Diet Vs Safe cycling

Jawgap

petethedrummer wrote: »

You can have a listen @47:25 where arguably the two leading Paleo exponents do NOT bash carbs.

http://robbwolf.com/2015/01/13/episode-253-chris-kresser-red-meat-again-and-neu5gc/

Sorry I can't listen to that podcast on this computer.

I didn't say they bash carbs but they have a bias against them.

Also what about the exclusion of whole grains? My understanding is that the paleo-diet requires or advises its adherents to avoid eating all cereal grains? Including brown rice?

Half the world's population lives on rice, and some of those countries have pretty impressive population health outcomes, Japan for example.

I suspect that these fad diets are designed to do one thing and one thing only and that's sell books and web site subscriptions - people would be better spending the money on a consult with a private dietitian, and get some tailored advice, imo.

petethedrummer

Jawgap wrote: »

I didn't say they bash carbs but they have a bias against them.

If the carbohydrate comes in the form of table sugar, HFCS, Modern Wheat ....then yes. And they do bash volume for certain people.

Jawgap wrote: »

Also what about the exclusion of whole grains? My understanding is that the paleo-diet requires or advises its adherents to avoid eating all cereal grains? Including brown rice?

There is no one paleo diet. It's a starting point or template. Again, if you listen to Wolf or Kresser it's about individual tolerance. Granted most would advise against limiting modern Wheat. Which is probably anathema to someone who thrives on whole grains.

Jawgap wrote: »

Half the world's population lives on rice, and some of those countries have pretty impressive population health outcomes, Japan for example.

Very true. They have been eating it for centuries (millenia?). Quite well adapted to it. I'm not by extension suggesting that Europeans are not. The Japanese are not very well adapted to dairy or alcohol. 80%(ish) of black people are lactose intolerant. Should black people start horsing the milk in because northern europeans handle it well? Horses for courses on a population and individual level.

Anyway, over the last 2 years. I have listen to endless health and nutrition podcasts. So to save everyone else the bother, most of the 'paleo' exponents broadly follow this kind of approach (based on a relatively sedentary office working day)...
Breakfast: Fast or Fatty Coffee or Green Smoothy or a Cooked Breakfast.
Lunch: Large Salad with healthy oil and fish or meat
Evening Meal: A regular meal with what the layman would consider a 'normal' amount of carbohydrate.
Snacks: Generally nuts.
Most have a 80/20 approach and advocate reward or cheat days depending if you're a glass half full or half empty personality type. And there is a huge emphasis on exercise and lifestyle factors.

As for a paleo diet harming cycling. I suppose like anything, if you don't educate yourself and listen to your body then it might. It might not though... http://www.stickybottle.com/uncategorized/full-results-of-all-races-at-todays-des-hanlon-memorial-in-carlow/

Jawgap

petethedrummer wrote: »

I.......So to save everyone else the bother, most of the 'paleo' exponents broadly follow this kind of approach (based on a relatively sedentary office working day)...
Breakfast: Fast or Fatty Coffee or Green Smoothy or a Cooked Breakfast.
Lunch: Large Salad with healthy oil and fish or meat
Evening Meal: A regular meal with what the layman would consider a 'normal' amount of carbohydrate.
Snacks: Generally nuts.
Most have a 80/20 approach and advocate reward or cheat days depending if you're a glass half full or half empty personality type. And there is a huge emphasis on exercise and lifestyle factors.

......

Ah here - you mean the 'diet' advocates fasting or a cooked breakfast? Does that mean if you're a paleo adherent you can have a fry most days (that's what I usually take to mean a 'cooked' breakfast)?

Seriously, I've looked to see if there any scientific studies to back the paleo up and they are limited (to say the least) - mostly small scale, longtitudinal studies. Aside from those (which are inconclusive as to the unique efficacy of the paleo diet) is there actually any peer reviewed evidence to support such an approach?

Also why a 'green' smoothie when there's plenty of evidence to show that the darker the fruit (or vegetable) is the better in terms of anti-oxidants and the like?

