with HFCS) will inevitably be consuming a shitload of calories and inevitably be obese

Again this isn't due to processed carbohydrate. It's a result of lower activity levels (energy output) and increased calorie intake (energy input)

Again you're thinking "small picture"
The only medical benefit of a keto diet is for people with epilepsy. In which they don't follow a diet that is remotely close to what is recommended on the board here (they follow 90% fat 10% protein)
As for the general population being treated for disease with a keto diet, there isn't anything magical about a keto diet. If someone with poor health was put on a keto diet and improved their internal health (BP, lipids, etc) it was because they lost bodyweight/fat.

Eliminating a macronutrient group IS extreme.

I love discussing nutrition/dietetics/health sciences because it's the field I'll be entering within about 18 months :)

There are multiple related causes to obesity but don't kid yourself fructose is some nasty shit when taken in the volumes that many consume it. I'm not saying don't eat fruit but I know far too many drinking 2 litres or more of soda pop and juice per day.
24-01-2010, 09:52 PM
devo09

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiramisu

For the specific purpose of cutting weight while maintaining muscle I really can't imagine a diet significantly more effective than a ketogenic one. The purpose IS to get crazy ripped. It keeps the aminos high, avoids insulin spikes and keeps the calories down. It also preferentially burns body fat.

If you were to look for a crash diet then sure, give keto a shot. But insulin spikes are 100% NOT a problem providing you're still in a calorie deficit

Quote:

A 30 year old 200 pound bodybuilder
has a daily basic calorie requirement of 3400 calories
has an exercise demand of another 600 calories

4000 calorie maintenance diet

We can probably agree that protein intake should be about 300 grams
or 1200 calories.

Zone is 40/30/30 (carb/protein/fat) @ maintenance
1600/1200/1200 in calories

Palumbo's Cutting Template for a 200 pound man is take the calories almost entirely from carbs 2560
160/1200/1200 in calories

Ignoring the randomness of metabolism and water this should be good for a 3 pound reduction in weight per week while keeping aminos high and preferentially burning fat (ketosis).

good god, there is no metabolic benefit of ketosis over just a regular semi low-moderate carb diet, this is proven (I'm not digging up the studies, you can check lyle mcdonalds website for a research review)

So your thought is; since insulin suppresses lipolysis, and carbs = insulin secretion....well ****, lets just get rid of ALL the carbs and well just loose fat quicker than any other way! Sorry doesn't work that way

And you're example is crazy too; a 1500calorie deficit? He better be loaded up on drugs if he wants to maintain muscle mass. Not too mention the metabolic slowdown that will occur from slashing calories that quickly. If a drug-free person were to do that they would stall within weeks and be metabolically ****ed within a couple months. It might not matter if you have the option of adding GH+t3+clen but for natural that is a terrible idea
24-01-2010, 09:55 PM
devo09

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiramisu

There are multiple related causes to obesity

NO, there are not. There is 1 cause:
Energy imbalance (energy intake exceeding output)

It's really not a nutrition issue at all. It's a societel issue, inactivity is SOOO low through society and food is EVERYWHERE.
24-01-2010, 09:56 PM
tiramisu

Interesting how you call a proven effective template crazy. This is Dave Palumbo's contest prep template and it absolutely works (proven by 100's of competitors).

So you're probably going to have to adjust your definition of crazy a bit :)
24-01-2010, 10:05 PM
devo09

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiramisu

Interesting how you call a proven effective template crazy. This is Dave Palumbo's contest prep template and it absolutely works (proven by 100's of competitors).

So you're probably going to have to adjust your definition of crazy a bit :)

ok...crazy = giving a "one size fits all" template/diet to everyone

also..with enough drugs pretty much almost anything will work.. (hopefully that doesn't offend anyone)

and palumbo knows his drugs
http://forums.fitness.ee/uploads/mon...1222277748.jpg
24-01-2010, 10:09 PM
tiramisu

It's not one size fits all. It's one size for a 200 pound male bodybuilder then adjust.
However, it's pretty darn close to bang on for every 200 pound male bodybuilder. Oddly human physiology doesn't vary all that much.
24-01-2010, 10:09 PM
Talo

...

A lot of people need to control their insulin levels ( spikes ) and a lot of these diets are perfect for that.

If your not insulin sensitive than it wouldn't really matter if you did one of these diets.

Personally , I've been on a clean keto for the past two weeks . I've tried one before and didn't like it , but this time I have cut out cheese and greasy bad fats ( i.e. : bacon ) and I only had two bad days . I am slowly going to add in some fruit ( berries mainly ) so you can call it a Paleo diet if you want. My main thing is to control my insulin spikes .

Recently , my asthma has been getting worst as my body weight increased ( with exercise only ) this has cleared up 100% as I went for a salt bag fast walk last night and had no problems. My bodyweight is only down about 5lbs , but I can say the inflamation has cleared up.
24-01-2010, 10:14 PM
tiramisu

Yes, DP is an ugly bugger but the diet works. I've tried it and it's been effective, 100's to 1000's of others have as well and the success rate is extremely high.

In this case Denial is not a river in egypt. You really have to adjust your opinions to include facts or the debate just gets silly.
24-01-2010, 10:19 PM
devo09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talo

What are your thoughts on the Paleo diet ( caveman ) ?

my thoughts?

Isn't it just lean meats+healthy fats+fruits/veggies? And avoiding starchy carbs?

Why is there any need to eliminate a food group completely? There isn't even conclusive research on what "the caveman" really ate.

It (along with the keto diet) will work for alot ofpeople because essentially it works as a "cutting calories for dummies" diet because it completely eliminates entire food groups, resulting in lower energy intake

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page