Insane Clarity – Cholesterol, Ketogenic, and Low Carb Myth Busting

I was just going to leave it at that. And this one too, even though I had a follow-up post planned initially. Then I got this comment from “FormerBlogger.”

A few of us quit blogging (fairly prominent sites) because we were tired of being associated in any circles with Jimmy Moore. You just could never win. If you didn’t affiliate with him, people thought you were a hater; if you did, you just didn’t sleep well at night knowing you were acknowledging a doughy dufus who made money marketing himself. At the end of the day, some of us chose to sleep at night, and put our sites to rest (we had a combined running total of well over two decades).

I asked recently why jimmy moore was so fat. I was met by the excuses of accolytes, from “his book writing made him gain weight” (funny, I wrote two and never gained weight), and “I choose to support Jimmy” (which isn’t even a response). People refuse to hold him to the standards we should hold marketers and salesmen to. Now that he’s jumped into paleo, it’s even more incomprehensible this new crowd is looking the other way. Why isn’t anyone calling this chubby guy out? Why are people funding a lie? Are we saying there are no better alternatives out there? And if not, why not? Where’s the common sense leadership?

And from “AnotherFormerBlogger.”

There are many of us! jimmy moore is obese again, nothing new, I just won’t participate and haven’t in a few years. Not my monkeys, not my circus.

Along the way, there have been a number of mildly dissenting voices; that after years of supporting jimmy moore and standing up for him many, many times, I’d finally had it with him. And, I understand their dissent. The old “baby with the bathwater” thing.

Well, yea, but this has become Rosemary’s Baby, now. It’s high time for infanticide.

…I recall first getting wind of Jimmy in about early 2008, I think. It was also a time where he’d maintained his LC-diet weight loss for a decent while but was beginning to experience problems. As a guy on the decline from 245+ to an eventual 175 myself (then at perhaps 220), I overlooked it, largely because of the podcast. I never read his blog regularly—I have my own. But the podcast was quite something in those days. So much cool info that really helped me gain a wide perspective.

And, it was quite something to initially be a guest, then another appearance or two, and finally, guest hosting it about a year ago. Now, I see the podcast as an endless array of The Usual Suspects to prop up his sycodouche, peppered with the occasional dissenting voice to manipulatively lend a sense of integrity to people who are only looking for authority figures anyway. I choose to not feed into any sense of Guru seeking, going forward. Rather, I wish to declare open season on all Gurus, for whateverthehell reason you like.

It’s difficult to regret any of it, however. I’m more of a life goes on kinda guy, and don’t ever agonize over couldashouldawoulda. Humans are very bad at integrating the context of the time with actions at that time. Give yourself a pass, and just don’t do that shit anymore once you come to your proper senses.

…Someone else pointed me to Jimmy’s “I Will No Longer…” post, where he’s going to let himself off the hook in terms of adhering to pretty much every standard that’s logically, critically integrated into everything his Low-Carb Business is about.

I was talking to a trusted friend this week about what’s been happening in my life over the past year that has had a direct impact on my weight. I’ve been very open and honest about this and working diligently behind-the-scenes to create strategies that will help control the stress that is raising my cortisol and blood sugar levels making it next to impossible to lose weight right now despite faithfully eating low-carb, high-fat. With so many people writing to me sharing their own frustrations about the lack of weight loss despite everything being right in their diets, I wanted to offer up some encouragement to them and myself that all hope is not lost. Keep in mind there are so many non-diet reasons why your weight is stuck or going up, including stress-induced cortisol spikes (what I believe I’m dealing with), lack of sleep, hormonal imbalances, getting older, and more. I’m always amused by those who say the ketogenic diet must not work because people like me don’t have the “perfect” body and weight. Despite our cultural obsession with this, there are many other markers of health besides weight–triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, minimal small, dense LDL particles, A1c, fasting insulin, hsCRP (key inflammation marker), CT heart scan, and many other tests. The fact that these markers are still all excellent for me is what keeps me motivated while still working through the weight challenges.

Shorter Jimmy: I’m so stressed about not losing, but gaining weight instead, that I can’t lose weight, only gain weight.

Do you even need to unpack that? It is too ridiculous; it is to laf. It is designed for his cadre of fucktard sycophants—who are now beyond excuse for their own selves. Read the bolded sections again. Essentially: it’s got to be something else, and not that one thing we can’t speak of, lest it tarnish the LC/Ketogenic magic appeal of gluttony.

Jimmy gained about 60 pounds AGAIN!, in a year or two—an incredible rate of gain in a SAD world where it typically creeps up on people 10 pounds per year—and it could be anything or everything except the one thing that actually caused it: he ate too fucking much, too fucking often.

The CICO guys are once again vindicated. You can’t fool mother nature; you can’t fool physics or thermodynamics. Now, WHY he ate too much too often IS a valid question, and it’s my particular area of interest. In that, all of his excuses might play a role, and others, such as the gut microbiome. But, the role is contributory to making the conscious or unconscious decision to eat too much, too often: the absolute cause of his gobsmacking weight gain over a relatively sort period of time is simply eating too much over that period of time than he expended in energy over that same period of time—and even the Eadesian metabolic advantage of 300 kcal/d doesn’t matter.

People get stupidly confused about this, because they weigh themselves every day and lose the forrest through the trees. The bod doesn’t work like that. Every long-term weight gain is comprised of a wave function with days of weight gain and weight loss, in an overall upward trend. Every long-term weight loss is comprised of a wave function with days of weight gain and weigh loss, in an overall downward trend. The difference is that in the former, it’s higher highs and higher lows. In the latter, lower highs and lower lows.

So, you can count all the fallacious ways Jimmy got fat yet again, if you like, but there’s really only one reason, you silly cunts. Nonetheless, he’s going to let himself off the hook—that people are rightfully holding him to account for—because it’s inexplicable and, “despite everything being right in [his] diet.” That’s called an A priori falsehood. You don’t even need to get up off the couch to know and understand that virtually nothing is right with his diet.