BenEadir

As I'm about to end Phase One i.e. the no carbs phase I've been researching Phase Two and here are the summary guidelines:-

Harcombe Diet Phase 2 - Sustaining weight loss

The second phase of The Harcombe Diet has just three rules to follow in order to find your natural weight and stay there. Here it is all about forming the basis for how you will eat for the rest of your life, so it needs to be healthy, practical and effective. The three rules are as follows:

Rule 1. Don't eat processed foods. Foodstuff is naturally full of all the vitamins and minerals we need, so don't buy or eat anything that needs a label.

Rule 2. Don't eat fats and carbs in the same meal. Most foods are either carb/protein or fat/protein. Carbs tend to be from the ground and trees and include grains, fruit and veg, whereas fats basically come from anything that has or once had a face, such as meat, fish and dairy.

Eating both carbs and fats together means the carbs are used for energy and the fat is stored as body fat causing weight gain. If you eat fat alone, however, the body uses this for energy/cell repair and doesn't store it. Fats are therefore generally better for you than carbs.

Rule 3. Don't eat foods that cause your cravings. It is important to restrict food depending on your condition(s) until your immune system can recover and you build up a tolerance to the problem food again. Avoid reintroducing too many things too quickly to avoid losing control to cravings - if you can't wait to reintroduce something this is your problem food!

OK, I'll hunker back down and wait for the above to be torn to shreds

BTW, spuds with a veg omelette for dinner this evening and porridge for brekkie before my spin tomorrow. Looking forward to it.

Jawgap

petethedrummer wrote: »

If the carbohydrate comes in the form of table sugar, HFCS, Modern Wheat ....then yes. And they do bash volume for certain people.

There is no one paleo diet. It's a starting point or template. Again, if you listen to Wolf or Kresser it's about individual tolerance. Granted most would advise against limiting modern Wheat. Which is probably anathema to someone who thrives on whole grains.

Very true. They have been eating it for centuries (millenia?). Quite well adapted to it. I'm not by extension suggesting that Europeans are not. The Japanese are not very well adapted to dairy or alcohol. 80%(ish) of black people are lactose intolerant. Should black people start horsing the milk in because northern europeans handle it well? Horses for courses on a population and individual level.

First, hominids have been on the earth for a couple of million years and rice was only introduced into the diet in the last 10,000 or so - so I'm not sure how Asian populations could be well adapted given they've only been consuming the stuff for about 0.5% of their recent evolutionary history.

Second, some paleo diets recommend 'raw milk' - "Free the Animal: How to lose weight & fat on the paleo diet" by Richard Nikoley

"Nikoley recommends eating “real food” such as meat, organ meats, poultry, fish and shellfish, vegetables (limit potatoes), some fruits (berries and melons primarily), nuts, fats (lard, tallow, butter, ghee, coconut oil, red palm oil, olive oil), whole fat dairy and heavy cream (preferring “raw” milk if available). Foods to avoid include grain-based products, processed foods, certain fruits, potatoes and vegetable/grain/seed oils such as canola, sunflower, safflower and corn. Nikoley is a proponent of “intermittent fasting,” and recommends exercising for one hour per week, but avoiding cardio because it is “catabolic and makes you hungry.”

There'd nothing like a dose of Campy or E coli O157 to shift the weight off of ye:D

petethedrummer

Jawgap wrote: »

Ah here - you mean the 'diet' advocates fasting or a cooked breakfast? Does that mean if you're a paleo adherent you can have a fry most days (that's what I usually take to mean a 'cooked' breakfast)?

Well I think the point of it is that if you're not hungry in the morning and you feel like it then you could try a morning fast. If you are hungry, have one of the other options. In Kresser's case, cooked breakfast seems often to be leftovers from the previous evening meal. At the start of every podcast he tells what he had for breakfast. It don't think it's meant to be perscriptive daily option.

Jawgap wrote: »

Seriously, I've looked to see if there any scientific studies to back the paleo up and they are limited (to say the least) - mostly small scale, longtitudinal studies. Aside from those (which are inconclusive as to the unique efficacy of the paleo diet) is there actually any peer reviewed evidence to support such an approach?

The evidence for any diet seems nearly impossible to nail down. It's like a war zone. It's a shouting match of personal biases, correlation/causation, incorrect conclusions, epidemiological studies, poor intervention studies. Every single study is torn to shreds by people on different sides.

