BodyRecomposition Support Forums  

Go Back   BodyRecomposition Support Forums > General information > General diet questions
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Unread 10-26-2010, 09:15 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 23,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesKrieger View Post
I would agree with you that too many people will accept a rat model if it supports their argument, and then automatically dismiss it if it doesn't and say, "These are rats and not humans".

However, I don't think it's disingenuous to accept rat models under certain circumstances and be extremely cautious with or dismiss them under other circumstances. It depends upon what is being examined, and the magnitude of the differences between rat and human physiology and whether those differences are relevant to the problem at hand.

For example, rats have a greater capacity for de novo lipogenesis than humans, which is why some of the high fructose feeding rodent studies are not completely relevant to humans (particularly given that the fructose contents of the diets are often ridiculously high).

However, in this particular case, I do think the rat model is relevant. It's a model examining the contribution of glucose and non-glucose sources of glycerol for triglyceride synthesis under different dietary conditions. I don't think the differences in rat and human physiology would have a great impact on the applicability of these results to humans. The low carb zealots argue that carbohydrate is required for fat synthesis as a glycerol source. This paper makes it clear that adipose tissue "finds a way". In the presence of high carbohydrate, it will synthesize glycerol from glucose. But in the presence of high fat and no carbohydrate, it will synthesize glycerol through glyceroneogenesis from the ingested triglycerides. And one pathway is not more efficient than the other.

I think it comes down to why someone is dismissing or accepting a rat model.
I think that makes it far too easy to draw a line in the sand wherever you want to in this case.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Unread 10-26-2010, 09:17 PM
lylemcd's Avatar
lylemcd lylemcd is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 23,179
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randyjr View Post
I just saw this thread, very nice to have someone else arguing with Low Carb fruitcakes. I don't understand, why do those people defend their views so much? It's like they're on some super "high" by following their low and zero carb diets?
It's got nothing to do with the diet and everything to do with how the majority are programmed for belief systems. You can find zealots in any aspect of everything; people who want simple answers to complex questions and grab onto the 'religion' of the day and defend it to the end of the earth.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Unread 10-26-2010, 09:21 PM
JamesKrieger's Avatar
JamesKrieger JamesKrieger is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
I think that makes it far too easy to draw a line in the sand wherever you want to in this case.
I'm not quite sure I understand your stance. Are you saying that one should either always accept rat models or never accept them?

Sometimes rat models are the only models available given the limitations of human research. I also fail to see why a rat model is not relevant in this particular case.
__________________
James Krieger
Weightology, LLC
Empowering you with knowledge for weight loss success

The Health Sleuth
Journal of Pure Power
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Unread 10-26-2010, 09:24 PM
cyclist cyclist is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 212
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesKrieger View Post
You can't go any lower than zero carbohydrate. This study compared a zero carb group to a high carb group
Sorry, I mis-read the abstract
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
Reading my articles burns mad fat.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Unread 10-27-2010, 01:42 AM
Jean Paulo's Avatar
Jean Paulo Jean Paulo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,317
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
It's got nothing to do with the diet and everything to do with how the majority are programmed for belief systems. You can find zealots in any aspect of everything; people who want simple answers to complex questions and grab onto the 'religion' of the day and defend it to the end of the earth.
I completely agree 100%. Very well said. To the extent of believing that there's no other diet/s that will work to reach whatever goal they have.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Unread 10-27-2010, 07:44 AM
Patrick N Patrick N is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 30
Default

Regarding my argument with M. Levac, an animal study would be accepted by him. But I'm looking for one with zero carbs and zero proteins, only fats. Of course, this could not be sustained for too long. He is convinced that it is impossible to grow fatter by eating only fats. I expect that on an all-fat diet, while creating a caloric surplus, you are going to lose lean tissue and increase your fat store. He says that's impossible since nothing would stimulate the release of insulin.

If I can show him direct evidence of this. I would make real inroads. But so far I did not find such a paper.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Unread 10-27-2010, 07:49 AM
Myles.Buckley Myles.Buckley is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GPS: 50.916752 N, 114.050961 W
Posts: 1,452
Default

Some comedian said it best, "you cannot fix stupid"

Repeat that mantra when you encounter fools, it will help you save your breath, energy and sanity.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Unread 10-27-2010, 08:15 AM
Omn's Avatar
Omn Omn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 945
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Myles.Buckley View Post
Some comedian said it best, "you cannot fix stupid"
Ron White (comedian) had a stand-up special called "you can't fix stupid" on Comedy Central some time ago...


But yeah. As a general rule: Even if someone says something overly ridiculous about this, best to just keep quiet as they probably believe it like religion.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Unread 10-27-2010, 08:22 AM
jacegil jacegil is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lylemcd View Post
It's got nothing to do with the diet and everything to do with how the majority are programmed for belief systems. You can find zealots in any aspect of everything; people who want simple answers to complex questions and grab onto the 'religion' of the day and defend it to the end of the earth.
In French we have an expression that I could loosely translate as: you can't find one any more deaf than one who won't hear. If low carber zealots cared for the truth, how difficult would it be for them to find a handful of nuts who would eat 5000 kcal of fat daily for a week or 2 and see what happens. Don't confuse us with facts/evidence type of thing.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Unread 10-27-2010, 08:29 AM
Uchi-mata's Avatar
Uchi-mata Uchi-mata is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Guayaquil, Ecuador
Posts: 87
Default

Or you may try to lure some of the prophets followers to follow you instead...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.