Paleo Diet and Paleolithic Diet Questions & Answers

Question

19

1

It's definitely given me a lot more to think about concerning the insulin/leptin/lc/food reward debate that's been going on recently. Very glad that smart people are disagreeing and airing it out. It's good for everyone in the long run.

http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2011/08/i-have-read-good-calories-bad-calories.html

Edit: Key take away

"There comes a point at which fat cells become sufficiently insulin resistant that they cannot hang on to the their fat content. You can still put fat in there with minimal insulin and minimal insulin sensitivity. Once adipocytes are sufficiently insulin resistant and they are leaking sufficient free fatty acids to match input, obviously weight gain stops. The inappropriate spilling of FFAs causes palmitate deriviatives to be produced which worsen insulin resistance, whole body, and obesity flips in to diabetes.

I am in complete agreement with Stephan here. What I object to is citing a situation where insulin is failing to progress obesity, when it is doing its best to, as evidence it did not cause it in the first place. Insulin is trying and FAILING to make the adipocytes fatter. The more impossible the task, the more insulin is produced"

edited Sep 3 2011 at 22:14

asked Sep 3 2011 at 21:57

luckybastard♦
12.5k●1●14●65

14

Indeed. The new dogma amongst many Paleo bloggers that insulin has nothing whatsoever to do with obesity is on shaky ground. Just as the old "Insulin has everything to do with obesity" dogma is/was. – kilton Sep 3 2011 at 22:10

6

"The diversity of our opinions does not proceed from some men being more rational than others but solely from the fact that our thoughts pass through diverse channels and the same objects are not considered by all." ~Descartes, Discourse on Method – Rose Sep 3 2011 at 22:14

12

I've read it through three times. I really need a cigarette right now. – Shari Bambino Sep 3 2011 at 22:44

4

Insulin-shooting Granny who served sugared tea with jam on toast was a memorable bit for me! – familygrokumentarian Sep 3 2011 at 23:14

6

Favorite line: "But elevating insulin to lethal levels using glucose-free casein, beef, whey, eggs etc all produce acute, severe, unremitting, paradoxical normoglycaemia." – Aaron B. Sep 4 2011 at 1:19

show 6 more comments

wildthing · Answer 1 · 2011-09-04 00:56:51Z UTC

I am my own guinea pig.

I am insulin resistant with increasing blood sugar (120) I have fat around my stomach and back. I gain weight in my upper body.I had High blood pressure, I was on medicine. Many allergies...On four meds for that too. I am age 56,female... very active. I am a weight lifter.(500 pound leg presses) I do high intensity interval training every other day. But I am 50 pounds over weight that will not come off in fact I was still gaining a pound a month... I work out 6 days a week and was on a low fat diet. I ate 6 small portioned meals a day per Body for Life diet. Very frustrated.

I read Gary's Good Calories, Bad Calories...If Gary Taubes is right, then I should be decreasing my carbs to almost nothing in order to save my own life by eating nothing that causes a high insulin response.

SO far; Since Memorial Day:I stopped working out because I hurt everywhere for the first three weeks.. I ate what Gary advised. Mostly grass fed meat/eggs/chicken, Organic greens and organic low glycemic vegetables. My blood pressure plummeted to 116/68 with no meds. I dropped 25 pounds. My blood sugar reads 90. I stopped being drivin by constant hunger. I am off of all allergy meds. I can breathe through my nose. What a relief to find an answer. I don't know what you all are arguing about... works for me...

I began working out again last week. I am an avid reader of what all of you put up here.Maybe this would not work for someone who is not insulin resistant.

sherpamelissa · Answer 2 · 2011-09-04 01:19:17Z UTC

14

I am super excited by this portion:

If you are ex-morbidly obese and have managed to lose a few hundred pounds of fat you will still own a set of injured adipocytes. These injured adipocytes refuse to produce physiologically appropriate levels of leptin for their fat stores. Now THERE is a role for leptin. It might even reverse the persistent hyperinsulinaemia present even during starvation in the morbidly obese...

That leptin is most important for the formerly obese and not so much for fit/normal weight people and currently obese is key to me. I would like to be "fixed" some day. I would like to think that I will not have to eat 1200/1400 calories for the rest of my life to maintain my 100+lb weight loss. The more they figure out about this stuff, the better chance I have.

