Anyone lost a lot of weight, and kept it off?

A light bike doesn't replace good fitness.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Post Reply
User avatar
853guy
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:48 pm

by 853guy

Another set of data points for consideration...

http://www.cyclist.co.uk/tutorials/161/ ... 1kg-of-fat

Best,

853guy

User avatar
853guy
Posts: 109
Joined: Sat Dec 30, 2017 8:48 pm

by 853guy

Another data point that diverges from an Ockham-style "calories in - calories out" heurisitic.

"Conventional wisdom states that weight loss occurs when an individual is in caloric deficit. While on the surface that can be correct, there are caveats. When an athlete feeds his body less than it needs, his resting metabolic rate declines. Sometimes this is due to losses in skeletal muscle mass (e.g., the metabolically active tissue that would serve to maintain/ increase resting metabolic rate), and sometimes it is due to other reasons. When the body is already under stress (e.g., due to high activity, inadequate recovery, etc.), then we become catabolic (a metabolic state in which we start breaking down). Decreasing calories when the body is already “stressed” increases this destructive process. An athlete experiencing this phenomenon must first optimize his fueling and energy status before attempting a weight-loss regimen.

“This does go counter to conventional thinking, but that’s also exactly why so many people hit a weight-loss plateau and then bang their heads against the wall for years trying different diets and all sorts of stuff, with none of it being very successful in most cases,” Kohler says.

In Jan’s case, he was asking his body to continue producing energy for his activities while in a hypo-caloric state. His muscles were damaged, and his body was unable to repair them without proper nutrition or rest. Jan’s low glycogen stores put him into a downward spiral where he was unable to lose weight." (Emphasis mine.)

http://www.velonews.com/2018/04/news/tr ... ght_462042

The italicized sentances above were exactly the process I got to before radically altering my diet to a much higher portion of protein/fats/fibre, given I was intermittent fasting.

Best,

853guy

by Weenie


joejack951
Posts: 348
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:50 pm
Location: Wilmington, DE

by joejack951

853guy wrote:
Tue Apr 03, 2018 3:55 pm
Another data point that diverges from an Ockham-style "calories in - calories out" heurisitic.

"Conventional wisdom states that weight loss occurs when an individual is in caloric deficit. While on the surface that can be correct, there are caveats. When an athlete feeds his body less than it needs, his resting metabolic rate declines. Sometimes this is due to losses in skeletal muscle mass (e.g., the metabolically active tissue that would serve to maintain/ increase resting metabolic rate), and sometimes it is due to other reasons. When the body is already under stress (e.g., due to high activity, inadequate recovery, etc.), then we become catabolic (a metabolic state in which we start breaking down). Decreasing calories when the body is already “stressed” increases this destructive process. An athlete experiencing this phenomenon must first optimize his fueling and energy status before attempting a weight-loss regimen.

“This does go counter to conventional thinking, but that’s also exactly why so many people hit a weight-loss plateau and then bang their heads against the wall for years trying different diets and all sorts of stuff, with none of it being very successful in most cases,” Kohler says.

In Jan’s case, he was asking his body to continue producing energy for his activities while in a hypo-caloric state. His muscles were damaged, and his body was unable to repair them without proper nutrition or rest. Jan’s low glycogen stores put him into a downward spiral where he was unable to lose weight." (Emphasis mine.)

http://www.velonews.com/2018/04/news/tr ... ght_462042

The italicized sentances above were exactly the process I got to before radically altering my diet to a much higher portion of protein/fats/fibre, given I was intermittent fasting.

Best,

853guy
I see no divergence or anything counter to conventional wisdom here. Athletes do need to take special care when attempting to lose weight during training (it's generally ill-advised to combine the two). Anyone subjecting their body to too large a calorie deficit will suffer a bit, hence the recommendation to aim for ~1 lb. weight loss per week (500 calorie deficit per day). For an athlete to perform at their peak and realize some weight loss, that calorie deficit likely has to decrease and/or the quality of the food intake has to be way up there.

Most people plateau (in my opinion) because they are unwilling to adjust to the lower resting metabolic rate of their lighter weight and more physically fit self. I have personally gone through this and am currently in the midst another plateau actually, though it's been complicated by the fact that I was training for an event. I had to choose between being moody and unmotivated and in a calorie deficit or eating what my body wanted and not losing weight. I chose the latter for the past few months but hope to get back to working off those last few pounds I hope to lose.