This is a good podcast with Peter Attia, worth a listen no matter what your stance on carbohydrate is. Some interesting stuff on the cycling and the heart. He's started the NUSI foundation with Gary Taubes to investigate the insulin hypothesis and the effect of carbohydrate on weight. http://fourhourworkweek.com/2014/12/18/peter-attia/
The reason Taubes ended up in nutrition was because the science was so messy and he wrote about 'bad' science. Whether his interpretation of nutrition science is correct will be highly contested. Their results will be torn to bits, just like the China study was by people who think red meat is perfectly healthy. What Taubes and Attia uncover may only be correct for a sub section of the population.

Jawgap wrote: »

Also why a 'green' smoothie when there's plenty of evidence to show that the darker the fruit (or vegetable) is the better in terms of anti-oxidants and the like?

I believe 'green' is a generic term used as I think kale forms the basis of most. I would guess most people put berries in them. I don't know much about them. I've never had one.

Jawgap

petethedrummer wrote: »

Well I think the point of it is that if you're not hungry in the morning and you feel like it then you could try a morning fast. If you are hungry, have one of the other options. In Kresser's case, cooked breakfast seems often to be leftovers from the previous evening meal. At the start of every podcast he tells what he had for breakfast. It don't think it's meant to be perscriptive daily option.

The evidence for any diet seems nearly impossible to nail down. It's like a war zone. It's a shouting match of personal biases, correlation/causation, incorrect conclusions, epidemiological studies, poor intervention studies. Every single study is torn to shreds by people on different sides.

This is a good podcast with Peter Attia, worth a listen no matter what your stance on carbohydrate is. Some interesting stuff on the cycling and the heart. He's started the NUSI foundation with Gary Taubes to investigate the insulin hypothesis and the effect of carbohydrate on weight. http://fourhourworkweek.com/2014/12/18/peter-attia/
The reason Taubes ended up in nutrition was because the science was so messy and he wrote about 'bad' science. Whether his interpretation of nutrition science is correct will be highly contested. Their results will be torn to bits, just like the China study was by people who think red meat is perfectly healthy. What Taubes and Attia uncover may only be correct for a sub section of the population.

I believe 'green' is a generic term used as I think kale forms the basis of most. I would guess most people put berries in them. I don't know much about them. I've never had one.

I don't see what the problem is or why it should be a war zone - you recruit people to the study, divide them at random, place one group on the diet, leave the other group to their own devices, gather data on the participants, monitor them during the process, do the stats and arrive at a conclusion.

I don't have a 'stance' on carbs - I do on pseudo science. In the final analysis, less in than you put out, a varied diet and everything in moderation is still, to my mind, the best advice - but it won't sell many books.

And how can you even have a 'paleo' diet - the diets of different groups varied so wildly - the people roaming in Africa were eating a completely different diet to the ones roaming the tundra.

A paper by Alexander Ströhle and Andreas Hahn (Diets of modern hunter-gatherers vary substantially in their carbohydrate content depending on ecoenvironments: results from an ethnographic analysis)makes this point - pre-agricultural humans between 11°and 40° north or south of the equator had a diet that was up to 40% carbs (still less, admittedly, than your typical 'Western' diet), whereas north of 40° that carb content fell off markedly such that by 60° North people had a diet that was less than 10% carbs.

petethedrummer

Jawgap wrote: »

First, hominids have been on the earth for a couple of million years and rice was only introduced into the diet in the last 10,000 or so - so I'm not sure how Asian populations could be well adapted given they've only been consuming the stuff for about 0.5% of their recent evolutionary history.

Like i said I'm not going to suggest they are any more suited to it than europeans are. Anyone who has ever spent time in the company of coeliacs knows its a safe option for people with real digestive problems. But on a population level some humans are more adapted to some foods than othrs.

Jawgap wrote: »

Second, some paleo diets recommend 'raw milk' - "Free the Animal: How to lose weight & fat on the paleo diet" by Richard Nikoley

We're getting the crux of it here. There is no paleo diet. I think it is a framework to look at modern food and lifestyle and it's effect on our health. Or if it is diet/religion there are many denominations.