I realize that's not the main point he was trying to make, but it was the part that applied to my life.

answered Sep 4 2011 at 1:19

sherpamelissa
18.6k●1●21●69

3

I agree, Melissa. I'm very excited that this debate is even happening, egos and all. And I admit that the passage you quoted got me laughing when I first read it over there, only because it pretty much sums up what Itsthewooo, everyone's favorite logorrheic blog commenter, has been saying (and saying and saying and saying, lol). – Rose Sep 4 2011 at 1:24

3

i thought the same thing, rose. – luckybastard♦ Sep 4 2011 at 1:29

3

lb, I'd just like to take this moment to say you're another sane voice I really value on PH (there are a lot of sane voices, but as I'm socially inept, there are few whose names and personas I know on sight). I don't always agree with you, but I always learn from you. – Rose Sep 4 2011 at 1:49

7

@Melissa, Rose, and LB: I'm delighted with the discussion. And frankly, you can't do any "better" than Hyperlipid Peter. Many may not know that it is harder to get into Veterinarian School than it is to get into medical school. Peter also has an advanced degree in physiology as well as being an anesthesiologist. There's a reason that anesthesiologists, among MDs have traditionally been the highest paid specialty. They are taking you a hair's breath from death, keeping you there, without causing brain hypoxia or organ shutdown, all the while keeping you down far enough so you don't jump off – Atkins-witha-loincloth Sep 4 2011 at 2:13

7

I am DYING to know if ItstheWoo has seen this. Oh this is getting really, really good, lol! – Shari Bambino Sep 4 2011 at 3:11

show 8 more comments

The Quilt · Answer 3 · 2011-09-04 00:02:48Z UTC

12

I think the GT and SG affair has become more about ego than science at this point.

answered Sep 4 2011 at 0:02

The Quilt
27.5k●1●16●82

hey no kidding... – The Loon Sep 4 2011 at 0:34

#dietsoapopera.............. – none Sep 4 2011 at 0:35

2

What in this whole world is NOT about ego? – BaconHealsChic Sep 4 2011 at 5:03

1

+1 Great Comment! – Eric Sep 4 2011 at 16:14

Hurricane · Answer 4 · 2011-09-04 00:21:48Z UTC

I love these articles. It's like sitting down for a college final to a class you never even knew you were enrolled in, just wanna punch yourself in the face.

On a side note I find the theory extremely thought provoking (what I can understand that is). The idea that insulin plays a role up to the point that the adipocytes start leaking fat is a pretty awesome visual representation.

And the Baby.

BaconHealsChic · Answer 5 · 2011-09-04 06:04:32Z UTC

From SG "The fact is, insulin spikes after meals temporarily decrease fat release from fat cells, but if you look at total 24 hour energy balance, insulin spikes do not cause fat accumulation. " I think SG assumes the meal was satiating. For me an insulin spike goes something like this below...

I ate the ham sandwich...which led to...a craving for...cheetoes...which then led to a craving for candy...which then led to a craving for ice cream and before I knew it I had eaten a lot in 24 hours and I am still hungry.

My own experience confirms SG's next quote...

"Weight stable obese people have a higher energy flux out of fat cells, and a higher metabolic rate, but it is not enough to overcome the higher calorie intake that is also observed (26, 27). That has been repeatedly confirmed and it is simply a fact at this point." Yep...darn that ham sandwich insulin spike!

There are times that I eat some grass fed meat with roasted asparagus and butter and the taste is heavenly and REWARDING. After I eat it I am full--maybe even for 24 hours.

Peter says...". I'm still trying to get my head around that one, while eating low carb and trying to remember what it felt like to be hungry."

Yep...me too Peter. Me too.

The Loon · Answer 6 · 2011-09-04 00:33:35Z UTC

8

OK, I'll answer the question without even reading all of it, because I thought the post was just so darn meaty that it would take awhile to chew and digest. I rely on Hyperlipid to offer thoughtful posts on some of the best topics.

answered Sep 4 2011 at 0:33

The Loon
8,442●6●26

4

You and me both! – Atkins-witha-loincloth Sep 4 2011 at 3:05

4

Now, after reading it fully, I find myself wanting to go back to each sentence, not because it is unclear, but because it is so funny and appropriate. There is really lots of fun stuff here. – The Loon Sep 4 2011 at 4:06

7

Peter is really a delightful writer. Someone above was complaining about his sort of stream-of consciousness writing style. Not me. I really enjoy it. And I say that when someone like Peter spends his valuable time sharing the incredible info that he does, he gets to write any darn way he likes! YEah, it's a great read. His dry, wild humor is wonderful! – Atkins-witha-loincloth Sep 4 2011 at 4:56

2

stream on consciousness? Oh I disagree. Every sentence seems carefully placed. – The Loon Sep 5 2011 at 7:42

2

yes I agree... each thought sets up the reader for slam dunk – BaconHealsChic Sep 5 2011 at 14:02

Nance · Answer 7 · 2011-09-04 15:16:46Z UTC

3

I say this from personal experience rather than scientific training, but having tried just about all known strategies in my struggle with lifelong food addiction only 2 strategies have allowed me to ease my cravings and lose significant fat:

eating only one meal per day (over time, the size of the meal naturally diminishes without me having to exercise willpower in what or how much I eat)
eating a very short list of foods over and over again (seems compatible with Stephan's comments about food reward--if I eat "exciting" foods my cravings explode) such as beef with low-starch veggies every day

