Facebook Comments

23 thoughts on “Fri, Nov 21st”

1. That your hard-earned muscle turns to fat when you stop lifting weights. That pisses me off on so so many levels. Its probably the scientist in me that can’t figure out why people blatantly accept this, yet don’t think lead can be turned to gold.

   Why is one farcical idea more worthwhile than another?

2. Speaking of baseless advice actually. This whole Zone-diet thing has no real peer-reviewed literature backing it up. My not-so-thorough search of PubMed while writing an essay on the topic and a few emails back and forth with Robb Wolf came up dry.

   I asked Robb did he know of any studies performed using a proper high-fat diet and he knew of none. I’m too lazy to actually look any harder but if Robb Wolf (CF’s nutrition expert) can’t come up with any then I doubt it exists.

3. Hmmm, that’s interesting Bobby.

   By the same token, we’ve no peer reviewed controlled decent studies stating that squats are safe/dangerous. No experiments stating that CF is better than machine based programs either though.

   Didn’t you say that most of the diet studies you looked at were woefully designed/executed, though?

   This post sounds awfully reactive, but it’s meant to be more along the lines of “we don’t really have many decent studies”

4. Which is really one of my biggest questions…why not? There is absolutely no doubt that obesity (for both vanity and health reasons) is one of the most important if not the most important thing in the vast majority of America’s (and I imagine most industrialized nations’) mind.

   I would venture a guess that a compelling argument could also be made that it provides the highest cost/benefit ratio in terms of reductions in health care cost, lost time at work, etc. than any other epidemic due to its relative ease of treatment.

   By that I mean a dollar spent researching a ‘cure’ for (or at least conclusively validating the best diet/exercise scheme for) obesity has a higher potential reduction in health care costs than one spent on cancer, leukemia, etc.

   So why haven’t the governments of the world prioritized this? Even more surprising, why haven’t the Atkins foundation, or Dr. Sears who at this point must have enough money to fund such research, done so? Why don’t they team up with the Pritkin folks (or whoever is pushing low-fat high-carb) and agree on a study to test which diet works best? A jointly-funded study by the two opposing sides would have to be accepted by all.

   And Bobby, the theme I hear most often from Robb Wolf is ‘give it a try and tinker’ which I would guess reflects the fact that 1) there is no conclusive science on this and 2) individual variance accounts for an awful lot.

5. Bobby if you go to Google Scholar and type in High Fat High Protein Low Carbohydrate Diet, or even just Zone Diet you get a whole heap of results. To be honest in regards to the Zone I’m not entirely sold yet myself, however saying that I agree that we shouldn’t be shovelling carbohydrates into ourselves in disturbing amounts, whether carbohydrates are the cause of all our ills or whether simply over processed man made food is the real problem I’m not sure, it could be equally both or more one than the other.

   To be honest, in regards to high quality peer reviewed journals in regards to the Zone diet etc. it’s never going to be the same as something like apoptosis in the pharmaceutical industry, where a discovery would save billions of dollars, hence the pharma companies pump money and grants into research. With something like a diet, who would be supplying the money and why?

6. Speaking of individual variation in relation to diet here’s a completely random thought with the sole intention of irresistibly pulling Big Shane into the discussion. We know that different HG societies thrived (or at least avoided the ‘diseases of society’) on vastly different diets. Obviously food availability and therefore diet varied greatly in different regions of the world.

   So what was the timescale for the world wide diffusion of populations? Was it slow enough that evolution kept pace so that North Americans had time to evolve to a different diet than Central Africans? Or was it like agriculture where it happened too fast for evolution to keep up?

   The real question of course being, if folks really want to go paleo should they be basing it on their ancestry? Or, in the absence of knowing your ancnestry….tinker?

7. Ok so Kyle is obviously a much faster type than I am! I can see some of your points Kyle but to be honest I don’t think Dr. Sears would see any point in doing large scale research, from your average joe on the street considering a diet it’s unusual for them to start trawling the internet or libraries looking for complicated and intricate scientific journals to do a review of the diet before beginning. Most people read the diet book and are either drawn in by it or not, I’d imagine only 1-2% of people would make the effort to thoroughly research a diet. So from Dr. Sears perspective, why pour huge amounts of money into research, your book is selling 2 million copies a year (just a guess), a huge amount of cash poured into long and complicated research to simply improve your sales by 1%, and that’s if the research actually proves you correct.

   In regards to why don’t the government invest huge money into research, well I might put on my conspiracy theory hat here for a minute and say that, if you could prove that the current diet recommended by world governments is actually killing everyone slowly and that a reduction or elimination of processed carbohydrates would drastically improve the health of millions but by changing the diet of millions of people the economies of huge food producing countries, food manufacturing and farming would collapse, and there simply wouldn’t be enough high quality but cheap protein available to people in order for it to be sustainable, what would you do?