TLN
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 4:50 pm

by TLN

Does anyone have input on HR-zones for weight loss, time/distance for training and how often I should train?
I've just got myself wahoo bolt and did one ride yesterday just to see how it all works. Based on the data (and my feelings in the past) - i'm riding way above my "fat burn" zone, and often above aerobic too. I was looking at 145-150 yesterday, and usually I go faster, i"d estimate 155-165. I'm 28yo. Now question is: is that a right way to go? I guess I'm doing somethign wrong, while it feels totally ok for me. Now getting some more data and trying to do it the right way.

AJS914
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

I'm skeptical that there is a way to exercise that would optimize for long term sustainable weight loss. My theory is that you need to cut out crap food, reduce calories, increase high quality foods, and ride more.

Personally I've been calorie counting for the last few months and I'm finding that a 2+ hour ride puts me in enough calorie deficit for the day that I can end the day in deficit. I try to eat some complex carbs before the ride and I'll have a 120 calorie energy bar on the ride. This keeps me from coming home ravenous and wanting to eat a million calories.

I'm 52 this year and the weight seems more sticky - when I was 25 I'd just start riding 125 miles a week and I could easily lose 5 or 10 pounds a month.

Shrike
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

Nearly two months since I posted here but I haven't been slacking off. I've experimented a lot and done a lot more research. I was suffering badly from bingeing and I just couldn't work out why I could go from being mentally rock solid month after month, to not being able to control myself.

I could diet hard for half a year, go to bed hungry, fast as long as I wanted and lose a stack of weight but when I wanted to go into maintenance and build power I'd suffer from binge eating fests.

Tried loads of different diet options. The whole food thing helped, but ultimately failed me.

But I've cracked it now. It was all about my blood sugar spikes. Glycemic index and glycemic load. Foods like brown rice would still give me a big blood sugar spike if I was refuelling with it without something temper it (like egg or tofu for example). Quantity is important, I'm no longer into the high carb thing. Whether that's junk carbs, whole food carbs, plant based or whatever.

Basically eating in the morning, lunch, post workout and in the evening has to be done differently. For me anyway. I've killed off the bingeing and lost around 4 to 5 kg since last posting here.

There is a difference between feeling hungry and having willpower to not eat, and, having your hormones take control. That's what I was missing understanding of before. I know the difference in feeling between the two of those now too. The effects of those two feelings can be hugely amplified when you've been dieting for months on end.

Much happier and feeling and looking healthier now. The past 7 months feel like an insanely long emotional ride. 74.2kg today but would like to spend the next month losing more and then stop. Really want to get into doing some power work again. Started a little but it's hard to keep the heart rate high for long if glycogen stores are low. Muscle endurance is rubbish too with low stores, even if you pre-load for the workout. Pretty much need a good breakfast, lunch and late afternoon feed and then workout in the evening to put out a half decent hour long effort. Trying to do a hard workout earlier in the day is rubbish I've found when running a deficit 500+.

Interestingly now, when I get cravings, it's usually for some whole food that I've been eating regularly. Maybe there is something to the micro-biome/gut thing. Or maybe it's some other kind of mental retraining.

joejack951
Posts: 348
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 6:50 pm
Location: Wilmington, DE

by joejack951

TLN wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 4:51 pm
Does anyone have input on HR-zones for weight loss, time/distance for training and how often I should train?
I've just got myself wahoo bolt and did one ride yesterday just to see how it all works. Based on the data (and my feelings in the past) - i'm riding way above my "fat burn" zone, and often above aerobic too. I was looking at 145-150 yesterday, and usually I go faster, i"d estimate 155-165. I'm 28yo. Now question is: is that a right way to go? I guess I'm doing somethign wrong, while it feels totally ok for me. Now getting some more data and trying to do it the right way.
What is your focus, training or weight loss? The two aren't entirely mutually exclusive but they do conflict with one another a bit. Namely, focused training usually involves a lot of base mileage and then eventually a mix of base, aerobic, and anaerobic work to develop each of those systems. In order to do much of the latter you need to be properly fueled for the effort. Base mileage is really a necessity for proper training and similar efforts correspond with another necessity, recovery. Neither maximizes calorie burn, though.

