If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#151
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
Hollywood wrote: I don't understand where you get off with your air of superiority... Last year, my first year with my current company, I saved/earned the company over $10 Million dollars over three projects. So, when you sit back and think you're better than me, ask yourself, what value have you ever created? Do they come back and say, "JC, you were the greatest influence in my life, and this award, this life, is due to you." Keep it up.....I'm sure in another 20 or 30 posts you'll convince him you're right (and better) Me, I'll be convinced you've found the answer for your body, after you've doubled your 2.5 years of success and hit the 5 year mark with weight and health still on track. I'm partial to decades of proven success but I'm always open to individuals going in a positive direction with a sustainable daily pattern for several years. BTW, I"d bet not one person in 200 has a teacher, about whom they can say "you were the greatest influence in my life". Thus, that is hardly the criteria by which to judge that profession. I had many excellent teachers, but not one I'd make that statement about. I'm certain 10 years from now, the owners of your company aren't going to look back and say you were the "greatest asset to the success of their company".... People should look elsewhere for validation. |
#152
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
"Hollywood" wrote in message oups.com... On Nov 6, 9:51 pm, "jcderkoeing" wrote: "Hollywood" wrote in message Last year, my first year with my current company, I saved/earned the company over $10 Million dollars over three projects. I'm totally in awe. No, really. And yet, you still can't eat more than maintenance calories and continue to lose weight. This is a real inescapable conclusion that is quantifiable. Funny how that works. |
#153
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
|
#154
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
On Nov 7, 9:10 pm, Marsha wrote:
wrote: BTW, I"d bet not one person in 200 has a teacher, about whom they can say "you were the greatest influence in my life". Thus, that is hardly the criteria by which to judge that profession. I had many excellent teachers, but not one I'd make that statement about. Your bet may be a winner, but only by fools who don't give proper credit to teachers. I can name you five, without even thinking about it, who changed my life incredibly. If you're not listening, there's nothing to hear. I might be lucky, because I can point to at least one teacher from high school, undergrad and my masters who really changed how I looked at the world. Our great influences can't all be rural asians from 20 years ago. |
#155
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
On Nov 8, 2:49 am, Hollywood wrote:
I might be lucky, because I can point to at least one teacher from high school, undergrad and my masters who really changed how I looked at the world. Our great influences can't all be rural asians from 20 years ago. Say what you want about "rural Asians" (and lots of wealthy urban Asians) but given your limited track record of what? 30 months?, I think I'll defer to their methods and intuitive "science" when it comes to maintaining proper body weight and health over 30 years. You are to be commended for the past 2 1/2 years, but like so many converts, your need to believe 100% that you have found the the "true" way may actually blind you to the success of billions of other humans. Their methods and diet may not work for you, but any suggestion they are on the wrong dietary path is laughable. That you need to back up your ideas by continuing to use prehistoric man suggests that all humans over the last 5,000 to 10,000 years have gone in the wrong direction. Its a wonder the species didn't die out 3,000 years ago. Oh those foolish ancestors. If only they had our modern science, then they'd all have cut out those grains, rice in particular. But enough of that......now this new study comes out saying people might be healthier putting on 15 or 25 pounds.... So what am I to do? More rice and pasta or upping my meat (and alternatives) intake from about 2-3 ounces per day to a 12 ounce Ribeye? Certainly more veggies are not the answer since I am maxed out on those. I suppose I could also lower my bike mileage from 100 to 50 a week.... Walnuts, tofu, salmon....? You see, when you reach a diet that gives success for 5, 10, and 15 years or more, you really begin to like the stuff you eat. On a serious note, I would actually dislike a 12 ounce Ribeye. Health considerations aside, I have just lost my taste for meat when presented in a slab. Oh sure, the first 2 to 4 ounces gives me a buzz, but the thought of eating 12 ounces is like having to eat a second and third bowl of ice cream after enjoying the first. I hit the wall about 15 years ago after ordering a half plate slab of Prime Rib at a restaurant. I'd been used to eating 2 to 3 ounce portions in Asian dishes and the prime rib slab was just a chore to consume. I left about half of it on the plate and even at that had eaten too much. Sorry ancient ancestors, but I can't keep eating my 20,000 year old diet. Perhaps I can load up on Butternut squash, but I fear you'll now tell me its way up there on the Glycemic Index. |