I have a few friends who grew up on raw milk and never had any problems with it. I think some advocate using it to make Raw milk Keifier for the probiotic benefits for your gut microbiome. There are theories that over use of anti-biotics in humans and the animals we eat has caused the obesity epidemic and other health problems. You can make cows fatter by feeding them low doses of anti-biotics. But I suppose we're not cows and human micro-biology seems like another minefield.

Jawgap wrote: »

There'd nothing like a dose of Campy or E coli O157 to shift the weight off of ye:D

I got food poisoning eating fish once. Should I stop eating fish?
I also got it once from sausages.:(

ford2600

Jawgap wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is or why it should be a war zone - you recruit people to the study, divide them at random, place one group on the diet, leave the other group to their own devices, gather data on the participants, monitor them during the process, do the stats and arrive at a conclusion.

I don't have a 'stance' on carbs - I do on pseudo science. In the final analysis, less in than you put out, a varied diet and everything in moderation is still, to my mind, the best advice - but it won't sell many books.

And how can you even have a 'paleo' diet - the diets of different groups varied so wildly - the people roaming in Africa were eating a completely different diet to the ones roaming the tundra.

A paper by Alexander Ströhle and Andreas Hahn (Diets of modern hunter-gatherers vary substantially in their carbohydrate content depending on ecoenvironments: results from an ethnographic analysis)makes this point - pre-agricultural humans between 11°and 40° north or south of the equator had a diet that was up to 40% carbs (still less, admittedly, than your typical 'Western' diet), whereas north of 40° that carb content fell off markedly such that by 60° North people had a diet that was less than 10% carbs.

I think the practice of trying to eat Paleo is nonsense.

The foods have changed so much in the interim as to make it an impossible task. If it just means eat real unprocessed foods then that is fine, don't know why that needs a label though.

As for eat in moderation, that assumes everyone is the same and can handle varying macro diet and remain at optimum health. It makes little difference to lots of people( including me at 40, at 60 who knows) but some people don't do well on a modern high carb diet. Eat in moderation is pretty useless to them when it's their macro breakdown which matters most.

Why we seek to force a one size suits all advice with food when humans differ in some many other ways/needs is beyond me.

Ole Rodrigo

One things for sure - our ancestors didn't sit around pontificating on the dynamics of fat adaptation. :P

I do green smoothies from time to time. They are a good way up your fruit and veg quota. Water, spinach (lots), banana and mint leaves in a blender. The more you get used to them the less you taste the chlorophyll and the less fruit you need to put in.

Generally fruit does not combine well with vegetables, the exception being leafy greens. They are one of these things that don't need any science to back up claims - condensed raw greens and fruit. No argument except that in high doses ( a few kilos per day ) you need to switch the type of green to avoid build up of oxalate.

Also, there is diminishing marginal returns on anti-oxidants, but green smoothies are more about getting a wide range of micronutrients in their raw form than anything in specific.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/07/130722071955.htm

Jawgap

petethedrummer wrote: »

Like i said I'm not going to suggest they are any more suited to it than europeans are. Anyone who has ever spent time in the company of coeliacs knows its a safe option for people with real digestive problems. But on a population level some humans are more adapted to some foods than othrs.


We're getting the crux of it here. There is no paleo diet. I think it is a framework to look at modern food and lifestyle and it's effect on our health. Or if it is diet/religion there are many denominations.

I have a few friends who grew up on raw milk and never had any problems with it. I think some advocate using it to make Raw milk Keifier for the probiotic benefits for your gut microbiome. There are theories that over use of anti-biotics in humans and the animals we eat has caused the obesity epidemic and other health problems. You can make cows fatter by feeding them low doses of anti-biotics. But I suppose we're not cows and human micro-biology seems like another minefield.


I got food poisoning eating fish once. Should I stop eating fish?
I also got it once from sausages.:(

It's difficult to know where to begin.....

.....the use of antibiotics as growth promoters was banned in the EU nearly a decade ago, so unless you are getting your meat and milk from the Americas, it's not an issue.