Weight loss efforts are all about minimizing fuel while maximizing calorie burn. Unless you have unlimited time, you'll burn the most calories sticking solely to the aerobic heart rate zones and riding as much as possible. This isn't optimum training but it will make the most of your time.

Of course, to even know where you are operating requires either a max heart rate or a threshold test of some sort and it sounds like you have done neither. Max heart rate calculators are all estimates. If they get yours right it comes down to pure luck. If you really want to know, you gotta test for it.

The devil is always in the details. If you are significantly overweight, just get out there and ride. You'll lose weight pretty effortlessly as long as you consistently exercise. If you are already trim and trying to slim down further, that's when you need to focus.

mentok
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:58 am

by mentok

Shrike wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 9:48 am
But I've cracked it now. It was all about my blood sugar spikes. Glycemic index and glycemic load. Foods like brown rice would still give me a big blood sugar spike if I was refuelling with it without something temper it (like egg or tofu for example). Quantity is important, I'm no longer into the high carb thing. Whether that's junk carbs, whole food carbs, plant based or whatever.
I've gone back to my old ways of building 800-1000 calorie post ride dinners around whole foods, mostly vegetables with a few starches (by weight). It's very easy to get a substantial amount of calories and sufficient carbs for refuelling without eating massive piles of rice, bread, fruit, etc. Considering that it's counter-productive as you have noticed, I think it's an important part of a sustainable, long term calorie deficit.

FWIW, i find significant doses of fat, sugar, salt, or grains are all triggers for me once I've run my hormones into the ground so I try to keep them out of my diet. Minimal nuts, no added oils, sugar or salt and I steer clear of bread and oats.
There is a difference between feeling hungry and having willpower to not eat, and, having your hormones take control. That's what I was missing understanding of before. I know the difference in feeling between the two of those now too. The effects of those two feelings can be hugely amplified when you've been dieting for months on end.
Absolutely. Read up on the roles of ghrelin and leptin (though I imagine you may have already done that). I'm definitely familiar with that "full but unsatisfied" hormonal hunger when compared to an ordinary appetite. The impact is slow to build and takes a while to go away.
Really want to get into doing some power work again. Started a little but it's hard to keep the heart rate high for long if glycogen stores are low. Muscle endurance is rubbish too with low stores, even if you pre-load for the workout. Pretty much need a good breakfast, lunch and late afternoon feed and then workout in the evening to put out a half decent hour long effort. Trying to do a hard workout earlier in the day is rubbish I've found when running a deficit 500+.
I know this feeling. There's a special kind of tired that you can't eat your way out of and it's not worth trying. Higher levels of performance seem to come and go for subtle reasons, like a few hours of missed sleep, a bit of extra stress or a missed meal or whatever... I haven't done a strictly power based workout in over 6 months, I've just been collecting kilometres, burning calories and doing lots of sweet spot and Z2. I'm still reasonably fit, just missing that top couple of percent that is hard to find when you're already doing 15hrs a week of "just cruising around"...

Shrike
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

mentok wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 6:31 am
Shrike wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 9:48 am
But I've cracked it now. It was all about my blood sugar spikes. Glycemic index and glycemic load. Foods like brown rice would still give me a big blood sugar spike if I was refuelling with it without something temper it (like egg or tofu for example). Quantity is important, I'm no longer into the high carb thing. Whether that's junk carbs, whole food carbs, plant based or whatever.
I've gone back to my old ways of building 800-1000 calorie post ride dinners around whole foods, mostly vegetables with a few starches (by weight). It's very easy to get a substantial amount of calories and sufficient carbs for refuelling without eating massive piles of rice, bread, fruit, etc. Considering that it's counter-productive as you have noticed, I think it's an important part of a sustainable, long term calorie deficit.