#156
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
|
#157
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
On Nov 8, 4:51 pm, Marsha wrote:
So now you're changing your mind by mentioning your father. If you want to get technical, I can say that "my life is due" to at least two of those five teachers. It doesn't take much to call it a fairly high standard when you come from low standards to start with. Are you happy now? Marsha/Ohio What a pleasant person you are. Perhaps its your diet. |
#158
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
On Nov 8, 2:34 pm, wrote:
On Nov 8, 2:49 am, Hollywood wrote: I might be lucky, because I can point to at least one teacher from high school, undergrad and my masters who really changed how I looked at the world. Our great influences can't all be rural asians from 20 years ago. Say what you want about "rural Asians" (and lots of wealthy urban Asians) but given your limited track record of what? 30 months?, I think I'll defer to their methods and intuitive "science" when it comes to maintaining proper body weight and health over 30 years. Here we go again. Millions of years of evolution is not up to standard and neither is 30 months. Or any individual experience. Against your limited observation of millions of asians from 20 years ago, and we (and others) have been over that more than enough times for me to be sure that there's no point in further elucidating the flaws in your observation because you're simply not gonna get it. It's hard to admit you're wrong. You are to be commended for the past 2 1/2 years, but like so many converts, your need to believe 100% that you have found the the "true" way may actually blind you to the success of billions of other humans. Hrm. Pot, kettle, black. My thought on this, already very prevalent on this thread is that we, as a species, up from the dawn of the genus homo, evolved on a certain type of diet. The macronutrient profile of said diet is likely ideal. Since we're versatile omnivores (look at the teeth), different ways exist. Some are closer to ideal but many are functional. The diet of asians as observed for you must work for some people. Clearly, it works, in combination with unknown other factors, for the rural asians you have observed, and you as well. Is it ideal? I dunno. Is it ancient? No. The high content of polished rice is a very recent invention, on a Homo evolution scale. The ideal question is something we can dither about (google search for "advanced glycation end products" and see what you think), but the functional one, we can't. And the evolutionary one (assuming you're not a creationist) is something not really open for discussion either. Their methods and diet may not work for you, but any suggestion they are on the wrong dietary path is laughable. Many paths. I wouldn't walk that one having read what I have read. The last thing I'm gonna repeat about your Asian Role Models is this. You cannot understand their diet without understanding the economics of the region for the past, I dunno, thousand years. Surely the economy shaped it, as it shaped the religions coming out of South Asia, some of which shun meat entirely. Given the value of a piece of working livestock versus meat, they probably made the right decision at the right time. Simple version: Milk and milk products vs one off beef and leather, milk, milk products, and sustainable wool vs one off mutton and wool, Eggs vs Chicken, and the living animals all produce great fertilizer and feed to sustain the economy, while the eaten ones contribute little. I've digressed. The key thing is that dietary changes advocated by Hindus and to a lesser extent Buddhists (and Jains, and others) were driven as much by economy as ecumenism. And if you don't think Hinduism and Buddhism are really important forces in Asia, I'd question either your travel in the region or your understanding of the belief systems. I could go on about this for more length, but your understanding of your observation will remain unchanged. That you need to back up your ideas by continuing to use prehistoric man suggests that all humans over the last 5,000 to 10,000 years have gone in the wrong direction. You don't "kill" folks for decisions made under circumstances you can't understand. That's something we learned in business school. Similarly, it's hard to "kill" folks for doing something that