…This is nothing new, though, and guys like Dr. Michael Eades paved the ad hoc way. They taught acolytes well in Atkinianity. Here’s Eades’ modus operandi:

  1. You haven’t read the studies.
  2. Oh, you have? Well, you might want to look at the full text, not just the abstract.
  3. Oh, you did that too? Well, you need to understand how to interpret them.
  4. …Oh, BTW, it’s either observational, it’s old, or the researchers don’t understand basic biochemistry, or they’re not serious anthropologists, or whatever.
  5. Oh, still not satisfied? Well, OK, then it’s basic biochemistry. I’ll post about it in a year or more.
  6. What? A genetic mutation that makes some people different? Dismissible. “Stef,” and Basic Biochemistry.
  7. Oh, BTW, there are experts in the field. An expert is someone I think I agree with.

I don’t hate Jimmy, though I can’t bring myself to well wishes, anymore. I’m a bit disgusted by Michael Eades. I think he’s lying an manipulating—which is why I’m glad he went into the appliance business. I’m a sucker for redemption and even though you can do a decent sous vide on the cheap, his creation is cool and I paid for it, so he can’t take it away.

Look here. It’s but one tiny example of what The Duck Dodgers have been dealing with in terms of Eades’ Intransigence for well over a year—though we started off in a very honest attempt to get him to come along with new discovery. Valhalla proved too enticing.

This is from Peter’s blog, last November. The snark goes substantially up the thread, but here’s where it gets funny. Eades:

No dishonesty on my part at all. You once again are getting confused by Draper’s speculation versus what was actually measured.

It is true that Draper did write the above line in the paper in question. But here is where critical reading of the literature comes in. In Table II on page 314 (for those of you who want to follow along from home), in the far right column, it shows the glycogen content of the native foods (meat) to range anywhere from 0.1-0.9 grams. I averaged it to 0.5 grams. Remember, these are not speculative – they are measured. And measured in the native foods. Which is what, I have assumed, we’ve been talking about all along – the native Inuit diet of meat. [condescension emphasized]

Uh, oh.

LOL, so you are having trouble reading. You read it wrong!

Table II is not measured in grams. Table II is a measurement of percent of nutrients obtained from native foods.

In other words, each column is just the percentage of that nutrient that was obtained from native foods.

Try reading a little more closely next time, Dr. Eades!

Did that humble him in any way? Bitch, please: He’s Doctor Eades! And here’s a more recent Dr. Eades (his blog doesn’t have comment hyperlinks, so hit that link and do a Find on a relevant string). He still must assume—and show his congregation of blind-believing, cock-sucking, groupie-whore fucktards—that any interlocutor isn’t aware of studies; only read the abstract if he is aware; or doesn’t know how to “interpret” them if both prerequisites have been satisfied (rather like a Supreme Court interpretation of the plain English U.S. Constitution). In other words, the very only way that you and Mike Eades could ever see eye to eye on any study ever done anywhere, by anyone, at any time, is if you agree with him on its findings.

Your comments make it patently obvious that you have little understanding of the stable isotope literature. […] you need the 15N studies for that. All of which you carefully ignore.

You’re interested only in promoting a specific viewpoint that bears little resemblance to scientific reality. And, like Team DD, you’re fond of cutting and pasting large swaths of text without really knowing what they mean or how to interpret them. And, like Team DD, you’ve drifted into repetitive troll territory.

So (BTW, his interlocutor was just another in “Team DD”):

Right back at you. You are apparently unaware that the 15N values are misleading for determining meat consumption:

“Nitrogen isotope values in particular can be misleading. First, because of the complex nonlinear relationship between food source and consumer, it is not possible to accurately estimate the proportion of meat versus plants in the diet, since large changes in the percentage of meat are indicated only by small increases in 15N values (Ambrose et al., 2003; Hedges and Reynard, 2007). Second, unlike herbivores that acquire all of their protein from plant leaves, foraging humans usually eat plants for their carbohydrate content, and therefore focus on the starch- and sugar-rich storage organs of plants, such as USOs and seeds (Lee, 1979; Marlowe, 2010). These storage organs may have higher nitrogen values (Hedges and Reynard, 2007), and in any case provide a smaller amount of protein to the body and are therefore relatively swamped by the meat protein signal.” – http://pmid.us/24612646

Therefore, you won’t be able to conclude much about meat consumption from 15N values.

But there’s no need to be rude and terse with me. Do you always talk like that to anyone who disagrees with you?? It seems we are talking about different hominid species. I was referring to the dramatic shift from C3 foods to C4 grasses and sedges around ~3.5 million years ago, as explained by the National Academy of Sciences. Nowhere in any of the studies does anyone conclude that high-meat consumption was the most likely source of that shift for early hominids. You are inventing such conclusions if you think that’s what the studies said.

He published the comment, but it’s crickets after that. I’m sure all his Usual Eades Groupie Fucktards took note of that. Not.

I’m not sure if you knew this, but rumor has it that Mike Eades has a Low-Carb, Fire-Breathing, Ketogenic Dragon in His Garage.

“A fire-breathing dragon lives in my garage.” […]

“Show me,” you say. I lead you to my garage. You look inside and see a ladder, empty paint cans, an old tricycle–but no dragon.

“Where’s the dragon?” you ask.

“Oh, she’s right here,” I reply, waving vaguely. “I neglected to mention that she’s an invisible dragon.”

You propose spreading flour on the floor of the garage to capture the dragon’s footprints.

“Good idea,” I say, “but this dragon floats in the air.”

Then you’ll use an infrared sensor to detect the invisible fire.

“Good idea, but the invisible fire is also heatless.”

You’ll spray-paint the dragon and make her visible.

“Good idea, but she’s an incorporeal dragon and the paint won’t stick.” And so on. I counter every physical test you propose with a special explanation of why it won’t work.

Now, what’s the difference between an invisible, incorporeal, floating dragon who spits heatless fire and no dragon at all? If there’s no way to disprove my contention, no conceivable experiment that would count against it, what does it mean to say that my dragon exists? Your inability to invalidate my hypothesis is not at all the same thing as proving it true. Claims that cannot be tested, assertions immune to disproof are veridically worthless, whatever value they may have in inspiring us or in exciting our sense of wonder. What I’m asking you to do comes down to believing, in the absence of evidence, on my say-so.

In this context, the ad hoc, goal-post-moving is a concerted effort by Moore, Eades, et al, to prop up a sense of wonder in the ability to fool mother nature by being a quotidian glutton—only just keep the carbs low. It does work for some, perhaps many people. It worked marvelously for me at 25-30. Doesn’t at 54. But, perhaps the real reason it worked for me at 25-30 is that it satiated me, and I focussed on various active things that took time away from sitting around, wondering what was in the cupboard or fridge.