FWIW, i find significant doses of fat, sugar, salt, or grains are all triggers for me once I've run my hormones into the ground so I try to keep them out of my diet. Minimal nuts, no added oils, sugar or salt and I steer clear of bread and oats.
There is a difference between feeling hungry and having willpower to not eat, and, having your hormones take control. That's what I was missing understanding of before. I know the difference in feeling between the two of those now too. The effects of those two feelings can be hugely amplified when you've been dieting for months on end.
Absolutely. Read up on the roles of ghrelin and leptin (though I imagine you may have already done that). I'm definitely familiar with that "full but unsatisfied" hormonal hunger when compared to an ordinary appetite. The impact is slow to build and takes a while to go away.
Really want to get into doing some power work again. Started a little but it's hard to keep the heart rate high for long if glycogen stores are low. Muscle endurance is rubbish too with low stores, even if you pre-load for the workout. Pretty much need a good breakfast, lunch and late afternoon feed and then workout in the evening to put out a half decent hour long effort. Trying to do a hard workout earlier in the day is rubbish I've found when running a deficit 500+.
I know this feeling. There's a special kind of tired that you can't eat your way out of and it's not worth trying. Higher levels of performance seem to come and go for subtle reasons, like a few hours of missed sleep, a bit of extra stress or a missed meal or whatever... I haven't done a strictly power based workout in over 6 months, I've just been collecting kilometres, burning calories and doing lots of sweet spot and Z2. I'm still reasonably fit, just missing that top couple of percent that is hard to find when you're already doing 15hrs a week of "just cruising around"...
Felt like some sort of relief reading your post. Really is uplifting for me to read something and know that they're experiencing the same things, right down to the details :beerchug:

Curious about the salt. I've been using a bit more than I should recently, as I've been moving over to whole foods. Need to cut back on that, must be adding up..

AJS914
Posts: 1950
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 6:52 pm

by AJS914

Back at the beginning of this topic I said I was starting calorie counting again. I'm using the Lose It! app which is integrated with my Apple watch and Strava so if I do a workout I get bonus calories.

After two months I've lost 3 solid pounds. If I continue on that pace I'll be at goal weight in a year.

The app is a good feedback loop for me. It helps me avoid very calorie dense foods which push me over my daily calorie allowance.

TLN
Posts: 57
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2017 4:50 pm

by TLN

joejack951 wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 1:01 am
TLN wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 4:51 pm
Does anyone have input on HR-zones for weight loss, time/distance for training and how often I should train?
I've just got myself wahoo bolt and did one ride yesterday just to see how it all works. Based on the data (and my feelings in the past) - i'm riding way above my "fat burn" zone, and often above aerobic too. I was looking at 145-150 yesterday, and usually I go faster, i"d estimate 155-165. I'm 28yo. Now question is: is that a right way to go? I guess I'm doing somethign wrong, while it feels totally ok for me. Now getting some more data and trying to do it the right way.
What is your focus, training or weight loss? The two aren't entirely mutually exclusive but they do conflict with one another a bit. Namely, focused training usually involves a lot of base mileage and then eventually a mix of base, aerobic, and anaerobic work to develop each of those systems. In order to do much of the latter you need to be properly fueled for the effort. Base mileage is really a necessity for proper training and similar efforts correspond with another necessity, recovery. Neither maximizes calorie burn, though.

Weight loss efforts are all about minimizing fuel while maximizing calorie burn. Unless you have unlimited time, you'll burn the most calories sticking solely to the aerobic heart rate zones and riding as much as possible. This isn't optimum training but it will make the most of your time.

Of course, to even know where you are operating requires either a max heart rate or a threshold test of some sort and it sounds like you have done neither. Max heart rate calculators are all estimates. If they get yours right it comes down to pure luck. If you really want to know, you gotta test for it.

The devil is always in the details. If you are significantly overweight, just get out there and ride. You'll lose weight pretty effortlessly as long as you consistently exercise. If you are already trim and trying to slim down further, that's when you need to focus.
Define significantly. 230lbs at 6'4 is not significantly to me. my goal is to get under 220. Last year I touched 200-205, but it's not fun.
No I haven't done any zone testing, might consider that in future though, but not sure if that's neccessary for me at this point.
Question was: since I'm riding at aerobic zone (above fat burn) - is that still good for fat burning or not? I found out that it's pretty comfortable for me to stay there, and going at slower pace (and hear rate) is no fun to me.
So should I slow myself down or it's not needed?

