Couple questions about low-carb

[Danimal1209]

Hey guys, I have done stints of low carb diets in the past with good results, but now I am trying to take it to a new level.

I am 27 years old and I currently weigh 196-200. This is down from 215 about 6 months ago.

Right now I am starting back up on a low carb diet but I am making a few changes from the last time I did it. This time I am adding in weightlifting. My goal weight is somewhere around 180 depending on how I look/feel at that weight.

My usual meals in a day consist of:
breakfast: 2 scrambled eggs, 3-4 slices of turkey bacon, and sometimes sausage. This is usually accompanied by a cup of 2% milk.

Lunch: SANDWICHES! turkey or chicken or ham (low sugar), with that low carb bread and a small amount of miracle whip. Again with milk. When I don't have a sandwich I have a whey protein shake.

Dinner: Grilled chicken or ground beef mostly, sometimes italian sausage.

So, my questions are:
I have a tough time being strict enough to consume only water, 3-4 times a week I will drink a diet soda of some kind. Either diet coke or diet orange pop. Also, I have been drinking a lot of 0 calorie powerade that contain sucralose.
Is the diet soda something that should be avoided? what about the powerade?

I have started playing basketball a lot again, and coupled with weightlifting I think this will have a great effect on weight loss. How often should I do these activities? I have been weightlifting 4-5 times a week, basketball 4-5 times a week. Also, I run 2-3 miles 1-2 times a week.

Besides just dropping weight, I am trying to build a decent amount of muscle. I really want to get back in to competitive basketball again, so I need to get on working on my legs. What kind of tips can you guys give me on building muscle mass? I know that I need to consume a good amount of protein after I workout. But what else should I know?

Any other comments or advice about my food intake or workout routine?

 

[RbSX]

1st comment - Milk is lactose, if you want to have carbs and really want to lose the fat avoid lactose (it can only be processed by the liver to be turned into glycogen) go for complex and fibrous carbs with a low GI load. (rice, spinach or corn pasta/yams, beans etc and then veggies for fibrous carbs)

2nd comment - Sandwiches, if you're trying to cut carbs, again isn't great. 1st of all sandwich meat tends to not be the healthies meat, second of all, wheat contains gluten which, based upon the observations of others, tends to make them bloated.

Honestly, by just doing a quick one over, this meal plan is pretty bad, and if you want to lose weight having 3 meals rather than 5-6 smaller meals isn't a good idea either.

Avoid sodas at all costs, you'll find you will have a lot more flexibility in your diet if you cut out the EASY/REALLY BAD stuff like soda. All of your other work is for nothing if you keep crap like that in your diet.

Weightlifting 4-5 times a week, cardio and HIIT sports will lead to a burnout rather quickly, you're doing too much.

If you're losing fat it's hard to gain muscle at the same time because they require different calorie intake levels, if you are losing fat you want to be at a caloric deficit, that means between your caloric weight maitenance level and your BMR. If you want to gain muscle you need to be above your caloric weight maintenance, but because your body isn't efficient you will gain fat. PERIOD.

You can kind of avoid this by doing a ZIGZAG diet, which is eat in slight excess (200-300 cals) of your CIL on your lifting days, and a slight deficit (200-300 cals) on the days you do cardio. However, this slows down your mass gain and your weight loss.

Protein is (at minimum) 1.5 grams/lb.

In short - do more research, use bodybuilding.com as a basic reference guide, but in the end you have to work to customize the general routines to what works for you.

 

[Danimal1209]

What about the sodas being diet? They don't have sugar, is the caffeine bad?

 

[RbSX]

What about the sodas being diet? They don't have sugar, is the caffeine bad?

Diet or not they're empty calories, completely artificial, and not healthy.

No caffeine isn't explicitly bad - a lot of pre-workout boosters use caffeine.

 

[blinky8225]

Honestly, by just doing a quick one over, this meal plan is pretty bad, and if you want to lose weight having 3 meals rather than 5-6 smaller meals isn't a good idea either.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/health/23really.html
http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

There is absolutely no science behind this eating 5-6 meals per day nonsense. I have no idea why it's constantly repeated. I have a theory that it's perpetuated by processed food companies to encourage snacking and eating junk food.