Again, WHY you eat too much—too often for your level of activity—is the issue you ought best be dealing with. Or, think of it this way: it’s not eat less, move more. Perhaps, it’s move more first…eat less ’cause you’re engaged. Think about the difference.

Well, all is apparently right with the world. Jimmy wrote Cholesterol Clarity to explain away very high cholesterol numbers that normal people don’t have and might want to be concerned about—this is way apart from the Cholesterol Con. Then, he wrote Keto Clarity to explain away his and others’ dietary failure on Atkins. And since it’s now Atkinianity, it can’t be wrong. Explanations, qualifications, and interpretations are always needed to keep the catechism sound for all the children.

Mike: call your office. Childrens needs interpretations.


Memberships are $10 monthly, $20 quarterly, or $65 annually. The cost of two premium coffees per month. Every membership helps finance the travel to write, photo, and film from interesting places and share the experiences with you.

79 Comments

  1. EF on March 31, 2015 at 12:58

    Here’s the salient portion of a comment that Kurt Harris wrote on this blog in a Food Reward/Low Carb Synthesis post over three years ago.

    “And to the degree that people stay hyper caloric (stay fat and in energy excess) and reassure themselves that they have “great labs” they are simply whistling past the graveyard.”

  2. rob on March 31, 2015 at 13:39

    If I was going to eat myself to death I would go with

    – lasagna
    – pizza
    – cheeseburgers
    – McDonald’s breakfast sandwiches

    Oh wait, I already almost did that …

    Eating yourself to death on a highly restricted diet is beyond stupid. All that adherence and you still meet the same fate. Might as well live a little and go nuts at The Cheesecake Factory.

    • Hegemon on March 31, 2015 at 21:15

      you sir are my hero. Fantastic way to look at it.

    • John on April 1, 2015 at 08:18

      Correct.

      I think these LC people think that avoiding the toxic carb foods is more important than not being a fatass. Sort of what Dr. Harris was getting at in the quote above your comment.

      “Well at least I’m getting so much nutrition from my beef floating in grass-fed butter ‘soup’ and avoiding the evils of the starch and gluten.”

  3. Dave on March 31, 2015 at 14:44

    I wonder with Jimmy whether he’s seriously fucking deluded or it’s purely about keeping the money coming in?

    As for Eades, I looked in a few times at that post and there’s just no way that anyone can’t see through his bullshit and arrogance. I’d imagine he’s insufferable in-person.

    • Richard Nikoley on March 31, 2015 at 15:05

      “I’d imagine he’s insufferable in-person.”

      Well, he’s not. Total gentleman. We’ve met a few times in person, and he and Mary came over to that famous western guy’s hotel on the beach in Santa Barbara once to sit for coffee with Bea and I.

      Yin Yang. In comments way back, someone took him to task over associating with me. He told them that I’m nice in person.

      FWIW.

    • AnotherFormerBlogger on March 31, 2015 at 16:45

      Jimmy is a true believer in his own revisionist history and how he got where he is – in his mind he eats normally and does everything right, but gains weight anyway.

      He defies physics and has for a decade!

      Except that he doesn’t, every time he tracks and watches everything, he loses weight at a remarkable pace. Then he stops and leaves it to ad libitum eating, which has never worked for him because he eats too much!

      Lately he’s taken to saying he eats 2,000-2,300 calories a day and is packing on massive amounts of weight. Defying physics again! He absolutely is loath to consider CICO and instead will eat blocks of Kerrygold as if it were Dexatrim.

    • gabkad on March 31, 2015 at 17:47

      Richard, I think you’ve got it right: don’t be a glutton. Don’t use paleo high meat, high fat as an excuse to stuff the face. Balance is all.

      I don’t read the Jimmy Moore productions so don’t know, don’t care. If he’s packing on the pounds, clearly he doesn’t know his maths.

    • GTR on April 1, 2015 at 02:14

      “every time he tracks and watches everything, he loses weight at a remarkable pace” – tracking calories looks like more important in case you eat fat. Fat gives a very low satiety signal per amount eaten (as compared to the same in calories amount of protein, carbs, watery vegetables etc.), so it is difficult to assure proper portion sizes naturally via your organism internal mechanisms.

    • Wilbur on April 1, 2015 at 07:32

      @GTR

      I fixed my gut over a year ago using a high fiber diet. I sometimes eat lots of fat, sometimes just vegetables with no added fats. I have not tracked calories in all that time, and my weight has been in at my ideal weight +/- 3 lbs over the entire time. I exercise most of the time, but sometimes cannot for a couple of weeks. I travel. Yet my weight fluctuates little.

      I would argue that a properly functioning digestive system never requires calorie counting. Even when my gut was broken, calorie counting was pointless, especially when calorie counting is riddled with assumptions and problems that produce potentially large errors (the epilogue of the book Catching Fire is a fantastic description of this).

    • John on April 1, 2015 at 08:27

      I’ve met a couple of people that were some of the most obese people I’d ever known, and both had previously had gastric bypass surgery.

      Both times, the story was the same – “well I lost 100 lbs, and then it came back, and now I’m heavier than before.”

      I’m not usually one to say “why don’t you just fucking eat less” because I’m aware of the difficulty these derranged individuals have with weight loss, ease with which overconsumption of bad diet information can lead to unsustainable or no results and giving up. But holy shit, figure something out.

    • McSack on April 1, 2015 at 10:03

      Of the 3 people I know of that had gastric bypass or lap-band, one of them had a severe reaction a few years later and had to have emergency surgery to remove the band. The other 2 died from blood clots.

      It’s amazing to what level of butchery people will subject themselves to.

    • GTR on April 1, 2015 at 12:48

      @Wilbur – bonus movie: oldest street food in India:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8IiX8a773Ds

    • Wilbur on April 1, 2015 at 16:18

      Interesting video. I skipped through some parts, but it struck me that the people selling it – and presumably not eating it – were rather large, while the customers were fitter. I’d love to try some.

  4. yien on March 31, 2015 at 19:11

    “perhaps the real reason it worked for me at 25-30 is that it satiated me, and I focussed on various active things that took time away from sitting around, wondering what was in the cupboard or fridge”

    Thanks for that quote.

    Made me juggle a few thoughts -> satiety index / fullness factor foods…versus…more-ish / can’t fucking stop consuming foods (that are often designed to be like that)… then…what’s in your cupboard right now…versus…what your guts and mind insist should be in your cupboard right now.