Shrike
Posts: 1155
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 5:08 pm

by Shrike

TLN wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 9:59 pm
joejack951 wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 1:01 am
TLN wrote:
Tue May 01, 2018 4:51 pm
Does anyone have input on HR-zones for weight loss, time/distance for training and how often I should train?
I've just got myself wahoo bolt and did one ride yesterday just to see how it all works. Based on the data (and my feelings in the past) - i'm riding way above my "fat burn" zone, and often above aerobic too. I was looking at 145-150 yesterday, and usually I go faster, i"d estimate 155-165. I'm 28yo. Now question is: is that a right way to go? I guess I'm doing somethign wrong, while it feels totally ok for me. Now getting some more data and trying to do it the right way.
What is your focus, training or weight loss? The two aren't entirely mutually exclusive but they do conflict with one another a bit. Namely, focused training usually involves a lot of base mileage and then eventually a mix of base, aerobic, and anaerobic work to develop each of those systems. In order to do much of the latter you need to be properly fueled for the effort. Base mileage is really a necessity for proper training and similar efforts correspond with another necessity, recovery. Neither maximizes calorie burn, though.

Weight loss efforts are all about minimizing fuel while maximizing calorie burn. Unless you have unlimited time, you'll burn the most calories sticking solely to the aerobic heart rate zones and riding as much as possible. This isn't optimum training but it will make the most of your time.

Of course, to even know where you are operating requires either a max heart rate or a threshold test of some sort and it sounds like you have done neither. Max heart rate calculators are all estimates. If they get yours right it comes down to pure luck. If you really want to know, you gotta test for it.

The devil is always in the details. If you are significantly overweight, just get out there and ride. You'll lose weight pretty effortlessly as long as you consistently exercise. If you are already trim and trying to slim down further, that's when you need to focus.
Define significantly. 230lbs at 6'4 is not significantly to me. my goal is to get under 220. Last year I touched 200-205, but it's not fun.
No I haven't done any zone testing, might consider that in future though, but not sure if that's neccessary for me at this point.
Question was: since I'm riding at aerobic zone (above fat burn) - is that still good for fat burning or not? I found out that it's pretty comfortable for me to stay there, and going at slower pace (and hear rate) is no fun to me.
So should I slow myself down or it's not needed?
Wouldn't stress if you go over your 'fat burn zone'. Yes you'll rely more on glycogen but you'll still be burning a decent % of fat too. What % of fat you burn will depend on how often you ride at that zone. Your body adapts and will increasingly be able to burn a larger % of fat as fuel. So if that's where you feel comfortable, keep at it, you will definitely benefit.

There is always this trade off between riding slow and riding fast when it comes to weight loss and time spent anyway. The argument being that higher paced efforts raise your metabolic rate more post-ride and you get a nice fat burning effect for a while. Can be significant too. Hundreds of calories if it's from a tough interval session, for example. For some people anyway.

mentok
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:58 am

by mentok

Shrike wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 7:11 pm

Curious about the salt. I've been using a bit more than I should recently, as I've been moving over to whole foods. Need to cut back on that, must be adding up..
Likewise, nice to hear from other people suffering through the same things...

Salt is hard. It makes eating more enjoyable but it also increases my appetite and thirst. As endurance athletes we're turning over significant levels of minerals. The exact amounts and breakdown are difficult to quantify and so maybe some extra salt is necessary, but just plain table salt probably isn't going to provide everything. Maybe eating a variety of greens and other wholefoods gets you what you need in terms of salts and other micronutrients, but maybe it doesn't. I'm effectively plant based so I'm definitely not getting enough iodine unless I'm supplementing or eating iodised salt or eating lots of sea vegetables. Similarly, stuff like zinc is probably not that well absorbed on a plant based diet...

Anyway, I have no hard answers, except to say that more added salt means an upregulated appetite so while I'm trying to diet I'm going to avoid it and I'll just take a few supplements to safeguard against deficiency.

mentok
Posts: 511
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:58 am

by mentok

Shrike wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 10:24 pm
TLN wrote:
Thu May 03, 2018 9:59 pm

