Does anyone have any good explanation as to why this is happening.

[tury694]

I just want to add that not all people respond the same to each of these diets. Some people cut by restricting fat, others cut carbs, others just make a deficit without targeting one macro group, some rely on drugs to cut, and some people eat like crazy and do so much cardiovascular training that they stay lean. Chad Ochocinco is known to eat several meals from McDonald's every day and he is still lean and muscular. He is eating at maintenance(albeit lots of junk), using AAS, has great genetics and training like a madman.

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

hmm.. tell that to Ben Greenfield .. top level Triathlete,, who's two best times at the Hawaiian and Canadian triathlons came when he was in Ketosis,, he had ZERO CARBS,, he used MCT oil (pure saturated fat) during the race to 're-fuel'-- seems like pretty good performance to me.. if your best times come when you've had zero carbs,, then you can't say that carbs are essential for performance,, it obviously was not need for Ben.. also,, the greatest female triathlete of all time was on a very low carb high fat diet during all her years of competing.. worked well for her.

Please find the part where I said that carbs are "essential" - you can't because that is NOT what I said, please read carefully to avoid future misinterpretations
Ben Greenfield is a confessed PED user (this lets you get away with a bunch of stuff relating to diet/training) and, as a triathlete, actually works actively to avoid and/or reduce muscle mass.
The performance of endurance athletes doesn't correlate to that of strength/higher intensity athletes - a group more relevant to this community.

hmm.. what came first,, the chicken or the egg.

did they get fat because they were genetically pre-disposed and had a degree of insulin resistance from the start, or did they make themselves this way by getting over weight ?

the former seems more plausible to me,, especially because both sides of my family have a history of diabetes yet neither side has obesity issues,, we are all naturally lean***8230;

if I was to bet,, if you took a 30 year old man who was obese, took him back in time to infancy,, then never fed that person a carb as long as he lived,, when he hit 30 he would not be fat.

Genetics certainly plays a part in inducing insulin resistance, as does diet, lack of activity, weight, etc.
But since you cannot control your genetics it makes more sense to focus on the diet (calorie control), exercise (move more) and weight (don't get fat) factors.

The final study I posted shows conclusively that all diets that have a caloric deficit in place lead to improvements in insulin resistance, obesity, etc with no advantage being given to low carb diets.
So that bet would be a losing one - especially since the chances of that 30yr old man staying on that low carb diet would be very, very low (worst longevity rate of all diets).

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

First of all this is what you said:

it's clear that fat does not make a person fat (proven biological science),, it's impossible for fat to make a person fat because fat does not raise insulin and insulin is the only hormone in the body that can drive glucose and store fat in fat cells,, glucose comes from carbs and spikes insulin,, only carbs can make you fat

Your assuming that dietary fat can't make you fat because it doesn't effect insulin and insulin is the only hormone responsible for fat storage and therefore carbs are to blame.

So your saying that the fat cell can take in and store glucose.. without the presence of insulin ?

don't think that is in the human biology and medical text books we have available to us.. quoting a study that talks about how ASP is present in the blood and how consumption of oral fat intake essentially raises triglyceride-rich lipoproteins,, does not explain how the FAT is actually stored or how fat cells can intake glucose without the presence of insulin..

So,, you've clearly read the whole study, how does fat cells take in glucose without the presence of insulin,, and instead this ASP in the blood stream makes you store fat ?

This is not what "I'm saying" - its what biology is telling us happens (we've known about ASP since 1989).

Secondly, what biology tells us is that if your in a caloric surplus and consuming dietary fat - ASP increases and can turn that dietary fat into stored fat without any increase in insulin whatsoever - it has jackshit to do with glucose.

Thirdly, yes I have read the full study and can explain the whole process in a relatively simple manner:

- You eat fat
- Fat gets digested
- a large portion of this fat gets incorporated into chylomicrons (a lipoprotein)
- Chylomicrons float around the blood stream
- There are proteins on the surface of chylomicrons that stimulate various receptors, which in turn stimulate the production of ASP
- ASP influences lipoprotein lipase to suck fat out of the chylomicron
- ASP influences the adipocyte to esterify fatty acids reducing free fatty acid concentrations (reducing lipolysis)
- This entire process leads to a concentrated volume of free fatty acids taken across lipid transporters into the fat cell
- The fat cell turns these into triglycerides and stores them
- With a caloric surplus this whole thing = fat gain

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

proven biological science is that ONLY insulin can store glucose in fat cells,, nothing else. that's what the med texts books tell us.

so,, if something else in our body besides insulin can do this,, please prove this and enlighten us all, and I will agree that I don't know what the biological science tells us (and I'll agree that the biological text books should be re-written.. and preferably by you)

I have no idea what sort of textbooks you've been reading, possibly the same ones from the 30s that Taubes uses, but I can assure you that proven biological science says no such thing.