Ultimately, it comes down to the quality of your food. If you're more comfortable eating 5-6 times per day, then do so, but there's no advantage to doing so. Personally, I find it hard to eat 5-6 quality meals and end up resorting to junk food.

It's much easier to eat 2-3 high quality meals and not carry tupperware everywhere I go.

 

[ksheets]

I lost almost 100lbs 5 years ago on Atkins and have been able to keep it off so far. The first two weeks you must be strict in keeping your total carbs to ~25g or less a day. No "net" carbs during this period- no bread, no diet soda, no milk.

After the initial 2 weeks, I bought some ketosis? testing strips to determine how far in ketosis I was.

After that, it was just a matter of keeping my carbs to ~35g for the next 4 months or so. I couldn't stick to only water, so i eventually caved in and started drinking diet soda again. After 4 months I started adding low-carb bread, icecream, etc and actually stayed in ketosis during the entire time- I eventually upped my carbs to between 50-60g a day and was able to continue losing weight...

 

[prism]

When I went strict Atkins about 7-8 years ago I actually had good results drinking a diet soda every day or every other day. Despite what others say in this thread, diet soda (at least all I've ever seen) have ZERO calories, so they're not "empty calories." That being said, there's a great deal of research that those smarter and more well-read than I would be happy to link showing that the sweetness of these diet sodas can lead to increased hunger, and other research showing that artificial sweeteners are horrible for you in general. Personally, I've limited myself to one diet or regular soda per week on my cheat day.

Also, 1.5g of protein per lb is ridiculous. Strongmen and pro bodybuilders may espouse this ideology, but this is completely unnecessary for someone with your goals. Even the idea of 1g protein per lb of lean body mass can be argued as being overkill.

However, if you choose to only take one piece of advice from me, please make sure to eat lots of vegetables, preferably raw leafy greens. Aside from their inarguable nutritional benefits, these will do wonders to keep you regular with all the protein you'll be ingesting

 

[RbSX]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/23/health/23really.html
http://www.leangains.com/2010/10/top-ten-fasting-myths-debunked.html

There is absolutely no science behind this eating 5-6 meals per day nonsense. I have no idea why it's constantly repeated. I have a theory that it's perpetuated by processed food companies to encourage snacking and eating junk food.

Ultimately, it comes down to the quality of your food. If you're more comfortable eating 5-6 times per day, then do so, but there's no advantage to doing so. Personally, I find it hard to eat 5-6 quality meals and end up resorting to junk food.

It's much easier to eat 2-3 high quality meals and not carry tupperware everywhere I go.

Bullshit - here's one simple reason to do it, it allows you to time your meals better and not have a carb overload. It allows you to amortize them over the course of the day.

 

[tedrodai]

Bullshit - here's one simple reason to do it, it allows you to time your meals better and not have a carb overload. It allows you to amortize them over the course of the day.

Allows you to time your meals better? For some people this is the opposite of the truth. Taking 3 breaks to eat during work at set times of the day is too disruptive of my schedule, for instance. I've tried it in the past and done well as the diet goes, but no better than with 3 meals/day or even 2 with intermittent fasting. But the more meals I plan, the harder it is to be productive at work.

 

[blinky8225]

Bullshit - here's one simple reason to do it, it allows you to time your meals better and not have a carb overload. It allows you to amortize them over the course of the day.

Did you even read the links? In any case, I imagine that you think that the effect of carb overload is high blood sugar, and therefore, diabetes.

Blood sugar is actually better controlled with less frequent meals.

In non-obese individuals, glucose levels remained elevated throughout the day with frequent CHO meals compared to 3CHO meals, without any differences in the insulin levels. Increasing the protein content of frequent meals attenuated both the glucose and insulin response. These findings of elevated glucose levels throughout the day warrant further research, particularly in overweight and obese individuals with and without type 2 diabetes.

Source: http://www.journals.elsevierhealth.com/periodicals/yeclnm/article/S1751-4991(10)00054-5/abstract

Ultimately, I think that the best diet is the one that you can stick with. If it's truly easier for you to eat 6 meals per day, then do so. I don't think eating less often is a magic bullet, either, but don't act like eating frequently is any better for you for any other reason than personal preference. Some people graze like cows while others feast like lions. For the person with a busy schedule who travels frequently, eating 6 high-quality meals per day is unfeasible and often causes people to resort to fast food.