  5. Hegemon on March 31, 2015 at 21:13

    I shudder at the memory of my cholesterol numbers a few years back. Never really listened to Moore but I was researching the NMR lipoprofile and he had a post on how to read it. I was VLC at the time thanks to Sisson and Wolf (he was anti-carb at the time). I was eating stupid amounts of protein and fat, and Jimmy’s post justified my cholesterol in the 300s and claimed it healthy. How fucking stupid. I was ignorant enough to buy into it at the time; I didn’t know better. But I also kept growing and changing my eating based on new research and looking in the mirror.

    For me the turning point was to stop listening to anyone about cortisol, thyroid, A1c, etc, and simplify things. I just listened to my body on when I wanted meat, or vegetables, and how much. Damned if it didn’t seem to know without me counting carbs or logging every calorie online. Whether you call it intelligent design, chance or whatever, it’s obvious that most other creatures on the earth are built to eat without counting calories or carbs. Bottom line – it’s built in to the software.

    • Dr. Curmudgeon Gee on March 31, 2015 at 23:13

      re. “listen to one’s body”, i’m still trying to figure out when to listen, it’

      how do you know a craving is a true physiological need?

      occasionally i crave sugar, caffeine, fat, red meat, starch, salt. but i never ever crave vegetables! (liver also belongs to the same yucky group, oh, ditto, cold exposure)
      these are things my body simply does not want

      so if i listen all the time, i’d be eating too much sugary junk+ caffein.

    • Wilbur on April 1, 2015 at 07:38

      @Curmudgen

      I used to have a broken gut and craved all the bad things. When I fixed my gut, I did indeed start craving vegetables and liver! In fact, I had cravings so intense for liverwurst that I spent days driving to stores in search of one that did not have preservatives. I hadn’t eaten liverwurst in over 30 years, and here I was desperate! I never crave sweets, but I do enjoy eating them and will sometimes save room. I just eat what my body tells me to eat.

    • John on April 1, 2015 at 08:36

      I’m starting to see a lot of “magic” type of advice RE: gut fixing that reminds me of the magic promised by low-carb.

      I have trouble believing that “fixing the gut” will result in cravings for junk to disappear, and even create desires for what the body “should” be eating.

      And I think there may be a chicken and egg sort of situation. Did fixing the gut reduce cravings for junk, or did not eating junk and adapting to healthier foods?

      I’ll have no hunger, and be planning dinner, and feel no strong desire for what I’m planning, and smell a pizza and want that strongly, yet still not want dinner my dinner of meat and veggies.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 10:55

      “And I think there may be a chicken and egg sort of situation. Did fixing the gut reduce cravings for junk, or did not eating junk and adapting to healthier foods?”

      Very reasonable point we all should be mindful of. I’ve done a lot of experimentation with this, including a new radical probiotic. But I’m not yet ready to talk about it.

      For one, you are dealing with attempting to pass on something that might be objective, but it’s completely subjective. I have to be honest about that.

      On the other hand, with so much that the biome does, it’s hard to imagine that it doesn’t influence certain things. But with so many possibilities, for me, it’s completely in the territory of “this seems to have done this for me, but YMMV.”

      Thanks. Everybody always be sensitive to the Bullshit Meter. We all need someone to wipe off the dust, now and then.

    • Wilbur on April 1, 2015 at 11:46

      @John

      Regarding pizza, that might be part of the issue. Pizza is not inherently unhealthful. In fact, I make my healthful by using quality ingredients and loading it with raw’ish garlic, raw onion, and mushrooms. I can eat a whole pizza, but I automatically eat less before and after.

      And funny you should use this example. The next day my wife was heating the leftovers. It smelled great and there was plenty. I was very happy with my sardines and sauerkraut with no desire to switch.

      I see your point regarding your comparison to low carb. High fermentable fiber diet changed me and it is true that I have zero compulsion to eat things I do not want to eat. I used to be a slave to them before, so I know what it’s like.

    • Wilbur on April 1, 2015 at 12:53

      I’ve been thinking about this. Having cravings seems to put one in the strange position of wanting two things. I really want healthy food but want bad food. I want to stop eating but I want to keep eating. Well who is it wanting it to be good and who is it that doesn’t?

      For me, this is now resolved. I tend to want high fermentable stuff. I also want the occasional dessert. But there’s no strange thing of wanting two different things. If I don’t want to eat, I don’t. Everything is automatic. Cheat days make no sense for me because I can’t cheat. It is freedom, and my diet did it.

    • Dr. Curmudgeon Gee on April 1, 2015 at 21:49

      @Wilbur,

      you’re probably right that my gut could use some help of “good bugs”. well, maybe most people in the civilized world can use some more good friendly bugs.

      liverwurst is OK. pate is OK. i occasionally enjoy these. (it has to be mixed with other stuff to make it palatable to me, there’re other parts of offal that i like better than liver)

      i eat (non-starchy) veg. as medicine/supplements. XD. cause most of them just taste like non-food to me.

      (i do love most roots & tuber, sea veg. is also good)

      regards

  6. GTR on April 1, 2015 at 02:08

    “control the stress that is raising my cortisol and blood sugar levels making it next to impossible to lose weight”

    Cortisol is a fat-mobilizing hormone, that actually let’s fa cells release fat into the circulation for burning. So it supports weight loss, rather than hampering it.

    Notice that if he has in his blood fat released via cortisol action PLUS fat from dietary sources, while keeping insulin artificially low, because of thinking it is evil (thus fat won’t be stored in fat cells again), and not doing cardio (another evil stuff), that could burn the fat, and living in heated/airconditioned place (so fat won’t be burned for heat) – then the level of fat in the blood just has to be high, as it has nowhere to go.

  7. Gemma on April 1, 2015 at 02:31

    What should have been a very short time intervention (possibly beneficial) turned into a long term failure (definitely detrimental).

    “control the stress that is raising my cortisol and blood sugar levels making it next to impossible to lose weight”

    This is going to kill him. Where is Phinney or Volek or Attia to tell him: stop it, change your approach, before it is too late?

    • Mike on April 1, 2015 at 02:42

      Of course he would never consider that his diet is likely a major factor contributing to that stress – When I’ve been ketogenic in past, stress was magnified and simply adding some carbs back in reduced stress response significantly. Also if he does have significant stress, the last thing he should be doing is IF.