....the point about raw milk is that pasteurisation neutralises the pathogens, just as fish and sausages are rendered safe by proper cooking. The European Food Safety Authority recently issued a risk assessment on raw milk - I'm all for consumer choice, but let's not pretend that raw milk is not a risky product. There's a reason why we pasteurise products like that, and if you think Campy and O157 are worth the risk, what about TB and brucellosis?

....the while probiotic thing is more nonsense - consider the size / surface area of the human gut, the extensive and complicated nature of the bacterial flora found there and then consider whether you could ever consume enough 'friendly' bacteria to meaningfully alter your gut flora.

petethedrummer

Jawgap wrote: »

I don't see what the problem is or why it should be a war zone - you recruit people to the study, divide them at random, place one group on the diet, leave the other group to their own devices, gather data on the participants, monitor them during the process, do the stats and arrive at a conclusion.

Well it would appear to more learned people than myself that humans are too hard to try and make stick to a diet or lifestyle. Unless you lock them in a labfor weeks on end. Peter Attia discusses this in the podcast above.

Here's a loose study. done by a vegetarian researcher. so not an advocate of atkins. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eREuZEdMAVo

It turns out more people did well on Atkins. But rather than declare Atkins the victor which I did the first time I watched it. They should have taken the people who performed badly on each and gave them a new diet. Then track the results. They'd probably find each diet is beneficial to a different subset of the population in the study. Their needs may change over time.

Jawgap wrote: »

I don't have a 'stance' on carbs - I do on pseudo science. In the final analysis, less in than you put out, a varied diet and everything in moderation is still, to my mind, the best advice - but it won't sell many books.

I'm not going to argue against the law of thermodynamics. The fat didn't appear from nowhere. But I don't think calories in calories out tells you much. It's a bit like saying how do you get to be rich. Spend less than you earn. It's the ultimate truth but it's a bit simplistic. I would guess that people have different hormonal responses to food and lifestyle factors; different metabolic rates, differing responses to exercise, different fat burning capabilities. Diet might be like exercise where differing approaches are required at different times.

petethedrummer

Jawgap wrote: »

....the while probiotic thing is more nonsense

Lol. I don't know what to think in this regard but there's a fella down in cork looking into gut bacteria and human health!

http://www.nature.com/news/gut-brain-link-grabs-neuroscientists-1.16316
http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-09-08/bacteria-our-gut-may-influence-both-our-physical-and-mental-health

Chips Lovell

Jawgap wrote: »

In the final analysis, less in than you put out, a varied diet and everything in moderation is still, to my mind, the best advice - but it won't sell many books.

I'd hazard a guess that Pete reckons he eats everything in moderation. The issue is that your opinion on what constitutes moderation and his may differ. And as he's pointed out, there's very little scientific consensus these days on what constitutes a balanced diet.

Jawgap

Jep Gambardella wrote: »

I'd hazard a guess that Pete reckons he eats everything in moderation. The issue is that your opinion on what constitutes moderation and his may differ. And as he's pointed out, there's very little scientific consensus these days on what constitutes a balanced diet.

Sure there is.

The 'Eatwell Plate' for a start. 'Unfortunately' for the diet weight loss industry that's a free, easy to understand resource, so there's no secret to be sold. Thus creating an incentive to muddy the waters with as much as possible.

BenEadir

45km this morning after a couple of spuds last night and porridge with water this morning. Much much better than last week. No bonking that's for sure.

Thanks for the advice everyone including those who completely disagree with what I'm doing, it's all good to know.

Phase one ends today. 9kg dropped in total.

The challenge now is to keep it off in a sustainable manner and slowly drop another 8kg over the coming months to get to 85kg.

I'll update from time to time as I go, both good and bad.

DaithiMC

BenEadir wrote: »

45km this morning after a couple of spuds last night and porridge with water this morning. Much much better than last week. No bonking that's for sure.

Thanks for the advice everyone including those who completely disagree with what I'm doing, it's all good to know.

Phase one ends today. 9kg dropped in total.

The challenge now is to keep it off in a sustainable manner and slowly drop another 8kg over the coming months to get to 85kg.

I'll update from time to time as I go, both good and bad.

Another spud for the pot, so to speak, in relation to sustaining weight loss and maintaining long term health.... http://www.optimal.org/peter/cron.htm

ford2600

Jawgap wrote: »

Sure there is.