works, even if it's sub- optimal. Its a wonder the species didn't die out 3,000 years ago. Oh those foolish ancestors. If only they had our modern science, then they'd all have cut out those grains, rice in particular. I don't have a special beef against rice over all other grains. It's you who has a special place for this polished rice. I maintain that it's pretty deficient of anything save dietary carbohydrate. Since I don't think that's worthwhile to someone working with a fat burning metabolism, well, you can add, right? But enough of that......now this new study comes out saying people might be healthier putting on 15 or 25 pounds.... So what am I to do? More rice and pasta or upping my meat (and alternatives) intake from about 2-3 ounces per day to a 12 ounce Ribeye? You couldn't handle the Ribeye. You say so yourself. Besides, it's not gonna fatten you up. I'm not gonna take you through the flaws in THAT study. Don't add the weight if you're doing okay. Add it if you want to. But, I'm not. Certainly more veggies are not the answer since I am maxed out on those. I suppose I could also lower my bike mileage from 100 to 50 a week.... Are you training for something? Walnuts, tofu, salmon....? You see, when you reach a diet that gives success for 5, 10, and 15 years or more, you really begin to like the stuff you eat. So, don't change. Enjoy the AGEs. On a serious note, I would actually dislike a 12 ounce Ribeye. Health considerations aside, I have just lost my taste for meat when presented in a slab. Oh sure, the first 2 to 4 ounces gives me a buzz, but the thought of eating 12 ounces is like having to eat a second and third bowl of ice cream after enjoying the first. It's your life. I wouldn't dare tell you what to eat. But really, 4 ounces of steak hold more nutrition than a pound of polished white rice. I hit the wall about 15 years ago after ordering a half plate slab of Prime Rib at a restaurant. I'd been used to eating 2 to 3 ounce portions in Asian dishes and the prime rib slab was just a chore to consume. I left about half of it on the plate and even at that had eaten too much. You learn to do what you want to do and not do the things you don't. Wow. You're like everybody else afterall. Sorry ancient ancestors, but I can't keep eating my 20,000 year old diet. They don't care. They're dead. Perhaps I can load up on Butternut squash, but I fear you'll now tell me its way up there on the Glycemic Index. I wouldn't know. But since you're carb fueled, you don't care about GI any more than I do. Had this for the first time about two weeks ago at a restaurant. Was good. Reminded me of some pumpkin I had in Italy on one of the best nights I can remember. Lemme close with this. Like I said, lots of paths, many possible ways to get it done, fewer optimal options. So, do what you like. If it works, fine. If you want something closer to optimal, you're probably not there. But where you are is probably good enough for what you want. |
#159
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
On Nov 9, 6:04 am, Hollywood wrote:
On Nov 8, 2:34 pm, wrote: On Nov 8, 2:49 am, Hollywood wrote: I might be lucky, because I can point to at least one teacher from high school, undergrad and my masters who really changed how I looked at the world. Our great influences can't all be rural asians from 20 years ago. Say what you want about "rural Asians" (and lots of wealthy urban Asians) but given your limited track record of what? 30 months?, I think I'll defer to their methods and intuitive "science" when it comes to maintaining proper body weight and health over 30 years. Here we go again. Millions of years of evolution is not up to standard and neither is 30 months. Or any individual experience. Against your limited observation of millions of asians from 20 years ago, and we (and others) have been over that more than enough times for me to be sure that there's no point in further elucidating the flaws in your observation because you're simply not gonna get it. It's hard to admit you're wrong. You are to be commended for the past 2 1/2 years, but like so many converts, your need to believe 100% that you have found the the "true" way may actually blind you to the success of billions of other humans. Hrm. Pot, kettle, black. My thought on this, already very prevalent on this thread is that we, as a species, up from the dawn of the genus homo, evolved on a certain type of diet. The macronutrient profile of said diet is likely ideal. Since we're versatile omnivores (look at the teeth), different ways exist. Some are closer to ideal but many are functional. The diet of asians as observed for you must work for some people. Clearly, it works, in combination with unknown other factors, for the rural asians you have observed, and you as well. Is it ideal? I dunno. Is it ancient? No. The high content of polished rice is a very recent