Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Well this is where we disagree. Fat doesn't make fat. Sugar makes fat, sugar from carbs or junk food. Anything in excess can be converted to glucose.
Fat from butter and cream is one of the most needed ingredients that our bodies are not getting due to the American food pyramid. Our bodies need fat from fat for the brain and all the joints. Myelin, which sheaths the neurotransmitters in the brain, is made 70 percent of fats and 30 percent of protein. Yes we can get some from leafy greens but we can get much more from dairy and eggs, which have been vilified by the AMA.
Fat doesn't need to "make fat" because its already fat... When consumed dietary fat enters the blood and is either absorbed by your adipose tissue (e.g., adds to your body fat) or is utilized for energy by your cells. Similarly with sugar, after you eat sugar it enters the blood stream as simple sugars (glucose, fructose, etc).....but unlike fat sugars are primarily used for energy. To store sugars in body fat, obviously, the body has to first convert them into fats and this conversion process (de novo lipogensis) is inefficient and around 30% of the energy is lost. After this conversion, the fats enter the blood stream just like dietary fats. The body has no way to distinguish fats it has synthesized from sugars and fats you've consumed. In any case, due to the inefficiencies of the conversion process the body converts sugars into fat as a last resort, see here:
"Only when CHO energy intake exceeds TEE does DNL in liver or adipose tissue contribute significantly to the whole-body energy economy. It is concluded that DNL is not the pathway of first resort for added dietary CHO, in humans. Under most dietary conditions, the two major macronutrient energy sources (CHO and fat) are therefore not interconvertible currencies"
That is, only when carbohydrate intake exceeds your energy needs does the body even think about converting any carbohydrates into fats for energy.
As for butter and cream having needed nutrients, they are both very low in essential fatty acids which are the only fats you need to consume. The body can synthesize saturated fat, it doesn't need to be consumed. Additionally, the average American eats a lot of milk fat, just not in the form of butter or cream....instead cheese. Cheese consumption in the US has tripled since the 1970's. But, the last time I checked, the ice cream aisle at the grocery store was still large and thriving as well.
I'm not a scientist and don't quote sources. I am following Atkins. Atkins have many supporters like Taubes and Sinatra. Agree or don't agree with their findings. I do.
And again, this is the OLD science being quoted in above post, 1999. All the same things we have been told since the '70's. They are being shown untrue daily. But if you don't want to read Taubes and Sinatra then nothing can be discussed. We are at odds. Flat earth "science' eventual fell to the round world. I believe the fat is bad theory is soon going to go the same way.
I'm not a scientist and don't quote sources. I am following Atkins. Atkins have many supporters like Taubes and Sinatra. Agree or don't agree with their findings. I do.
These people don't have findings because none of them are scientists, none of them have conducted studies to test their hypothesis. They are just people with claims, really no more credible than the people on this forum. Atkins is a doctor that started to write diet books, Taubes is a journalism with an engineering degree, sinatra another doctor book author.
What I quoted is indeed "old science" though, its been known for awhile and you can find the same information in any nutrition, etc text-book. Now, if you want to believe a bunch of non-scientists selling diet books, etc instead of actual scientists that is your business.
ok so it's now been over six months wheat free. Still losing weight. Still feeling better. I'm letting myself have things that are lightly breaded, like chicken fingers or something along those lines. Doesn't seem to have an effect. I'm still missing good crusty bread though. And real pizza (that gf stuff is just not the same...)
I read an article the other day how people are all jumping on the gluten free bandwagon, thinking they are going to drop all kinds of weight if they simply replace the wheat version with the gf version. Hello - ain't gonna do it! You have to give up starches in general. But if you must have them, have real potatoes, real rice, real corn. But to lose weight all of that must be really limited.
I subscribe to several web sites that focus on gluten free research and information. Apparently there is research and concludes that corn triggers the auto-immune response in Celiacs in a similar way that wheat does. There are a couple of doctors who specialize in treating Celiac Disease (one is a pediatrician and both are in Texas) - they claim they have research that shows that all grains trigger the auto-immune response in Celiac patients and some seeds including some strains of quinoa and buckwheat also produce the response....in other words they recommend that those who are gluten sensitive and who have Celiac remove from their diets all grains - wheat, barley, rye, corn, oats, rice, spelt, etc.
Another thing that I have read is that those with Celiac were once gluten sensitive/intolerant but eventually this sensitivity lead to intolerance and then eventually to Celiac Disease.
As someone who has Celiac I find this information a bit depressing. I know so many people who have gluten issues.
You have to give up starches in general. But if you must have them, have real potatoes, real rice, real corn. But to lose weight all of that must be really limited.
You don't need to limit starches to lose weight, some of the leanest and most long lived populations consume large amounts of starch.
For Americans, its not the starch but what they usually add to the starch. Butter on bread, cheese on pizza, butter/oils/sugars in baked goods, etc.
I'm still missing good crusty bread though. And real pizza (that gf stuff is just not the same...)
.
after much searching, I have come up with a very, very good GF pizza dough recipe. I like it enough that I no longer crave any type of regular pizza... if you are interested, PM me.
Exactly. Modern wheat is a fairly recent crop. The breads of our grandparents, and the generations before them, bears very little resemblance to the food-like substance that is branded as "bread" today.
Unfortunately, this is only getting worse as all of the "mainstream" food grown in this country is transitioning to GMO. I read an article that indicated over 75-80% of all soybeans grown are now GMO compared to none 15 years ago. Quite scary and just another reason why the local organic slow food movement is exponentially gaining traction across the US. Better late than never at this point.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