The 'Eatwell Plate' for a start. 'Unfortunately' for the diet weight loss industry that's a free, easy to understand resource, so there's no secret to be sold. Thus creating an incentive to muddy the waters with as much as possible.

The eat well plate is just a rehashed food pyrimad. It's a low fat diet, 2/3 of reccommendations are predominatly carbs.

Reccommending it as optimum for everyone is nonsense.


http://www.irishtimes.com/news/health/advice-to-cut-intake-of-fat-and-saturated-fat-wrong-1.2096666


Edit; worth a read OP, very good website in general
http://www.dominicmunnelly.ie/2013/09/is-your-cardio-keeping-you-fat-and-out-of-shape/

Hi Ho

Jawgap wrote: »

...And how can you even have a 'paleo' diet - the diets of different groups varied so wildly - the people roaming in Africa were eating a completely different diet to the ones roaming the tundra.

This is very true. It's the interpretation of 'science' that matters. Science scan show that a certain Inuit population lives very long probably because of diet, but to suggest that this would be suitable for Celtic genes ( or whatever) wouldn't be a good use of science.

BenEadir

Hi all, OP here.

Just wanted to update the thread. I'm three months into the Harcombe diet and I can report that although I haven't followed it to the letter I have applied the key principles i.e. vastly reduced carb intake (no white flour or pasta whatsoever) , all sugar in tea/coffee and sugary drinks gone from my diet, all (nearly all) processed foods , burgers, sausages, convenience foods gone and take aways are (mostly) gone as are sugary snacks such as chocolate bars, crisps etc.

Typical days food might be:-

Breakfast - chopped apples and bananas with natural yoghurt and milled linseed or porridge with bananas and sultanas

Lunch - 3 poached eggs with loads of grilled streaky bacon on a big bed of green leaf salad with olive oil and balsamic vinegar and milled linseed sprinkled over it or 2 x 8 ounce rib eye steaks and 3 fried eggs or 900g of grilled lamb chops.

Dinner - Not much given the lunches I tend to have!!! Maybe some grilled fish with steamed asparagus and freshly made hollandaise sauce.

The initial period I called "detox" resulted in a loss of circa 10kg and since then I'm glad to report I've kept it off and actually lost another 1.5kg or so although that fluctuates a little from time to time as I have had a few blow out dinners and nights out for big events but always back on plan the following day.

It's actually bizarre, the odd time I've had a bit of junk food e.g. burger and chips I really felt bloated and a little unwell. I've also noticed I have a much reduced appetite, I don't eat the volume I used to eat and feel full and satisfied after eating much less than previously.

Anyway, I'm not here to declare I have succeeded or anything like that but to say I've kept the weight off, lost a little more and I'm quite happy to have dropped or massively reduced the junk food, processed food, white flour/pasta etc and alcohol from my diet. Did I actually need the Harcombe diet to achieve that? Probably not, I should have known these things were not a good idea and to reduce or eliminate them but it did provide me with a framework for cleaning up my act in a sustainable (thus far) manner which I'm happy with and grateful for.

End of update!!

neris

Were you doing much cycling over those weeks? Since the start of February Ive been eating mainly low carb but taking carbs before and after long spins and the odd take away blow out. On the scales weight is decreasing frustratingly slow but body sizes have decreased. Reckon muscle is been built from building up the road miles. Only caught the end of Prime Time last night & there was a segment on about full fat Vs low fat & what carbs do to you

BenEadir

neris wrote: »

Were you doing much cycling over those weeks?

No actually i haven't. Between crap weather and family commitments i haven't gotten out much but i have been hitting the gym and like you I've lost a good bit of size, I'm down to the last hole on my belts and wearing clothes i haven't fitted into in years which i guess is all good? I'm hoping as the weather improves and with the longer evenings I'll get much more time on the bike which will help burn some more weight off. I've +/-5kg more to go to get to my ideal target. Anywhere close will do!!

outfox

I'm late to this. If a diet programme (regardless of fancy name or dodgy science) eliminates sugar, reduces processed food intake, and makes you think about what you eat, then it's successful in my book. Fair play, Beneadir.