It's only recently that widespread obesity and diabetes have been a problem. People can do just fine on 2-3 meals per day. Why do you think we store fat in the first place? It's so that we can go long periods without eating.

 

[SunnyD]

- Drop milk/milk-based products.
- Drop wheat and other cereal grain products.
- Avoid legumes (soy, kidney, pinto, etc) and legume-based products.
- Avoid sugars in general other than what's contained in raw fruits.
- Eat a hell of a lot more fresh fruits and vegetables.
- Consume about 50% of your diet in lean meat-based proteins, preferably more fish/shellfish than chicken/pork/beef.
- Eat plenty of nuts, particularly almonds and walnuts for additional protein and fatty acids.
- AVOID peanuts like the plague - they are legumes and not tree nuts, and contain some rather unhealthy things for you despite the good things they do have.
- Avoid bulk starch foods (potatoes, etc) when possible.
- Drink plenty of water.
- Avoid any manufactured or processed foods - yep, that INCLUDES diet sodas. Drink teas, water, etc. instead.

You sound like you're moderately active, hell, more active than I am. I'm 35 and live a pretty much completely sedentary lifestyle. I do walk between 1 and 3 miles on a given day, and I've still managed to lose as of today 15 pounds over the last month and a half. And I haven't even been terribly strict on this diet. Other than eating, I haven't really changed much in terms of my lifestyle. There's more than just the list above, but that's pretty much what I follow.

http://thepaleodiet.com/

Yeah, when my doctor (actually my wife's "progressive" doctor, but I didn't have a doc at the time - I avoid them, and just needed to see one for a couple reasons) suggested it my first thought was "quack". But over the last 10 years my weight has just slowly and steadily gone up, from 165 to just about 200. I'm trying to prevent some other issues, as well as be able to get to a manageable weight where I can start increasing my activity level to become more fit for the long term. The doctor suggested it. I did a little research, and it looked like my diet may have also been a contributing factor to some of my systematic digestive issues as well - which I'm happy to say that I haven't had nearly as many problems with since either.

We're not 100% strict with the diet. It's not about being strict either - it's about being able to moderate when you aren't strict. Like for the 4th, it's okay to have a burger on a bun and some corn on the cob. But it's not okay to do it on the 3rd and the 5th as well. Just like any diet, common sense goes a long way.

Food for thought. 15 pounds in about 6 weeks on a sedentary 35 year old.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

1st comment - Milk is lactose, if you want to have carbs and really want to lose the fat avoid lactose (it can only be processed by the liver to be turned into glycogen) go for complex and fibrous carbs with a low GI load. (rice, spinach or corn pasta/yams, beans etc and then veggies for fibrous carbs)

2nd comment - Sandwiches, if you're trying to cut carbs, again isn't great. 1st of all sandwich meat tends to not be the healthies meat, second of all, wheat contains gluten which, based upon the observations of others, tends to make them bloated.

Honestly, by just doing a quick one over, this meal plan is pretty bad, and if you want to lose weight having 3 meals rather than 5-6 smaller meals isn't a good idea either.

Avoid sodas at all costs, you'll find you will have a lot more flexibility in your diet if you cut out the EASY/REALLY BAD stuff like soda. All of your other work is for nothing if you keep crap like that in your diet.

Weightlifting 4-5 times a week, cardio and HIIT sports will lead to a burnout rather quickly, you're doing too much.

If you're losing fat it's hard to gain muscle at the same time because they require different calorie intake levels, if you are losing fat you want to be at a caloric deficit, that means between your caloric weight maitenance level and your BMR. If you want to gain muscle you need to be above your caloric weight maintenance, but because your body isn't efficient you will gain fat. PERIOD.

You can kind of avoid this by doing a ZIGZAG diet, which is eat in slight excess (200-300 cals) of your CIL on your lifting days, and a slight deficit (200-300 cals) on the days you do cardio. However, this slows down your mass gain and your weight loss.

Protein is (at minimum) 1.5 grams/lb.