    • el-bo on April 1, 2015 at 05:12

      being caught in his own web of lies, always trying to work out which “truth” he should share, will also be adding stress

  8. Brendan on April 1, 2015 at 03:26

    I don’t really have anything meaningful to contribute to the discussion on a scientific, political or ‘tribal’ level. I prefer to skirt the edges in that regard.

    What I do want to say is thanks, Richard. Reading posts like these is a breath of fresh air whenever I start to take all this shit entirely too seriously. It’s surprisingly easy to fall into thought patterns of “Oh fuck I ate 4 frozen bananas after dinner, I’m a horrible person better fast for 3 days and drink a flask of MCT”. It’s like everyone is set on making you feel guilty about ‘losing control’ over your biology (like you were ever meant to be in complete control). It is definitely needed to read an attitude of “cut that shit out”. Even those as ‘blessed’ with idolatry as Moore/Sisson/Cordain/Wolfe/Asprey/etc etc. are ultimately unworthy of it.

    So yeah, thanks. Cabo looks fucking lovely.

  9. Henk on April 1, 2015 at 04:40

    You’re not gaining weight because you’re eating too much, you gain weight because your body doesn’t work properly.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 07:32

      “You’re not gaining weight because you’re eating too much, you gain weight because your body doesn’t work properly.”

      Yea, and wouldn’t it be funny if eating too much was the chief way in which your body ceases to “work properly,” and eating less with adequate quality nutrition is one of the most effective ways of rectifying that.

  10. sassysquatch on April 1, 2015 at 04:52

    You got pissed off at me a few months ago for pointing out that every one seemed liked fair game to you but your ‘podcast buddies’.

    I stand corrected.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 07:23

      Meh, you probably had a point, sassy. Just don’t do that shit again. :)

      Well, I suppose that it took the time it did goes to not taking this stuff lightly. I’ve been nipping at him and Eades for a long while, hoping to see them move in more reasonable directions, as Sisson, Wolf, and Kresser have done. Nope.

  11. Gina on April 1, 2015 at 06:00

    You know that if Jimmy Moore was lean and his detractors were morbidly obese that the obvious wouldn’t be declared off limits.

    I always think of the time on Low Carb Conversations where he relayed how at Starbucks he laughs at fellow customers ordering low-fat lattes. The idea of Jimmy feeling superior as he waddles up to the counter to order butter in his coffee kills me.

  12. formerblogger on April 1, 2015 at 07:13

    I think there’s unfortunately something to be said for bullshit over substance. Moore’s an excellent marketer, but he’s got the physical form for PR work (read: behind the scenes shilling for other companies and not flaunting his own Shillsbury rolls publicly). Those of us who actually care about the movement and eating healthfully (and we’re not talking fat shaming or skinny versus fat; we’re talking about health) are flummoxed that someone who’s a walking poster child for diabetic ointments and high blood pressure meds is shilling his ‘flavor of the week’ versions of healthy eating–and worse yet–that people are jumping on every one of his bandwagons (remember his egg diet?). He’s even selling an eating plan. Why? Does he eat it? Is it working? (I’m thinking no). How is he not being held accountable by consumers?

  13. el-bo on April 1, 2015 at 07:33

    >> “How is he not being held accountable by consumers?”

    because he’s giving them the vindication they want i.e the excuse that no matter how healthy the diet (remember that jimmy has 2 books worth of doctors endorsing him), you may just have a body that is working against you

    • formerblogger on April 1, 2015 at 08:33

      Many buy into his personality because he sells himself rampantly; it’s just too bad what he’s selling isn’t honesty or open dialogue. I know plenty of online personalities who can’t stand the guy, but they keep quiet because they believe he’s wielding the power he claims to have. A little secret: many site owners, including myself, have (and have had) followers, social media fans and pageviews exceeding his by quite a bit–and we did (and still do) this through honesty and integrity toward the goal of bettering the community–not via bullshit. What’s more, many of us still made (and still do make) a damned good living at it. So why make does he things so much harder than they have to be? Spinning and obfuscation have to be so damned tiring. No wonder his adrenals are shot.

    • el-bo on April 1, 2015 at 08:44

      >> “So why make does he things so much harder than they have to be?”

      his income and lifestyle are so tied to his maintaining the illusion of success, that he doesn’t have the freedom of simply notching it down to a bad idea and trying something else

    • EF on April 1, 2015 at 09:03

      Does anyone know where Taubes currently stands on LC and the insulin hypothesis? Taubes purportedly stands for science so I think he would backpedal if the science does not pan out.

      Moore is way too financially invested in the LC movement to backpedal.

    • formerblogger on April 1, 2015 at 10:00

      My sole form of income was my website, too. The upswing: My experience running my own company landed me an extremely lucrative marketing job earning much more than Jimmy’s recently made in a good year (according to an inside source). Fame is nice, but I’d rather support my family.

    • el-bo on April 1, 2015 at 10:16

      >> “My sole form of income was my website, too”

      except i was more alluding to his books and the authority they seem to have offered him. when he just had the blogs/podcasts, he could at least be seen as searching for answers, rather than appearing to own them

      clearly you want to hold on to your anonymity, so i have no idea who you are. but given your stance, i am going to assume that you wouldn’t, like jm, be prepared to offer false hope to desperate health-seekers just because you’d lose face for pulling a ‘180’

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 10:48

      “Does anyone know where Taubes currently stands on LC and the insulin hypothesis?”

      I don’t, and he answers my emails. Gary is too smart, too proud to strut around. I don’t know how this plays out with him, but I have to think that his status as a science journalist with a degree in physics weighs more than Moore.

    • formerblogger on April 1, 2015 at 12:23

      Hi! You make a great point. I think that, unlike Jimmy, it was never about me (I never wanted to be a guru/personality), and so I invited copious amounts of dissent and discussion. I was also willing to change up my routine when something proved to not work. And without a diverse community of robust opinion all sharing their experiences, what’s the point? People aren’t om nom nom nom zombies. They don’t need to be told to sit down and shut up (and eat the two sticks of butter…and buy my book…and oh yeah, buy my diet plan…and this sponsored candy bar…and have I told you about this affiliate program…?).

      At the end of the day, I hope he’s getting health advice he can actually apply and pull himself together. It might even mean low-carb just isn’t going to cut it for him anymore. So what; at least he’d be healthy, and people need to go with what works for them (even if there’s not a paycheck waiting as a result).