So should I slow myself down or it's not needed?
Wouldn't stress if you go over your 'fat burn zone'. Yes you'll rely more on glycogen but you'll still be burning a decent % of fat too. What % of fat you burn will depend on how often you ride at that zone. Your body adapts and will increasingly be able to burn a larger % of fat as fuel. So if that's where you feel comfortable, keep at it, you will definitely benefit.
Ultimately, higher intensity = more calories burnt per hour so unless you're working so hard that you can't do as many total hours or you're not enjoying yourself then I say just work harder. You can read up on RQ (respiration quotient) - by analysing expired air during exercise sports physicians can tell what proportion of substrate (fat/carbs) you're burning. Turns out that once you go past the poorly named "fat burning zone" you're still burning lots of fat, probably more, you're just burning glycogen as well.
There is always this trade off between riding slow and riding fast when it comes to weight loss and time spent anyway. The argument being that higher paced efforts raise your metabolic rate more post-ride and you get a nice fat burning effect for a while. Can be significant too. Hundreds of calories if it's from a tough interval session, for example. For some people anyway.
I've done lots and lots of calorie tracking, weighing everything, riding with powermeters, etc and if there is an "afterburner" effect then I haven't been able to quantify it. I typically see it go the other way - as I diet my BMR goes through the floor and I've decided that's down to hormones and thyroid downregulation caused by chronic calorie deficit. I suspect this is highly personalised though. Trained VS untrained probably matters too. Also, training/sport type (endurance VS strength) probably matters a lot too.

User avatar
WinterRider
Posts: 337
Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2013 2:46 pm

by WinterRider

Shrike wrote:
Wed May 02, 2018 9:48 am
Nearly two months since I posted here but I haven't been slacking off. I've experimented a lot and done a lot more research. I was suffering badly from bingeing and I just couldn't work out why I could go from being mentally rock solid month after month, to not being able to control myself.

I could diet hard for half a year, go to bed hungry, fast as long as I wanted and lose a stack of weight but when I wanted to go into maintenance and build power I'd suffer from binge eating fests.

Tried loads of different diet options. The whole food thing helped, but ultimately failed me.

But I've cracked it now. It was all about my blood sugar spikes. Glycemic index and glycemic load. Foods like brown rice would still give me a big blood sugar spike if I was refuelling with it without something temper it (like egg or tofu for example). Quantity is important, I'm no longer into the high carb thing. Whether that's junk carbs, whole food carbs, plant based or whatever.

Basically eating in the morning, lunch, post workout and in the evening has to be done differently. For me anyway. I've killed off the bingeing and lost around 4 to 5 kg since last posting here.

There is a difference between feeling hungry and having willpower to not eat, and, having your hormones take control. That's what I was missing understanding of before. I know the difference in feeling between the two of those now too. The effects of those two feelings can be hugely amplified when you've been dieting for months on end.

Much happier and feeling and looking healthier now. The past 7 months feel like an insanely long emotional ride. 74.2kg today but would like to spend the next month losing more and then stop. Really want to get into doing some power work again. Started a little but it's hard to keep the heart rate high for long if glycogen stores are low. Muscle endurance is rubbish too with low stores, even if you pre-load for the workout. Pretty much need a good breakfast, lunch and late afternoon feed and then workout in the evening to put out a half decent hour long effort. Trying to do a hard workout earlier in the day is rubbish I've found when running a deficit 500+.

Interestingly now, when I get cravings, it's usually for some whole food that I've been eating regularly. Maybe there is something to the micro-biome/gut thing. Or maybe it's some other kind of mental retraining.
Hellish good post. --bold above mine.

>>>Gluconeogenesis (abbreviated GNG) is a metabolic pathway that results in the generation of glucose from non-carbohydrate carbon substrates such as lactate, glycerol, and glucogenic amino acids.

Above ---itself burns some calories.. tends too.. for me/my genetics. We evolved essentially eating protein, fat and some greens. Getting OFF the carb cycle is hard for some.. am convinced some of this is mental for many people.

QUALITY fat... yes that bad buzz word via the vast herd of human sheep.. is of much importance. No.. not bacon fat filled w nitrates... crap oil via processing... stuff that's squeezed and as been around awhile. Salmon fat, olive oil.. flax oil runs well in my 'carb'... too old to be fuel injected... :lol:

I do suspect.. the hormones and methods to grow out animal protein does harm for some genetics. Epigenetics.. read on that.. hard to find anything of substance.. not much really written/known about this software of human genetics.

"Maybe there is something to the micro-biome/gut thing"

Methinks yes.... definitely. :thumbup:

by Weenie


Post Reply
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post