In short - do more research, use bodybuilding.com as a basic reference guide, but in the end you have to work to customize the general routines to what works for you.

Where did you get this explanation of your's? First of all, lactose is just a disaccharide of glucose and galactose put together. In the small intestine, lactase (an enzyme) breaks the bond between glucose and galactose. It is then utilized as any normal simple sugar source would be: partially absorbed into many cells, partially stored, partially used to create compounds the body needs. It is by no means directly converted into glycogen. Granted, it's not ideal for a low-carb diet, but please don't post faulty explanations. They get misinterpreted by other people who aren't worried about low carb and then people don't drink milk because of that. That's not sensible.

Also, research has never supported the 1.5g of protein per pound body weight with a weight lifting program. Most suggest than even as low as 0.5g of protein per body weight is effective. I don't suggest that, but 1.5g/lb body weight is far excessive, especially to call a minimum. 1g of protein/lb body weight is much more realistic, gives similar gains, and still not the minimum. Stop with the bro-science.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

What about the sodas being diet? They don't have sugar, is the caffeine bad?

Well, they aren't exactly the healthiest. Sodium benzoate, phosphoric acid, carbonic acid. Sodium benzoate has been linked with a plethora of health problems. Probably because it has a modified benzene group in it... In addition, the acids mess with your teeth and bone density. The phosphoric acid is especially detrimental because phosphate is an important mediator for bone development and breakdown. Flooding the bloodstream with it negatively affects the system, which results in reduced bone density. On top of that, artificial sweeteners aren't the greatest and many times sodas are borderline addictive. Being addicted to anything isn't in your best interest and may make you weaker in your other dietary decisions.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Bullshit - here's one simple reason to do it, it allows you to time your meals better and not have a carb overload. It allows you to amortize them over the course of the day.

Can you even say what a carb overload is? Your body isn't retarded. If you have a lot of food or carbs, you know what it does? It slows digestion. You don't get diabetes from one meal if you eat three a day. In fact, you don't get it if you eat one big meal a day. Research actually shows that eating one big meal a day (like intermittent fasting) improves glucose sensitivity, which is inversely related to risk of diabetes. Three meals a day is way more convenient. Six meals a day is fine, if you get hungry often, as it may help stave off hunger a bit better. It's more important when bulking, as it's easier to get more calories in that way. Technically, there's research suggesting that the more frequently you eat, the worse as it may negatively affect the health of your teeth due to increased bacteria and such. To each his own. Don't force the six meal a day thing. Again, it's bro-science.

 

[RbSX]

Where did you get this explanation of your's? First of all, lactose is just a disaccharide of glucose and galactose put together. In the small intestine, lactase (an enzyme) breaks the bond between glucose and galactose. It is then utilized as any normal simple sugar source would be: partially absorbed into many cells, partially stored, partially used to create compounds the body needs. It is by no means directly converted into glycogen. Granted, it's not ideal for a low-carb diet, but please don't post faulty explanations. They get misinterpreted by other people who aren't worried about low carb and then people don't drink milk because of that. That's not sensible.

Also, research has never supported the 1.5g of protein per pound body weight with a weight lifting program. Most suggest than even as low as 0.5g of protein per body weight is effective. I don't suggest that, but 1.5g/lb body weight is far excessive, especially to call a minimum. 1g of protein/lb body weight is much more realistic, gives similar gains, and still not the minimum. Stop with the bro-science.

I guess my research of lactose was wrong then, it was my understanding that lactose could only be converted by the liver and that the liver had a very limited storage capacity, thus, eating/drinking lactose/fructose unless it's right before or after a workout could have a detrimental effect on weight lose.

So far as 1.5g of protein per pound of weight... let me put it this way. If I ate only 1g of protein per pound of lean body weight my proportions for my meal plan would end up like this.

I need 2950 cals per day to maintain my weight, if I'm at excess let's say 3300.

180g of protein = 720 cals (20%)
143g of fats = 1290 cals (40%)
320g of carbs = 1290 cals (40%)

I mean come on cut it with the bro science shit, in your own healthy eating thread you recommend a 20 carb/40 fat/40protein split.

If you're cutting carbs you have to add cals somewhere and it can't all be fat. So what that means is that you end up eating AT LEAST 1.5g of protein today.

