4 ms·

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/... This guy lost 27 pounds

http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/11/08/twinkie.diet.professor/... This guy lost 27 pounds eating your "weaponized carbohydrates." The thing is you have fallen hook, line, and sinker for people and groups that make money off of selling you books and info about "weaponized carbohydrates." Is sugar overconsumption bad? Of course. That doesn't mean that we have to begin breaking the laws of physics concerning calorie intake to justify it.

philip1209 9y ago
I'd love to see his A1C measured before and after that experiment. Conservation of energy is basic physics. The relevant questions are whether a normal person has satiety on 1800 calories of sugar, and whether the metabolics of sugar are different than other sources of energy [1]. [1] https://peterattiamd.com/do-calories-matter/ https://peterattiamd.com/do-calories-matter/
notheguyouthink 9y ago
I mean, can't you both be right? I doubt the OP was indicating that any amount of sugar automatically and magically makes you gain weight. You can diet off of pure sugar if you want. Calories in, calories out. I doubt anyone denies that. Weaponized carbs is akin to drinking a beer vs hard liquor. Sugar gets pushed into everything, you like it, you eat a ton of it, and eventually you run into massive problems. I think the weaponized carb idea is correct. Carb's aren't inherently bad, but when you take out ability to be sated from carbs, when you take out fiber from the carbs, removing natural barriers to consumption, when you refine it to pack in more carbs per weight.. all these things start becoming weaponized carbs. We're refining a drug. Your reply also ignores sudden climbs in carb related problems. Eg, the India article that the OP linked. Your reply seems to suggest that suddenly, for no reason, India is just wanting to over eat. This over eating trend has been caused by something. Modern junk food with massively refined carbs seems likely to blame.
LMYahooTFY 9y ago
You reply with an accusation of falling prey to a supposed vast group of profiteering researchers and support it with one anecdote? The body is sufficiently complex that some people smoke cigarettes for 40+ years and still manage to die of something that isn't respiratory related first.
jimrandomh 9y ago
The Twinkie Diet guy may have been funded by coca-cola. http://observer.com/2015/10/here-are-the-people-coca-cola-has-paid-to-manufacture-health-claims/ http://observer.com/2015/10/here-are-the-people-coca-cola-ha...

philip1209 9y ago

I'd love to see his A1C measured before and after that experiment. Conservation of energy is basic physics. The relevant questions are whether a normal person has satiety on 1800 calories of sugar, and whether the metabolics of sugar are different than other sources of energy [1]. [1] https://peterattiamd.com/do-calories-matter/ https://peterattiamd.com/do-calories-matter/

notheguyouthink 9y ago

I mean, can't you both be right? I doubt the OP was indicating that any amount of sugar automatically and magically makes you gain weight. You can diet off of pure sugar if you want. Calories in, calories out. I doubt anyone denies that. Weaponized carbs is akin to drinking a beer vs hard liquor. Sugar gets pushed into everything, you like it, you eat a ton of it, and eventually you run into massive problems. I think the weaponized carb idea is correct. Carb's aren't inherently bad, but when you take out ability to be sated from carbs, when you take out fiber from the carbs, removing natural barriers to consumption, when you refine it to pack in more carbs per weight.. all these things start becoming weaponized carbs. We're refining a drug. Your reply also ignores sudden climbs in carb related problems. Eg, the India article that the OP linked. Your reply seems to suggest that suddenly, for no reason, India is just wanting to over eat. This over eating trend has been caused by something. Modern junk food with massively refined carbs seems likely to blame.

LMYahooTFY 9y ago

You reply with an accusation of falling prey to a supposed vast group of profiteering researchers and support it with one anecdote? The body is sufficiently complex that some people smoke cigarettes for 40+ years and still manage to die of something that isn't respiratory related first.

jimrandomh 9y ago

The Twinkie Diet guy may have been funded by coca-cola. http://observer.com/2015/10/here-are-the-people-coca-cola-has-paid-to-manufacture-health-claims/ http://observer.com/2015/10/here-are-the-people-coca-cola-ha...