Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Diet advice


lightsout

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, Jeremy Igo said:

Carbs and sugar don't  cause diabetes. Fat does. High fat diets are the cause of type 2 diabetes. Here is how it works...

 

 

Within two weeks of a whole food plant based diet most people are actually cured of type 2 diabetes. They can eat all the delicious fruit they want with 0 negative side effects.

Low carb diets don't cure type 2 diabetes they just take away the symptoms by restricting sugar. 

Diabetes isn't carbs? Dumbest ever, lol. That's idiocy taken to new heights. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jackofalltrades said:

Diabetes isn't carbs? Dumbest ever, lol. That's idiocy taken to new heights. 

Carbs trigger the symptoms. It isn't the underlying cause of the problem. It's not difficult to understand.

Watch the video. It explains it well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jeremy Igo said:

Carbs trigger the symptoms. It isn't the underlying cause of the problem. It's not difficult to understand.

It's hard to understand how someone like you would be so easily duped into believing bullshit. But hey, you do you. I'm going to keep on doing what works. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jackofalltrades said:

It's hard to understand how someone like you would be so easily duped into believing bullshit. But hey, you do you. I'm going to keep on doing what works. 

Cool. I'm done trying. Let me know when you come around. Hopefully it won't be too late. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2017 at 8:07 AM, Jackofalltrades said:

Stay away from fruits as they're high in sugar. I love fruit but I avoid it, only occasionally indulging in strawberries. Eat eggs and bacon, cooked in real butter.

I have to wonder if this isn't a troll.

 

Quote

I'm fully fat adapted now 

No earthly idea what this means.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Cat said:

Low calorie, eating fruit, veggies, oats, nuts and lean meats. Skip sugar, junk food and go light on the dairy.

@lightsout listen to this advice. Avoid Jeremy and JOATS ridiculous pissing match. 

 

I've also cut out red meat and overall starchy foods (bread, potatoes) almost entirely. Lift heavy, try to take in about 2 gallons of water a day. Start at 1 and work your way up. HIIT cardio is ideal after your workouts if you can. Try to workout 4-5 days a week. I quit dipping Feb 2016 and have lost about 100lbs. Best of luck. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paa Langfart said:

I have to wonder if this isn't a troll.

 

No earthly idea what this means.

Not trolling at all, this is my day to day lifestyle and I've had nothing but great results. 

Fat adapted means I don't burn glucose because I don't supply my body with carbs or enough protein. I burn stored fat which produces ketones, thus the name Ketogenic diet. Your brain and your body run more efficiently on ketones. 

This isn't some experimental crap I found or invented, there is TONS of science and data to support it, otherwise I wouldn't have done it. It goes against the conventional "wisdom" that has seen or nation become fatter and sicker while adhering to the food pyramid fallacy. Americans statistically eat less and exercise more yet obesity, insulin resistance, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, etc are still on the rise. If you really want to learn more I'm happy to put you in contact with hundreds, if not thousands, or people who have done this for a long time and have changed their lives for the better, just as I have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Cat said:

Low calorie, eating fruit, veggies, oats, nuts and lean meats. Skip sugar, junk food and go light on the dairy.

First sentence has been proven not to work. The second sentence was accurate though. Low calorie diets fail, it's been proven many times over. Low calorie diets lower your basal metabolic rate, even with exercise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Jackofalltrades said:

Low calorie diets fail, it's been proven many times over.

That is because folks refuse to stick to them, not because they don't work.  Eat fewer calories than you burn and you will lose weight.  Anyone who says different is full of crap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all you're making is way too complicated. For the love of God people fasting is dumb and unhealthy. It's a cheap way, or vanity as Zod says, way to loose weight but has no other benefits other than looks.

 

Good lord. Don't worry about how you look, learn to NOURISH your body properly with FOOD. Pizza, burgers, ice cream is not food...these are STIMULI. They feed appetite, not your body.

 

You crave it because our hunter gather heritage makes our bodies crave things like meat, carbs and sugar because back in the day these things were hard to find...and good to eat once found. Our bodies have not caught up to the AVAILABILITY of things we have today, and how easy it is to obtain then. We no longer hunt or farm or search for them that take days and a ton of energy.

 

You people are so focused on how you look you starve yourselves because you have no self control over eating stimuli yet you're only hurting your body and not creating a long term solution.

Eat healthy portions of protein, carbs and healthy fat throughout the day. Make sure you're getting your body's minimum of these which is based of your activity. Drink water and excersise. Stay away from stimuli. That's all! How hard is that? Your body will look good AND you'll feel good.

 

The lack of self control of you guys, to the point you have to stop eating altogether, is terribly frightening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Paa Langfart said:

That is because folks refuse to stick to them, not because they don't work.  Eat fewer calories than you burn and you will lose weight.  Anyone who says different is full of crap.

Unless you look at the many studies that show otherwise. Not only that, but what good is a diet you can't stick with? Wonder why there hasn't been a Biggest Loser reunion show...

Calorie restriction also slows down your metabolism. Again, it's been proven. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • That's my biggest concern with making him the 2C.  You split up the Aho Jarvis bromance that accounted for a lot of points.  If Jarvis excels as a C, it could help the team even more though.
    • The Saints being that high is the one that killed me. Chris Olave might not know his name at this point, Shaheed is coming off injury as well, so 31 year old Brandin Cooks might be your best WR...coming off a 260 yard season over 10 games. Kamara is Kamara, but didn't have 1,000 yards last year and is about to turn 30.  Toss in the fact that Taysom Hill may be the best QB on the team and I truly don't understand Barnwell's thoughts beside seeing the names "Olave" and "Kamara" and going yep, that sounds better than "Chuba" and "Thielen". 
    • Now now now, I wouldn't say there is no logic, but there's just not a lot of in-depth thought put into Barnwell's  "analysis." Now to be fair to him (and other national writers), pre-season team rankings are basically clickbait. And...Barnwell, himself, said that "there's a lot of projection here." He basically admits that he doesn't know how the hell things are going to turn out with our receiver group. He also said that "I find myself" more intrigued by Coker than Legette; that does not mean that he said that fans should be, or that Coker will even be better than Legette (regardless of ESPN's per-route-run stat). So, yeah, Barnwell said some things, but even he has to basically admit that he doesn't know how bad or good that our playmakers will be in 2025.  Overall, what Barnwell is basically thinking is that the Panthers have gotten worse at the offensive skill positions, and baked into that is that others have gotten better. That's the argument in July (meaning, please don't give this any more weight than it's due). I would personally be surprised (not shocked) if we end up worse than the Titans, Pats and Giants at least. Once you throw in the Bills, Giants, Jets, Steelers, and even the Chargers, I personally think there are several teams' skill groups that may end up ranked lower than ours by the end of 2025.  @kungfoodudeis one of my dudes, but like others he is over the tipping point. He's had enough. Seeing is believing. I will say this though: Barnwell's piece is less about logic than just good ol' opinion. And to be honest, he might as well be a Huddler throwing out sh¡t in the summer based upon nothing but good feels or bad feels.  Our offense as a whole (just like any other team's) is going to depend upon the play of the O-line and especially the QB. How you can even rank the skill positions without expressly baking those two things in the cake is beyond me. I would dare say that that's not even logical. 
×
×
  • Create New...