lol paleo
I've been losing weight lately without any fad diet. I just cut my caloric intake by 20% and boosted my caloric output by 20-30% with regular exercise.
I've been losing weight lately without any fad diet. I just cut my caloric intake by 20% and boosted my caloric output by 20-30% with regular exercise.
Just because the idea came from the prehistoric doesn't mean it can't be a fad.
So what? Vegetation diet 100 million years ago I'll guess that obesity is nill comparatively to today.
I'll also guess that there was comparatively virtually no obesity in the Paleolithic period.
Nowadays we live in a period where we're told pasta is healthy, or orange juice is healthy (a lot of brands have more sugar in the juice than coca cola). We all eat lots of bred, refined carbs. Sugar has never been so readily available. Parents buy their children sweets all the time.
And guess what? We're turning into a developed world of obese people and higher levels of heart disease.
So yes, a modern vegetarian diet probably is healthier and safer than sandwiches, crisps and orange juice.
Paleo diets are not fads. Our bodies are tuned to metabolise those sorts of foods. People relentlessly defend carbohydrates when they are the most likely candidate for the epic levels of obesity and other related diseases.
Basically, the response to the change of the environment of a species depends on three factors:
1. Heritability 2. Intensity of the selection 3. Number of generations that selection acts.
What this means is that 10,000 can be more than sufficient to fully evolve the ability to eat and digest dairy and grains.
I strongly suspect that my excellent reaction to low carb diets is because I haven't evolved the ability to consume them as well as other humans. Clues include oral allergy to birch pollen and my 'output' when I eat dairy and grains is less than optimal.
I don't believe low carb works for everyone. It doesn't work for my wife. But it is a useful tool, that I'm very glad I found.
Additionally, beer is considered by many to be the first significantly consumed product of grain. I don't think you could say modern day beer is completely free of any health side-effects. It gets the blame for quite a number of ailments.
Which is older than all of the vegetables that exist today, and older than cattle or chicken. "This food has evolved over time" is not support for a claim that the food is unhealthy or dangerous.
>It gets the blame for quite a number of ailments.
No, it doesn't? Alcohol does, but that's neither unique to beer nor does it have anything to do with grain.
"...in the vast quantities we eat them today." THIS is what matters.
Net calories are king, regardless of diet macro composition.
Calorie counting will probably have you losing weight, but reduction of carbs to protein for example will assist with weight loss better. Also protein is more useful to your body than carbohydrates.
God, I hate hearing this.
Let me guess, you say "weight" as in "gain weight" and "lose weight"?
The problems is that nearly everyone...EVERYONE actually means "lose fat, maintain muscle" or "gain muscle, lose/maintain fat".
No one WANTS to gain fat. And when losing weight, no one wants to lose muscle. So talking about "weight" is stupid. And when you only talk about net calories, the only thing you can talk about is weight.
Macros matter when talking about "losing fat, maintaining muscle", "gaining lean muscle" or "recomposition". And the simple fact is that the ratio of macros greatly effects what you are going to do, regardless of total calories.
If you don't get that, you need to spend more time researching.
And also, for those that are extremely obese?
And what if your goal was to actually lose 50 pounds of fat, but losing muscle+fat you can't achieve your goal for 1+ year, but just targeting fat reduces that to 6-8 months. That gain in time is huge.
And, lastly, chances are that if you say "I don't care about losing muscle as well", you will if you actually achieve your goal of being a certain weight b/c you won't look like you thought (or perform as well in x activity as you would have thought). Muscle is a magical thing.
The fact that it is fundamentally inaccurate with no basis in reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic_diet#Opposing_views
Also a calorie is not a calorie. One small example, different calories have different thermic effects. I've read estimations that from protein you lose 30% of the calories from the thermic effect, and with carbs you'll lose 15%. Therefore reducing carbs and upping protein will assist with weight loss further. Calories in and out will probably have you losing weight, but it's an over-simplistic view.