8. Pixie–in a word, Armageddon.

9. if you’ll allow me be pedantic, we didnt kill off the neaderthals. The “great and tiumphant march of the early homo sapiens (as opposed to us, the modern sub-species)” is a myth and is more along the lines of good story telling/tirumphant-ism. In fact the two lived side-by-side for a good while (ill double check later). In fact they have found bones of the both neanderthals and early sapiens in the same caves together, and there appears to have been some significant interaction between the two.

   The big problem with all this stuff is that it is educated guesswork. The era we’re talking about is at the tail-end of accurate measurements for establishing the age of bones in question.

   For governments i guess it could a moral thing. Can you intentionally drive thousands of farmers out of business? Condemn millions to death by starvation (and i know that happens anyway, but that is accidental rather than design). And also, what about those who enjoy eating patatoes, chips, spag. bol., noodles etc. Are they to be denied their rights to enjoy food?

   rant over, apologies

10. Man, I really, really need to get some work done. Ok thoughts on morality and Gov’ts role in diet. First, I’m far to Libertarian (sorry Big Shane) to ever suggest that anyone, govt or otherwise control how a person eats. However, as Dr. Eades pointed out this happens unintentionally for 50 million Americans on a daily basis through prisons, schools, etc.

    I might suggest, however that if it were conclusively proven that a diet causes, say diabetes and a person who knows this chooses to eat that diet, they should not receive any tax payer funded medical treatment should they develop diabetes. And yes, I feel the same way about cancer, AIDS and any other disease. And yes I understand it would be very hard to enforce, it’s just the idea.

    As to forcing farmers out of work, I can’t think of a worse justification for promoting a diet. There are lots’ of sugar farmers out there, so should the govt be promoting sugar consumption?

    As to starvation due to the inability to produce an equivalent amount of calories in protein as is produced through carbohydrates. This is a valid concern, but not a reason not to do anything. Why not work toward a gradual/workable solution?

    And finally to morality. My mom lives next to high tension power lines which may or may not cause cancer based on studies of children who grow up next to them. Now let’s say a study were to prove that living within a mile actually does cause brain cancer. Should government tell those people? Should government ban construction within a mile of these lines or should they consider the construction jobs that might be lost, or the people that won’t be able to afford housing anywhere else? Do conspiracy theorists really think politicians are that evil? To be sitting in a meeting saying ‘sure these power lines cause brain cancer in kids, but I really don’t want to upset the construction lobby in my state…’

    Why does that seem ridiculous and outrageously immoral when promoting and in some cases forcing a diet that may or may not cause cancer (or diabetes, or hypertension, or heart disease) is not held to the same standard?

11. Man if I keep this up you guys might start calling me Barry Cooper.

12. http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=q7bEkk5GHwg

    Ahh “A x B x C = X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don’t do them.”

13. Ok, as far out there as this may seem, I’m not going to accept the Ford case as evidence of immorality, even if I find Ed Norton annoying—happy to give you my views if you’re ever curious. Falklands I don’t know enough about but if Iraq were about supplying the US with oil they really should have thought it through a bit more as we still don’t have a seat on OPEC (truth be told I’ve never been able to come up with a motive in that case). I suppose there are plenty of examples in business and govt where an individual or a few people made the types of decisions we’re talking about but I still think that deep down, the vast majority of humans are still human. Tobacco is the classic and a very good example of how not just a few individuals but entire mgt teams can screw folks so sure it’s possible.

    Although it may seem harsh governments must always value lives in monetary terms and I’m not sure from your post if you think that is immoral or not, but we seem to have strayed well of topic now, haven’t we?

14. I’m fine with people eating whatever the feck they like, as long as they understand enough about the short and long term consequences of what they eat to make an informed decision.

    They average person is completely clueless to the fact that there’s a very direct interaction between what they eat and how they feel. I’ve been that person, and it’s shit.

    I’ve got a lot of barely-contained rage on the topic, as I spent a huge portion of my life feeling constantly tired and getting sick all the time from eating huge quantities of “healthy whole grains”.

    It’s tempting to think that it’s all part of a huge, clandestine conspiracy to keep the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical and grain industries in invory backscratchers, but I think the truth may be even scarier: The people in charge of deciding public policy on health and nutrition are absolute morons.

15. was the ford thing real, or just in fight club?

    Ah, you read my mind colm

    Big Shane –

    i dont think you were being triumphalist, i studied human evolution in college (although we only scratched the surface) and its a common misconception people have re neanderthals. Fact is species die out all the time naturally when a better species comes along. Neanderthals/early homos (this is the genus level classification of the animal, not homophobia) were no different. What i was saying is that there was in fact more interaction than people generally think – they have found neadnerthals with relatively advanced tools, and how they got them is anyones guess be it trade, stealing, copying etc. There was a power struggle between the two which “we” won. Also “modern” hominids may date as far back as 100000 years ago which would put a serious spanner in the works of dating and overlap work done to date.