I provided a detailed study proving this.
I have explained it fully - so consider yourself enlightened.

Stop having a go at me just because you made a dumbass comment on a topic you don't understand - this isn't me vs you, its biology vs your interpretation of biology

 

[Roush]

First of all this is what you said:



Your assuming that dietary fat can't make you fat because it doesn't effect insulin and insulin is the only hormone responsible for fat storage and therefore carbs are to blame.



This is not what "I'm saying" - its what biology is telling us happens (we've known about ASP since 1989).

Secondly, what biology tells us is that if your in a caloric surplus and consuming dietary fat - ASP increases and can turn that dietary fat into stored fat without any increase in insulin whatsoever - it has jackshit to do with glucose.

Thirdly, yes I have read the full study and can explain the whole process in a relatively simple manner:

- You eat fat
- Fat gets digested
- a large portion of this fat gets incorporated into chylomicrons (a lipoprotein)
- Chylomicrons float around the blood stream
- There are proteins on the surface of chylomicrons that stimulate various receptors, which in turn stimulate the production of ASP
- ASP influences lipoprotein lipase to suck fat out of the chylomicron
- ASP influences the adipocyte to esterify fatty acids reducing free fatty acid concentrations (reducing lipolysis)
- This entire process leads to a concentrated volume of free fatty acids taken across lipid transporters into the fat cell
- The fat cell turns these into triglycerides and stores them
- With a caloric surplus this whole thing = fat gain

This makes sense , I was looking at it from the glucose angle and not the triglyceride angle ,, where the body uses the glucose needed then stores the rest in fat. And I'm sure the body can store fat without the presence of insulin then because fat is essential nutrient,, same reason amino acids can be converted to glucose

So sure, consuming fat in calorie surplus can cause fat cells to store triglycerides ,, of course, adding carbs to that fat intake as well will cause a rise in insulin and then the fat cells are storing glucose on top of it.. A double whammy for fat gain

that's why low carb high fat diets can and do work just fine for loosing fat for plenty of people (but not all,, not everyone has the mental discipline)


Do you agree : excess calories of Fat along with excess carbs will cause fat gain more then if there were no carbs and just fat ,, doesn't the added carbs cause insulin spikes and glucose levels to rise and force the body to store in the fat

 

[Hypnotix]

Ripped, if you want me to find out how to scrub meta data from pictures.. you can post up some pudding! Roush might not listen unless you show him the pudding

Just messing Roush

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

Do you agree : excess calories of Fat along with excess carbs will cause fat gain more then if there were no carbs and just fat ,, doesn't the added carbs cause insulin spikes and glucose levels to rise and force the body to store in the fat

I'm assuming calories are all even in this scenario (otherwise its a just a case of whoever is eating more)...

Both will make you equally fat it just happens through different mechanisms.

- Excess dietary fat will get stored directly as fat through ASP with saturated fat leading the way.

- Excess carbs RARELY get stored directly as fat - it take days of overfeeding exclusively on carbs to activate de novo lipogenesis, and even then only like 7% of total carb intake is actually store as fat.
Instead, what happens is insulin increases carb oxidation and impairs fat oxidation so that more of your dietary fat intake gets stored as fat.

So basically, excessive calories in general will cause equal fat gain as long as we remember that "excess" is context dependent.

This is why Taubes' argument is so flawed - he completely ignores the mechanisms in place that allow dietary fat alone to lead to fat gain. And that is where the whole "control insulin and ignore calories" stuff falls flat on its face.

 

[Roush]

Another question zilla -- bringing this back around to the original topic

Would years and years of a low fat diet possibly cause low testosterone levels ? Or also If a culture or society that ate very low amounts of fat have much lower testosterone levels in general then a culture that had higher fat diets

 

[Roush]

I'm assuming calories are all even in this scenario (otherwise its a just a case of whoever is eating more)...

Both will make you equally fat it just happens through different mechanisms.

- Excess dietary fat will get stored directly as fat through ASP with saturated fat leading the way.