If I'm following your guidelines I'm actually eating about 2g of protein per day. It's not broscience, it's math using your own nutrition guidelines. The cals have to come from somewhere, and it can't be carbs in this diet.

 

[RbSX]

Can you even say what a carb overload is? Your body isn't retarded. If you have a lot of food or carbs, you know what it does? It slows digestion. You don't get diabetes from one meal if you eat three a day. In fact, you don't get it if you eat one big meal a day. Research actually shows that eating one big meal a day (like intermittent fasting) improves glucose sensitivity, which is inversely related to risk of diabetes. Three meals a day is way more convenient. Six meals a day is fine, if you get hungry often, as it may help stave off hunger a bit better. It's more important when bulking, as it's easier to get more calories in that way. Technically, there's research suggesting that the more frequently you eat, the worse as it may negatively affect the health of your teeth due to increased bacteria and such. To each his own. Don't force the six meal a day thing. Again, it's bro-science.

I'm going through a bulking phase hence my 6 meals a day - but personally, I can't eat meals more than 500-600 cals in one sitting. I couldn't imagine having 3 1k cals meals per day.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

I guess my research of lactose was wrong then, it was my understanding that lactose could only be converted by the liver and that the liver had a very limited storage capacity, thus, eating/drinking lactose/fructose unless it's right before or after a workout could have a detrimental effect on weight lose.

So far as 1.5g of protein per pound of weight... let me put it this way. If I ate only 1g of protein per pound of lean body weight my proportions for my meal plan would end up like this.

I need 2950 cals per day to maintain my weight, if I'm at excess let's say 3300.

180g of protein = 720 cals (20%)
143g of fats = 1290 cals (40%)
320g of carbs = 1290 cals (40%)

I mean come on cut it with the bro science shit, in your own healthy eating thread you recommend a 20 carb/40 fat/40protein split.

If you're cutting carbs you have to add cals somewhere and it can't all be fat. So what that means is that you end up eating AT LEAST 1.5g of protein today.

If I'm following your guidelines I'm actually eating about 2g of protein per day. It's not broscience, it's math using your own nutrition guidelines. The cals have to come from somewhere, and it can't be carbs in this diet.

That is true for fructose, but not lactose. The biochemistry is different.

Also, I'm giving people these splits based on a caloric deficit. If you're only taking in 1800cal, 40% of those being protein, you'd take in 180g of protein. For someone who's 215lbs, trying to cut, and losing weight, that's 100% ok (0.8g of protein per pound body weight). The amounts you're suggesting are insane for somebody who wants to cut or even maintain weight. In the same scenario or someone taking in 1800cal at 215lbs, you're suggesting they take in ~322g of protein, which would make up almost 1300cal, which is 71% of their total caloric intake. That is ridiculous and completely unfounded. That's excessive, such that I believe it could go so far as to cause detriment to one's health.

Btw, re-read my thread. Not healthy eating - fat loss. Not one and the same. Maintenance is a different story.

And I agree, some of info in the fat loss sticky is a little dated. May change that today in fact.

 

[Awkward]

What about the sodas being diet? They don't have sugar, is the caffeine bad?

Diet sodas contain artificial sweeteners that have extremely high GI, which cause blood sugar spikes, so it's typically best to avoid them when you're on a low carb diet.

Pasteurization of milk causes changes in its entire structure. Lactose sugar is converted to beta-lactose which causes blood sugar levels to spike rapidly.

If you're on a low carb diet, you're going to need to significantly up your fat intake or you'll be miserable and fail.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Diet sodas contain artificial sweeteners that have extremely high GI, which cause blood sugar spikes, so it's typically best to avoid them when you're on a low carb diet.

Pasteurization of milk causes changes in its entire structure. Lactose sugar is converted to beta-lactose which causes blood sugar levels to spike rapidly.

If you're on a low carb diet, you're going to need to significantly up your fat intake or you'll be miserable and fail.

That's a fallacy. Commonly used artificial sweeteners do NOT act on insulin, which is related to the glycemic index. They definitely don't cause sugar spikes. They do, however, have some effects on hunger sensation and some hormones.