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 12:33

      “I was also willing to change up my routine when something proved to not work.”

      Jimmy did that too. Lower carb, higher fat, less protein.

      He never questioned the underlying premises, because that’s unquestionable. It’s the “livin’ la vida low carb.’ Sucks to have to change the name.

    • Gemma on April 1, 2015 at 12:34

      “At the end of the day, I hope he’s getting health advice he can actually apply and pull himself together. It might even mean low-carb just isn’t going to cut it for him anymore.”

      I would put him on a potato hack for a couple fo days :-)

    • GTR on April 1, 2015 at 13:14

      @EF – “Does anyone know where Taubes currently stands on LC”

      We will soon find out, there was an announcement:

      “Alan Aragon & Gary Taubes will be going head to head in a debate entitled “Carbohydrates or caloric excess: WHY do we get fat and HOW do we fix it” on Saturday 16th May 2015, 2-4pm.” (during EPIC fintess summit).

  14. John on April 1, 2015 at 09:07

    I’ve never understood why Jimmy Moore is so popular. His website sucks, he looks unhealthy, his diet is fringe, and his voice sounds effeminate. I suppose having a guru who’s appearance doesn’t intimidate, and who’s words promise gluttony is powerful.

    Regarding the Constitution, it never planned for THE INTERNET!!! This sort of thing is a favorite thought of “Con” scholars who love interpreting the best meaning. The smug smile these interpreters invariably have as they make jokes about just reading it for what it says instead of changing its meaning is not unlike the smile any other bullshitter has when he truly believes his bullshit is “the way” (I think about what my own face must have looked like when I used to parrot low carb dogma).

    I’ve recently decided to get back into some leangains dietary principles, high protein, macro/calorie cycling, etc. The volume of food I’m eating relative to the calories is ridiculous.

    Workout day – approx 2350 calories
    3 pounds of 0% greek yogurt (aka Costco tub) with 1.1 pounds blueberries.
    1 can tuna,
    3 eggs cooked in 1/2 tbs butter,
    100 grams rice krispies with 3 cups 1% milk
    10 uni-liver tabs.
    That is a ton of food, and physically difficult to eat – the volume of the yogurt and berries alone is tough to deal with.

    Rest day – approx 1450 calories
    1 pound 2% cottage cheese
    1/2 pound smoked salmon
    1 pound lean ground beef
    1 bag frozen vegetables.
    Extraordinarily satiating – sometimes it is work to get all the veggies down.

    Despite feeling extremely full after meals, I never have that gross feeling that being stuffed on pizza gives, and I was previously eating a large pizza at least once a week (experimenting with incorporating junk in my diet without counting calories – I remained mostly weight stable for a year, but didn’t feel great).
    Weight is flying off, I’ve gone from fairly lean at 5’10, 173lb, to vascularity returning on abdomen 165lb, in 4 weeks (yes some was water weight). Strength the same or better.

    Under any circumstance, the only thing in the past 6 years that has threatened to make me gain a significant amount of weight was believing added fat is healthy and carbs are evil.

    To any LC dieters out there that want a super delicious recipe – make wings in the oven. They taste better than deep fried. Then coat liberally with butter and Frank’s hot sauce. Make sure to add enough so there’s something to wipe clean with your finger when the wings are gone. Homemade low carb low PUFA blue cheese dressing optional!

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 10:59

      Ha, John, thanks for the look back at stuffing my face for Martin.

      Ultimately, I couldn’t do it. I’m a little pussy. But, I know absolutely that it works, provided you do the heavy in the gym.

    • John on April 1, 2015 at 14:29

      “The volume of food I’m eating relative to the calories is ridiculous.” I just recently went back to Colpo’s Fat Loss Bible plan, and am having the same experience. My targets are 2500 cal, 150p, 200-300c and 77-100f. I can eat 3 pounds of potatoes, and STILL not hit the min carb target for the day. So I added orange juice and honey to hit my targets. I got no complaints.

      I get that a lot of people don’t want to track their food, but if you do, it will give you a MAJOR advantage when it comes to weight loss or fitness goals.

    • Tim maitski on April 2, 2015 at 04:15

      I usually use nutritiondata.self.com for looking up Nutrtion profiles. It looks like 1 pound of potatoes is around 95g of carbs. A little over 2 pounds should get you close to 200g carbs.

      Even eating one pound of potatoes at a meal with some other stuff is a challenge. I usually have 3-4 oz lentils with them to keep from spiking my blood sugar.

    • John on April 2, 2015 at 07:53

      Yeah John (with the avatar),

      I’m fine without tracking my diet – weight stable and strong. I’m probably where a lot of people hope to get. 5’10, 170 lbs. 32″ waist, etc.

      If I want below 10% bodyfat, while maintaining my relatively high strength, I need to dial things in and track.

      Frankly, creating a meal plan that is simple has made many things in life easier. Never wondering “what will I eat today.” Never thinking about if tonight will be pizza and ice cream night. Never wondering about how much I’ve eaten.

      “Never” isn’t the right word, because family and friends invite me for dinner a lot; no problem, just pull a 24 hour fast that day. I’m not going to miss out on great food in great quantities with family.

      3 pounds of potatoes… Yeah, I’ll stick with some cereal!

    • Richard Nikoley on April 2, 2015 at 07:56

      “I’ll stick with some cereal!”

      Something else I do. But, Rice Krispies with whole, raw milk. 2-3 months to go through a box, though. How I roll, now.

    • John on April 6, 2015 at 07:23

      A few years ago I was living in a city that had several dairy farms around it, there was a co-op that sold various brands of raw, non homogenized milk.
      Cream too, thick as clotted cream on the top of the bottle – you could see the cream (sold in glass bottles) go from orange to white as the year moved into winter. That was the major part of why I was so excited to try VLC. I still remember sticking a knife in the bottle to break the surface up and how good that first taste of cream was.

      One day there was a sample stand set up for one of the dairies, so I walked up and told the people how much I enjoyed the raw milk and I was glad they were selling it. They said that as the dairy owners, not employees of the co-op, they really appreciated the compliment.

      I can’t find raw milk where I live now – whole foods stopped selling it about 6 years ago.

    • John on April 9, 2015 at 21:13

      “I’m fine without tracking my diet – weight stable and strong. I’m probably where a lot of people hope to get. 5’10, 170 lbs. 32″ waist, etc. ” I know lots of people have success without tracking. There’s several times I did, too. The problem for me is that I would always plateau, always have a gut (and I’ve had one since I was 9), and always felt that while I could get better, I could never be good or great.