- Excess carbs RARELY get stored directly as fat - it take days of overfeeding exclusively on carbs to activate de novo lipogenesis, and even then only like 7% of total carb intake is actually store as fat.
Instead, what happens is insulin increases carb oxidation and impairs fat oxidation so that more of your dietary fat intake gets stored as fat.

So basically, excessive calories in general will cause equal fat gain as long as we remember that "excess" is context dependent.

This is why Taubes' argument is so flawed - he completely ignores the mechanisms in place that allow dietary fat alone to lead to fat gain. And that is where the whole "control insulin and ignore calories" stuff falls flat on its face.

What's in bold was my main line of thinking - Having carbs, raising insulin ALONG with dietary fat ,, resulting in MORE storage of dietary fight because of the insulin response

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

Another question zilla -- bringing this back around to the original topic

Would years and years of a low fat diet possibly cause low testosterone levels ? Or also If a culture or society that ate very low amounts of fat have much lower testosterone levels in general then a culture that had higher fat diets

There is no evidence whatsoever that a low fat diet alone causes low test levels - as in hypogonadal levels. You'll find a bunch of association type studies but being associated with a condition doesn't mean you caused it.

Outside of that it depends on how "low" we're talking here.
Most of the research suggests that as long as you get 1-3g of EFAs and fat makes up around 20-25% of your total calories there is nothing to worry about from a health perspective.
In fact there is no evidence at all that you "need" more than the basic 1-3g of EFAs. This is another reason why focusing on what you "need" is a poor way to go about things.

Could years of very, very low fat diets cause lower test levels? Maybe but the data isn't there yet for me to give a conclusive answer.
Is it a bigger contributor than obesity and inactivity in general? No - the data clearly shows that obesity lowers test regardless of dietary macros
.

What's in bold was my main line of thinking - Having carbs, raising insulin ALONG with dietary fat ,, resulting in MORE storage of dietary fight because of the insulin response

The part in bold is incorrect if calories are equal.
Excess carbs & fat simply means you have 2 different mechanisms in place that contribute to fat gain determined by caloric excess.
Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[tury694]

So Ripped, in your opinion what is causing the drop in test levels that we are seeing?

 

[Mrrippedzilla]

So Ripped, in your opinion what is causing the drop in test levels that we are seeing?

Its not just one cause.
Its a combination of things coming together such as obesity, sedentary lifestyle, lack of sunshine exposure, people living longer (aging = test dropping), better records of test scores now compared to the past (we have no idea of the test levels of guys from the 1700s, 1800s or whatever), etc.

But in order to address any of these causes, you have to come up with solutions that people can implement and SUSTAIN permanently - completely eliminating and vilifying a macro group isn't going to get it done.

 

[49ER]

Do you guys have any pudding?

 

[tury694]

Its not just one cause.
Its a combination of things coming together such as obesity, sedentary lifestyle, lack of sunshine exposure, people living longer (aging = test dropping), better records of test scores now compared to the past (we have no idea of the test levels of guys from the 1700s, 1800s or whatever), etc.

But in order to address any of these causes, you have to come up with solutions that people can implement and SUSTAIN permanently - completely eliminating and vilifying a macro group isn't going to get it done.

Oh ok. I did not think it was a macro group. I thought that some sort of environmental hpta disruptor was to blame but a combination of the things you said makes sense.

 

[DinoTexas]

I don't need to change the world, and I'm 100% certain that only 1% of the earth can be as disciplined as some of us are in their eating regimen. But there are alternate diets that work will work better for the less disciplined masses; and then most of them will quit eating that way and balloon back up. For the masses, the answer is simply make healthier choices your lifestyle, and not your strict discipline. Sadly I'm convinced most can't follow anything overly hard or considered a diversion from their normal path of least resistance

Its not just one cause.
Its a combination of things coming together such as obesity, sedentary lifestyle, lack of sunshine exposure, people living longer (aging = test dropping), better records of test scores now compared to the past (we have no idea of the test levels of guys from the 1700s, 1800s or whatever), etc.

But in order to address any of these causes, you have to come up with solutions that people can implement and SUSTAIN permanently - completely eliminating and vilifying a macro group isn't going to get it done.

 

[dexterbenson]

I did Weight Watchers for about a month and it did work for me. I also used the Dr. Max Powers Burn for about 2 weeks and even my friends have really noticed a difference. I am at that age where weight is really hard to budge. The Max Powers Burn combined with Weight Watchers has made a huge difference. Although I also have a load more energy.