Also, milk does show a link to increased glucose insensitivity. However, if you're active, you're fine. Those who are at risk are mainly the sedentary, overweight population. It doesn't have nearly the effect of sucrose of fructose.

 

[Awkward]

That's a fallacy. Commonly used artificial sweeteners do NOT act on insulin, which is related to the glycemic index. They definitely don't cause sugar spikes. They do, however, have some effects on hunger sensation and some hormones.

Semantics. Point is, it's basically the same effect.

Also, milk does show a link to increased glucose insensitivity. However, if you're active, you're fine. Those who are at risk are mainly the sedentary, overweight population. It doesn't have nearly the effect of sucrose of fructose.

Wrong. All pasteurized and homogenized milk products have insulinotropic effects with responses far exceeding their low GI. Some tests show that there have been insulin increases of up to 105% in healthy, normal weight individuals.

Sucrose and fructose aren't nearly as much of a problem when they're paired with their natural minerals and enzymes. Same as how raw milk is completely fine to drink.

He's on a low carb diet. The goal is to minimize carbs and this makes you insulin resistant. Why would he consume pasteurized milk?

 

[Wreckem]

Semantics. Point is, it's basically the same effect.

Not really. Its actually a huge difference.

Diet Soda isn't going to fuck up a low carb diet. I've been in ketosis for six weeks and I drink caffeine free diet dr pepper regularly(1-2 cans per day). The theory is diet soda makes you hungry/have cravings. I rarely if ever feel hungry on this low carb diet, even when drinking diet soda.

On a side note, if you buy artificial sweeteners at the grocery story, they almost always have a binding agent, typically dextrose(splenda actually has 24g carbs per cup). However, food manufacturers use the pure version of whatever artificial sweetener they are using and almost all have 0carbs and no GI spike.

If you are using artificial sweeteners, stick with the pure stuff.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

Semantics. Point is, it's basically the same effect.

Wrong. All pasteurized and homogenized milk products have insulinotropic effects with responses far exceeding their low GI. Some tests show that there have been insulin increases of up to 105% in healthy, normal weight individuals.

Sucrose and fructose aren't nearly as much of a problem when they're paired with their natural minerals and enzymes. Same as how raw milk is completely fine to drink.

He's on a low carb diet. The goal is to minimize carbs and this makes you insulin resistant. Why would he consume pasteurized milk?

Not semantics. The hormone effects aren't nearly as significant as you're trying to make them seem. Granted, I'm not FOR artificial sweeteners, but I'm also not trying to fear monger. They have some effects, which researchers are unsure about, but they don't make you fat by default. I'm moreso talking about this to call you out. Don't just start saying things that aren't true. You could have completely misled people by what you said before. That's not okay.

And raw milk has shown some serious health risks in relation to infections... so each point is moot. If you want to be the healthiest you can be, don't drink an excess of milk. You may have read studies, but I can guarantee you those studies were done in "normal, sedentary" individuals, as that is the norm researchers set. If you drink milk and you are the abnormal, regular exerciser, the effects are very different. Considering one 30min bout of cardio can improve insulin sensitivity for days after the exercise, the exerciser's body is much more apt to deal with milk. Period.

The problem is sucrose and fructose, in the processed-foods culture of America, is RARELY in its natural environment. In such cases, fructose is probably the most detrimental thing you can take into your body, in relation to body fat composition, lipid levels, insulin sensitivity, etc.

Minimizing carbs makes you insulin resistant? I don't know if that's a typo, but that's exactly the opposite of what research shows. Keto diets reliably improve insulin sensitivity. You're on this "pasteurized" milk thing. I'm stating that milk is fine for the average individual. I'm here to clear things up for the people thinking that everything in this thread applies to them, even if they're not low-carbing. Raw milk isn't any better and you won't find any randomized controlled trials to support that it is.

 

[Awkward]

Not semantics. The hormone effects aren't nearly as significant as you're trying to make them seem. Granted, I'm not FOR artificial sweeteners, but I'm also not trying to fear monger. They have some effects, which researchers are unsure about, but they don't make you fat by default. I'm moreso talking about this to call you out. Don't just start saying things that aren't true. You could have completely misled people by what you said before. That's not okay.