      Over the last year, nothing seemed to work (or it would work for a bit, then stop). So, I decided to use Colpo’s system and go “all in” with tracking everything as accurately as I could. Suddenly, over the three weeks, I became hyper-aware of everything I was eating, calories went down, protein and carbs went up, fat was cut, and alcohol went from a nightly ritual to a once a week event with friends.

      Crazy thing is, everything is improving. I’m looking better, feeling better, noticing fuller muscles, thinking better, clothes are starting to get looser, I’m more active, and even enjoying food more, and, from a volume (not calorie) perspective, I think I’m eating more of it. I’m also figuring out how to budget “forbidden” foods like soda. I even lost 9 pounds in the first two weeks, which is close to the old Atkins promise, only I was eating 250-300g of carbs and doing it.

      It’s funny that I resisted this for so long, thinking that tracking would be hassle (and it may have been 15 years ago), or that a caloric deficit would mean constant hunger. Neither of those are the case, and I’m actually finding it quite fun and rewarding.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 10, 2015 at 07:20

      Great work, John.

      Yea, for some people, tracking is necessary where you don’t have all the old natural limitations around, i.e., getting just enough to eat was a constant struggle. It amazes me that this is so rarely taken into account.

  15. Bill on April 1, 2015 at 10:47

    Posted at Chez Jimmy’s. For the record.
    Can’t see it for posterity over there…
    Liz Trekkiemaiden Morgan • a day ago
    Hey Jimmy, sending big hugs and thanks. Just keep on doin’ what your’re doin’ and try to ignore the naysayers. I’m in a similar place, having followed LCHF for the last 13 years or so, but at nearly 53 I’m watching weight slowly creep on, and eating less and less and finding it really hard to get it back off. However, I feel great, I look way younger than my years, so I know what’s going on on the inside is all good. And I have to admit that although I’d like to be slimmer, I am ultimately trying to conform to what society deems to be acceptable shaped. I’m not obese, just stocky and at nearly 53 and 5 children later I still look damn good. There is also evidence that nature compels us to gain extra weight as we age as a protective factor against illnesses, which are always more serious in the elderly. Guess that’s what I’m heading towards LOL. So you are not alone, stick with the programme and know you’re still helping so many people with your advice and real life struggles.

    My comment:
    So basically, like Jimmy, it’s not working for you.
    I’ve followed Jimmy for more than 7 years.
    Jimmy and Christine do not look metabolically healthy.
    They yo-yo too much. I can accept a 5 or 10 pound weight gain because of other factors, stress, medication etc. However 50-60 pounds in a year?
    Sorry, don’t buy the excuses. I’ll cross post this on FTA. No doubt it will disappear from here.
    Thin skins, these fat xtian fundies.

    • Richard Nikoley on April 1, 2015 at 11:11

      Bill:

      I just would like people to once in a while ask themselves, when they want to eat something. “Am I really, really, really truly hungry, or am I going after something else like taste, reward, mouth feel, dopamine, etc.”

    • Bill on April 1, 2015 at 11:27

      I’m just not there on the urges front.

      I went 5 years without bread and then had freshly baked bread. It was okay but not what I imagined it would be. So I’ve not had any since.

      Gluten for me was my culprit. Not celiac but gluten sensitive. Alopecia areata and mildish arthritis for 20 years up until 2006. Took 3-4 years to recover and heal.

  16. John on April 1, 2015 at 12:23

    Jimmy’s post talks about avoiding carbage and eating real foods in the same visual space as low carb cookies and such.

    He makes himself out as a victim because of his proclaimed broken metabolism and people criticize the information he puts out and his appearance. Well if you’re putting yourself out there as a promoter of healthy eating, and your promoted diet is making you fat, and weight loss is the purpose of your diet but accepting your fat-assedness and chanting garbage pop songs to drown out the “haters” is how you deal with not loosing weight, a couple of “fucking scam artist” type comments.

    He doesn’t want to die from obesity like his brother, so he’s going to stop stressing about being fat.

    “Haters” are people that speak negativity because they’re feeling something akin to envy. People attacking Jimmy probably feel something different.

  17. EF on April 1, 2015 at 12:35

    I think people get sucked into LC because they initially lose weight eating “forbidden” foods and they immediately think — must have been the carbs making me fat. See Richard’s LC/Food Reward Synthesis post for a complete takedown of that idea.

    But then they think Jimmy and his parade of experts must be right. That, and his gee-shucks attitude is very compelling for the masses of non-critical thinkers who just want to be told what to eat.

  18. Bill on April 1, 2015 at 12:42

    gee-shucks
    That’s his mantra.

    Spot on. Nothing more or less….

  19. edster on April 1, 2015 at 19:10

    Way to go Jimmy! It at first you don’t succeed… the clue is in the word “faithfully” — whatever happened to the scientific method? I guess if you replace one dogma with another you shouldn’t be surprised when the world doesn’t bend to your will.

  20. louie on April 1, 2015 at 22:04

    I constantly see jimmy praise his haters, and he wears a shirt that says “Haters make me famous”. These “haters” generally all have some sort of grain of “your full of fraud” in their comments. and many comment that they wish to see his empire fall. Recently, jimmy opened an instagram that depicts him eating cake at a resturaunt (but veggies kick me out of keto!”, putting 8 tablespoons of butter on a meal, and baking “LCHF” chocolate chip cookies – so much for eating real foods. I’m beginning to think that it isn’t jimmys hold on people that keeps him t the top, perhaps its a culmination of him not wanting to diverge from his calories don’t matter opinion, and followers/supporters either not wanting to admit they were wrong to side with him, or have no other dogma to follow. For a man who demonizes fruit to be posting photos of himself eating cake to remain at the top is just insane.

    • John on April 2, 2015 at 08:05

      People like gluttony. Gluttons like fatty food. People like to be told their destructive behavior is healthy. Simple.

      “Pig out on fatty food for your health, if you gain 60 pounds in a year think about my authority and know you’re healthy, ignore the haters, and turn up the shitty fat acceptance pop hits!”

    • Richard Nikoley on April 2, 2015 at 08:30

      “think about my authority and know you’re healthy”

      …And eat “faithfully.” I only just caught that word in the bolded part this morning. Talk about a single word saying pretty much everything.