Trying to eat 1200 calories per day of a varied menu takes about 3 days to trigger extreme anxiety and obsession with the next bite of food.

answered Sep 4 2011 at 15:16

Nance
29.8k●1●9●52

4

But my question would be can you maintain the weight loss? Do you plan to eat like this forever? Is that a realistic expectation? This is the biggest issue I have with the food reward idea. At some point most people want to go on to have a relationship with food again that involved reward. Food is one of the great joys of life! I just don't see this as a viable long-term strategy (and I say this from my own personal experience.) – Shari Bambino Sep 4 2011 at 16:40

2

Shari – I don’t think pre-industrial culture often saw food as a “joy in life” - this is a more modern attitude. I believe Dr. Harris has talked of becoming perfectly happy with plain food. Many people that lose a lot of weight speak of adopting the attitude that food is just fuel. I think recognizing this is an important tool for some people, especially those that are obese and looking to lose weight. I think once you are at your desired weight you have a lot more options, but it is still a tool to consider (i.e. eating plain during the week and splurging on the weekends.) – Paleo2.0 Sep 4 2011 at 18:19

5

Don't know that I agree about the "joy in life" critique. My dog -- granted, he's a domesticated animal, and may therefore be analogous to agricultural man -- seems to be very, very happy when he eats. I get the food-as-fuel argument, and when I went ZC I really did give up lots of pleasurable tastes, but then I discovered something amazing: a ribeye steak -- heck, even a boring slice of chuck roast -- really tastes wonderful. All by itself. N=1, yeah, but I've heard others say that too. – Rose Sep 4 2011 at 19:15

2

Presumably a dog, or any well-functioning animal, only gets great joy from their food when they physically need food. Hence an animal should fall upon suitable food ravenously when hungry and then naturally not want to eat it any more when satiated. This is unless you think our bodies set us to overeat all the time- the thrify gene hypothesis- but looking at every other animal in the wild, and indeed, preindustrial humans, that seems to be dead wrong. – David Moss Sep 4 2011 at 20:57

4

Perhaps a more modern attitude but pandora's box has been opened and there is no closing it for most of us. I failed at weight loss time and time again when I tried to squeeze food culture out of my life. I agree in theory you should be able to deny yourself the pleasure then reintroduce bette tasting food once weight loss is no longer the goal but it seem to me we've tried that over and over and over again and it doesn't seem to work very well. You white- knuckle it then go off the rails in the end. People can only deal with so much denial before their heads explode. – Shari Bambino Sep 5 2011 at 0:14

show 2 more comments

Jay · Answer 8 · 2011-09-04 02:57:04Z UTC

2

I think Stephan's arguments are generally more honest, less emotional, and better articulated than those of GT or, sorry to say it, Peter (who I like quite a bit).

answered Sep 4 2011 at 2:57

Jay
4,433●6●11

7

I agree that Stephan better articulates his views than Peter, though this is probably down to their choices of style rather than innate writing ability: you only need to look at Peter's blog and his (non-existent) filing system, that he's more interested in writing down his thoughts for his own amusement and in a highly amusing, but idiosyncratic fashion than with building an audience. I certainly don't think he's more emotional or less honest than Stephan. – David Moss Sep 4 2011 at 8:28

10

Does not make him correct.......just makes you feel better believing that he is – The Quilt Sep 4 2011 at 12:52

2

QUILT, did I say it makes him correct? Why would you assume that I meant otherwise? – Jay Sep 4 2011 at 14:21

Travis Culp · Answer 9 · 2011-09-04 07:25:36Z UTC

That insulin acts upon HSL to inhibit lipolysis is a better argument for strategic insulin management than for the complete avoidance of carbohydrates. I think we still have an entire macronutrient class getting thrown out with the bathwater.

Though fructose intake is the most efficient way to raise triglycerides/VLDL and thus reduce the passage of leptin across the blood-brain barrier, I'm sure you could also achieve this to some extent via a generally high starch intake coupled with inactivity. Being sedentary is no more biologically appropriate than drinking a cola or eating margarine.

Any attempt to combat the obesity epidemic should focus on reducing fasting plasma triglycerides, and thus increasing leptin sensitivity. Luckily, the same strategies that accomplish this also increase insulin sensitivity (removing fructose completely for a few weeks, increasing activity - especially before meals - and not eating carbohydrates during one's most active hours). Satiety increases and lipolysis is maximized without the stress of total glucose starvation.

How do you feel about Peter(Hyperlipid)'s response to Stephan Guyanet?

9 Answers