invention, on a Homo evolution scale. The ideal question is something we can dither about (google search for "advanced glycation end products" and see what you think), but the functional one, we can't. And the evolutionary one (assuming you're not a creationist) is something not really open for discussion either. Their methods and diet may not work for you, but any suggestion they are on the wrong dietary path is laughable. Many paths. I wouldn't walk that one having read what I have read. The last thing I'm gonna repeat about your Asian Role Models is this. You cannot understand their diet without understanding the economics of the region for the past, I dunno, thousand years. Surely the economy shaped it, as it shaped the religions coming out of South Asia, some of which shun meat entirely. Given the value of a piece of working livestock versus meat, they probably made the right decision at the right time. Simple version: Milk and milk products vs one off beef and leather, milk, milk products, and sustainable wool vs one off mutton and wool, Eggs vs Chicken, and the living animals all produce great fertilizer and feed to sustain the economy, while the eaten ones contribute little. I've digressed. The key thing is that dietary changes advocated by Hindus and to a lesser extent Buddhists (and Jains, and others) were driven as much by economy as ecumenism. And if you don't think Hinduism and Buddhism are really important forces in Asia, I'd question either your travel in the region or your understanding of the belief systems. I could go on about this for more length, but your understanding of your observation will remain unchanged. That you need to back up your ideas by continuing to use prehistoric man suggests that all humans over the last 5,000 to 10,000 years have gone in the wrong direction. You don't "kill" folks for decisions made under circumstances you can't understand. That's something we learned in business school. Similarly, it's hard to "kill" folks for doing something that works, even if it's sub- optimal. Its a wonder the species didn't die out 3,000 years ago. Oh those foolish ancestors. If only they had our modern science, then they'd all have cut out those grains, rice in particular. I don't have a special beef against rice over all other grains. It's you who has a special place for this polished rice. I maintain that it's pretty deficient of anything save dietary carbohydrate. Since I don't think that's worthwhile to someone working with a fat burning metabolism, well, you can add, right? But enough of that......now this new study comes out saying people might be healthier putting on 15 or 25 pounds.... So what am I to do? More rice and pasta or upping my meat (and alternatives) intake from about 2-3 ounces per day to a 12 ounce Ribeye? You couldn't handle the Ribeye. You say so yourself. Besides, it's not gonna fatten you up. I'm not gonna take you through the flaws in THAT study. Don't add the weight if you're doing okay. Add it if you want to. But, I'm not. Certainly more veggies are not the answer since I am maxed out on those. I suppose I could also lower my bike mileage from 100 to 50 a week.... Are you training for something? Walnuts, tofu, salmon....? You see, when you reach a diet that gives success for 5, 10, and 15 years or more, you really begin to like the stuff you eat. So, don't change. Enjoy the AGEs. On a serious note, I would actually dislike a 12 ounce Ribeye. Health considerations aside, I have just lost my taste for meat when presented in a slab. Oh sure, the first 2 to 4 ounces gives me a buzz, but the thought of eating 12 ounces is like having to eat a second and third bowl of ice cream after enjoying the first. It's your life. I wouldn't dare tell you what to eat. But really, 4 ounces of steak hold more nutrition than a pound of polished white rice. I hit the wall about 15 years ago after ordering a half plate slab of Prime Rib at a restaurant. I'd been used to eating 2 to 3 ounce portions in Asian dishes and the prime rib slab was just a chore to consume. I left about half of it on the plate and even at that had eaten too much. You learn to do what you want to do and not do the things you don't. Wow. You're like everybody else afterall. Sorry ancient ancestors, but I can't keep eating my 20,000 year old diet. They don't care. They're dead. Perhaps I can load up on Butternut squash, but I fear you'll now tell me its way up there on the Glycemic Index. I wouldn't know. But since you're carb fueled, you don't care about GI any more than I do. Had this for the first time about two weeks ago at a restaurant. Was good. Reminded me of some pumpkin I had in Italy on one of the best nights I can remember. Lemme close with this. Like I said, lots of paths, many possible ways to get it done, fewer optimal options. So, do what you like. If it works, fine. If you want something closer to