And raw milk has shown some serious health risks in relation to infections... so each point is moot. If you want to be the healthiest you can be, don't drink an excess of milk. You may have read studies, but I can guarantee you those studies were done in "normal, sedentary" individuals, as that is the norm researchers set. If you drink milk and you are the abnormal, regular exerciser, the effects are very different. Considering one 30min bout of cardio can improve insulin sensitivity for days after the exercise, the exerciser's body is much more apt to deal with milk. Period.

The problem is sucrose and fructose, in the processed-foods culture of America, is RARELY in its natural environment. In such cases, fructose is probably the most detrimental thing you can take into your body, in relation to body fat composition, lipid levels, insulin sensitivity, etc.

Minimizing carbs makes you insulin resistant? I don't know if that's a typo, but that's exactly the opposite of what research shows. Keto diets reliably improve insulin sensitivity. You're on this "pasteurized" milk thing. I'm stating that milk is fine for the average individual. I'm here to clear things up for the people thinking that everything in this thread applies to them, even if they're not low-carbing. Raw milk isn't any better and you won't find any randomized controlled trials to support that it is.

The Weston A. Price Foundation, presented an enlightening report on outbreaks of food borne illnesses--specifically comparing raw vs. pasteurized milk.


This information was presented to the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors when the board was considering whether or not to allow raw milk in the county.


What the board found was that between 1982 and 1997, not a single person reported getting sick from consuming raw milk. But in that same time frame, more than 220,000 people became ill from some form of salmonella they got from drinking pasteurized milk.

He's trying to lose weight, artificial sweeteners are impeding his cause and entirely unnecessary.

Yeah, maybe sucrose and fructose in processed foods are hard to digest. People in our society have been bombing themselves with hormonal imbalances with stuff like Soy, omega 6 polyunsaturated fats, toxins, etc, etc for years so that they cannot even digest simple food like fruit/natural sugar anymore.

 

[SociallyChallenged]

He's trying to lose weight, artificial sweeteners are impeding his cause and entirely unnecessary.

Yeah, maybe sucrose and fructose in processed foods are hard to digest. People in our society have been bombing themselves with hormonal imbalances with stuff like Soy, omega 6 polyunsaturated fats, toxins, etc, etc for years so that they cannot even digest simple food like fruit/natural sugar anymore.

Raw milk consumer numbers are thousands of times lower than normal food consumers. In addition, raw milk isn't exactly regulated. Therefore, there's no way to keep someone responsible for such. Most mainstream milk-producers create a lot of volume and are held to a high standard by the FDA. In addition, you think raw milk companies (tiny, typically solo farmers) have required, expansive reports like other, larger companies? The percentage, if actually recorded tightly, is much higher in raw milk consumers. It's a reporting problem.

If you try to find a firm amount of research saying that the sweeteners are significantly impeding his process, you'd be hard pressed to find a whole lot. Stop being the guy who argues a point just to argue it. It's moot. Research doesn't show what you're saying. Physiologically, it can do things. On the macro scale though, it's not going to really impede his progress... Like if he added splenda to his coffee everyday. If he's drinking diet sodas, then he's not gonna be as healthy as he wants to be, but he's gonna lose weight.

I don't even know how to respond to your last statement because it isn't true whatsoever. Your digestion doesn't magically change based on what you've eaten in the past. You can still absorb the same nutrients and the same calories, unless you have a serious GI pathology.

 

[mple]

I'm going through a bulking phase hence my 6 meals a day - but personally, I can't eat meals more than 500-600 cals in one sitting. I couldn't imagine having 3 1k cals meals per day.

I envy you. I'm 135lbs and can easily eat 1k cal meals 5x per day.

Diet sodas contain artificial sweeteners that have extremely high GI, which cause blood sugar spikes, so it's typically best to avoid them when you're on a low carb diet.

Pasteurization of milk causes changes in its entire structure. Lactose sugar is converted to beta-lactose which causes blood sugar levels to spike rapidly.

If you're on a low carb diet, you're going to need to significantly up your fat intake or you'll be miserable and fail.

Unless you're a diabetic, why does this GI crap even matter?

http://jn.nutrition.org/content/135/10/2387.full.pdf+html