    I have to say this, i hate the name of the paleo diet. If someone can be idealogically opposed to the naming of a diet, i am. I’m not saying it doesnt produce results, nor do i think any less of the people that follow it. Just doesnt sit right in my mind for one reason or another.

    If anyone is interested i can email them my lecture notes from college on human evolution. I have a few on neanderthals and homo sapiens, but if anyone is interested in more they stretch from the start to now.

16. reminds me, does anyone know any of the illuminati? They could shed some light on the situation!!

    for those who arent aware the truth http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illuminati

17. Wow! Great to see the board active again!

    First things first, if anyone bothered to watch the link to Dan Ariely I posted a few days ago (sniffle) they’d see that given the opportunity to cheat, most people will. So given the opportunity to lie about something, people will. This includes governments.

    I think we’re all intelligent enough here to understand that governments aren’t completely benign, and always selflessly acting out of our best interests. For one thing, those who are best at getting elected rule, not those who are best at ruling.

    On morality. I work for a company that sells flavoured poison for a living. Does that make me a bad person? Are you wearing clothes right now that were made by some poor child in China? Are the chickens you ate free range or battery? My point is that morality is hard to judge, at best.

    Oh and Big Shane – Your Face isn’t really necessary!

18. Ok, just realized that keep missing posts because people are posting at the same time as me. So…

    Colm, I tried watching that video last night but due either to my connection or the server its on it took foooooorrrrreeeeeeeever. Wanted to kill someone.

    In answer to your question. Yes, if you truly believe you are doing harm by taking advantage of unknowing people (but look on the bright side, at least you never made Amy cry). I’m curious if you would work for a tobacco company. Would you do accounts for a drug dealer? A pimp? How about a P.I.M.P? I would agree that morality is subjective, I’m not sure that I agree that a person’s actions are hard to judge. Kind of like determining a person’s level of fitness after you agree on a definition of fitness. From what I could see of the video the students knew they were cheating and didn’t care. Then again I may be way off base with that one. I’ve decided to post first, think later.

    You must know that with Big Shane and I posting with any sort of regularity that a political discussion was inevitable.

19. On the whole Zone and literature thing: Wasn’t there a pretty long list of studies in one of the older CFJs which didn’t pertain directly to the Zone, but involved reading around the topic i.e they were on hyperinsulinism and its causes. Until someone does a study, seems like a lot of what goes on is make an infference (sp?) from that kind of thing. Beyond that, anyone who’s zoned for any length of time knows through personal experience what it does, I guess.

    For what it’s worth I’ve had two days of absolutely gorging myself on NY pizza, beer and general crap. Maybe it’s because I’ve been quite good at zoning now for a month or two, but yesterday I felt worse than I have in … well… a month or two. Think I’m going to try and Zone it in the morning or evenings. Seems the habit has formed.

    And now back to traipsing around the coolest city in the world. Gentlemen, I salute you.

20. Kyle, just something for you to think about if you want to dwell on the idea of people and their moral choices, companies in particular. Have a look at Enron – The Smartest Guys in the Room documentary, very interesting.

21. Ames: 17-20-20; 17:30 @ 10Kg
    Deirdre: 7-12-12; 13:33 @ 5Kg
    Emmy: 7-17-17; 13:35 @ 5Kg
    Keith: 40-40-40; 20:19 @ 20Kg

22. Haha, I knew that piece about the Zone diet would kick something off alright.

    I’ll probably miss a good few peoples posts here in my reply but I’ll be training tomorrow morning if anyone wants to chat about this stuff.

    Colm, yes the studies are badly designed most of the time, usually to almost criminal levels. I’ve yet to see a study where the diet used is actually clarified exactly, for example, some studies regarding the use of a high fat diet simply take a normal western diet and increase fat intake. The study will then go on to say that high fat intake is bad. Is it just me who can see the problem with that approach?

    Pixie, yes, Google Scholar and PubMed throw up loads of studies but none of them are any good (If you can find one then tell me, I’d really love to be wrong). Are you involved in the Pharmaceutical industry? Just curious like.

    Ruairi, you’re exactly right, there’s a ton of work done regarding hyperinsulemia and its associated pathologies. Simply inferring things off these studies though just doesn’t fly. Well not at the level of peer-reviewed research anyway. Cold hard results are whats needed and there hasn’t been any put forward (well none have been published anyhow)

    It makes me smile when Glassman bulls on about the ‘science’ backing it up. Scientists would be glad if they could prove a life-enhancing diet, they really would be. The fact (as far as my research shows anyway) is that it hasn’t been proven, and probably never will be to the level to be accepted by top level academics.

    That said, even if it were proven, would it make a lick of difference? Probably not, people enjoy potatoes and sugar too much. People know smoking causes cancer yet they still smoke, people know speeding causes road deaths, yet we still speed. Conclusively proving something that a lot of people actually know (eating lots of fruit and veg and not eating processed food) isn’t going to do much I don’t think.

23. Pingback: Tue, Nov 25th – CrossFit Ireland - Forging Elite Fitness