optimal, you're probably not there. But where you are is probably good enough for what you want. OK......I probably agree with most of what you've said....... at this point I can't even remember what my first post on in this group was about......that went to another thread.......and multiple in this thread. Its all a fog now.... I can't remember who has and who has not traveled to Asia, South Asia, the MiddleEast etc...... I remember you took some courses......about the cultural aspects of understanding how their minds work.....but I can't remember if it was you or someone else who had ever spent much time in those regions.... I will only say that "being there" for a much longer time frame than the typical 1 to 4 weeks that tourists spend, makes all the difference in the world in discovering what is actually going on. Spending time in small regions of major cities.....down the side streets, in the markets and cafes......talking to the university students..... Spending many months in many different years gives one an entirely different out look on the cultural and true religion as well as the real diets,,, both for those with adequate money and those without. So I think my imput here, however it began ( I can't remember),,,is near a close. I hope you continue to do well. I will probably not gain 50 pounds regardless of what I eat.......Unless my biking goes to zero. I also understand there are those who gain on almost any "normal" diet even with exercise.......although with 100 miles a week or more,....I find most dropping weight even if ever so slowly, unless their diet is terrible. So given your work, time, and lifestyle, if your diet gives you a leaner body and better blood work, then who can argue. I just wouldn't sink my feet in cement. Too much religion on both sides. I've visited the extreme opposite and its really funny to see how humans leap onto one idea and then hold it tight as though all will collapse if they lose their grip. Not unlike the two sides in Iraq... No give, no room for compromise. The other side's version of Islam (rice) is evil or very close to it. OK......wish you well......I've got a busy day......and then, of course, its Saturday. We ride 26 miles each way to the Peets (pre-Starbucks) Coffee in Danville....sip coffee for 30 minutes, plus sneak in a few carbs, then ride 26 miles back home. As strange as its sounds......its not only fun, but we do it at fair speed and after having done it a hundred times or more, its seems no more unusual than driving 3 miles to the local Starbucks. BTW....at this Peets (the precursor to Starbucks chain), there are normally about 40+ bikes in the courtyard and at the outdoor tables at 10:00 AM on any Saturday.... Almost all the riders are trim or nearly trim. I always wonder what came first....the bike or the slimness. I do know this, those who lay off for a few months quickly gain 5 to 25 pounds, just like clockwork. But then again, they typically continue to eat as they did while doing their 100 miles per week so I'm uncertain about the science...... Again, and not to back up my position, but of all these riders, I seldom if ever hear about avoiding carbs. However there was this one guy. Fernando. I used to see him all the time. Began at about 240 and about 5' 11" perhaps 6' 0"... Lost a little while riding down to about 205 or 210...... The he really cut down on calories, mostly by eliminating carbs. He melted away......Striking. I'd see him every few months and couldn't recognize him. Last time he was at 155 and I was thinking thats enough..... but he wasn't done. Now, he was riding well over 200 miles per week and eating way under 2,000 calories per day. He said about 1,500 to 1600.... It will be interesting to see what happens when he burns out on riding........No one sustains that level on that many calories. Still as a way to drop pounds rapidly, I have seen nothing superior to heavy cycling and low carb. He will be a interesting model to watch when he scale back to 100 miles and 2,000 to 2,500 calories. OK.......gotta go.... I'll give my wisdom dispensing a rest, unless urged on by the clamor. |
#160
|
|||
|
|||
Taubes' Ten Inescapable Conclusions
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Taubes Book - Requires Slow Reading -- and cooling off breaks | Jim | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 18 | October 12th, 2007 10:10 PM |
Nice Reader Review of Taubes Book "Good Calories, Bad Calories" | Jim | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | October 1st, 2007 05:24 PM |
More on Taubes Book | Jim | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 7 | September 16th, 2007 03:28 AM |
Taubes: Good Calories, Bad Calories | Roger Zoul | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 7 | September 13th, 2007 05:03 PM |
Diet Conclusions | Aplin17 | General Discussion | 28 | September 29th, 2004 05:06 PM |