      (I sorted out you’re your. :)

  21. cunty on April 1, 2015 at 22:56

    I’ve hit a fat loss plateau. I’m starting Anthony Colpo’s routine to break through it. My challenge to Jimmy is to do the same! What he’s doing now is clearly not having the desired result.

  22. Bret on April 4, 2015 at 10:25

    Digging into the “why,” the Jaminets made the intriguing speculation that folks develop health issues on either extreme of the vegan-ketogenic spectrum due to bankrupting themselves of critical nutrients found in the foods they eschew, and that one such effect might be a persistent hunger. Combine that with the fact that in the modern western world, we have refined foods in abundance (and this includes butter, cream, coconut oil, and all the other largely isolated fats that many VLCers selectively exempt from “refined” status) — contrary in almost every way to how the majority of our ancestors actually ate, based on what was available — and you have a recipe for overeating and obesity.

    I think this has happened to Jimmy Moore. His body is crying out for the fibers and other carbohydrate-based nutrients he has been depriving it of for decades, and therefore it never turns off the “please eat!” signal. It’s the same argument that VLCers use, but smarter, because it doesn’t pretend that infinite dietary fat is harmless (nor that it’s beneficial, or even ideal, for that matter).

    I feel bad for the guy, and I do wish him well. I don’t agree one bit with some of the comments above speculating that Jimmy is lying to keep making money, because it makes no sense to me that someone who has been morbidly obese most of his life would willingly remain that way. Plus, Jimmy strikes me as a decent and humble man, and I suspect he would make a full account of his error if he realized it was an error. The reason he can’t make that connection, however, is that he and his company are drowning in VLC/KG religious doctrine. A priori is spot on indeed.

    • GTR on April 12, 2015 at 12:55

      @Bret – First of all it is easy to eat a decent amount carbs – and nutritients included in carb-rich foods – on a low-carb diet, unless you go for keto. 150g of carbs (25% of calories for a 2400 kcal diet) could classified as low-carb… Compatible with Sissons ideology, paleo and others. So Jimmy could eat quite a lot of carbs and not loose his “low-carb” business, had he not went for the keto ideology.

      End even without keto there are less dangerous approaches than a persistent keto. Jimmy had interviewed John Kiefer who advocates LC for non-training days, while eating a lot of carbs after strenght training, done like 3 times a week or so. So had Jimmy followed a person he himself classified as an expert he could loads of carbs 3 times a week, while still being low carb overall, at the cost of some strenght training.

      So even within the low-carb options he knew were there, and promoted on his podcast he chose the most extreme one. Weird.

    • Bret on April 12, 2015 at 16:35

      I have never disputed any of that, GTR, but that does not prove Jimmy is trying to pull one over on his listeners. I think his unfortunate gravitation to the extreme of chronic ketosis is due to his deep-seeded belief that carbs cause him damage, especially due to his history of refined carb abuse and consequent “metabolic derangement.”

      Jimmy hosts many experts that recommend cyclical carbs. But for every one of those, there is a Nora Gedgaudas or Steve Phinney who says or implies that every bite of starch or sugar, regardless of its source or root in nature, degrades metabolic health and reduces life. It’s these latter folks to whom Jimmy is giving more deference in the discussion (selection/confirmation bias). As Richard has pointed out in one of these recent posts, Jimmy includes people that disagree with him to varying degrees on purpose (he had Richard guest host about RS last year, hosted McDougall a couple of years ago, etc), perhaps in an attempt to convince even himself he is adequately weighing all perspectives.

      While I agree with folks here that Jimmy is not in fact weighing those perspectives adequately, I think that shortcoming is due to the bias monster rather than intentional chicanery. I find accusations to the contrary to be mostly speculative and based on woefully flimsy evidence.

  23. Jeff JOhnson on April 12, 2015 at 22:29

    Low Carb 101
    1. there are three kinds of low carbers –
    2. -those who can burn excess fat calories –

    3. – those who somehow regulate their calorie intake naturally –
    4. – those in who both of these things do not work – these people think(a cerebral process) – that 2. and 3. work for them – when they do not – their nuts –

    Their cerebal process has failed them – their insane – at least in this respect –

    Jimmy Moore’s carb intake is reasonable – his problems are not coming from carbs –

    His total disregard for a calorie tolerance and fat tolerance is the problem –

    The cure is simple enough – reduce his fat intake enough to maintain his weight or reduce it enough to lose weight –

    He’s not gaining weight eating protein or carbs – it’s his excess fat intake
    No shxt sherlock –

    Where will this all end ? It’s like watching a train wreck in slow-motion –

    • David on April 13, 2015 at 05:52

      From Keto Clarity expert Ron Rosedale,

      LIMIT SATURATED FAT FOR THE FIRST THREE WEEKS
      When you want to lose weight, what you
      really want to lose is largely saturated fat.
      Most saturated fats are harder to burn,
      and you will need to get a little fat-burning
      practice under your belt first. So limit it, at
      least for the first three weeks you are on
      the meal plan.

    • Bret on April 13, 2015 at 12:07

      David, the Jaminets made a similar point in PHD. The idea being that the body has daily needs preferential to protein, fats, and carbs — contrary to the fat vs carbs stuff you see in the VLC/vegan debate.

      Our bodies need the same quantity of protein, fat, and carbohydrate, whether we are trying to lose weight or maintain. Therefore, reducing fat intake seems to make the most sense for someone trying to lose, because he’ll get at least part of his dietary fat needs from his adipose tissue.

    • David on April 13, 2015 at 19:16

      Totally agree, Bret. I posted that quote from Dr. Rosedale because he’s a Keto Clarity expert, yet certain parts of the message get conveniently ignored.

  24. Gemma on April 13, 2015 at 23:47

    “Most saturated fats are harder to burn”

    Not only that. Some fatty food for thought:

    “One of the first-line weapons the immune system deploys against infection are molecules called Toll-like receptors (TLR). While complex in its workings, when the immune system comes across a potential invader these receptors are designed to evaluate if it is bacterial, viral, or fungal. If the body finds evidence of any of these organisms, the immune system can begin its attack immediately while the adaptive immune system assesses what specific pathogen it is facing [46]. One of the TLR weapons, TLR4, is designed to sense bacteria. Unfortunately the part of the bacteria TLR4 binds, lipopolysaccharide (LPS), contains mostly saturated palmitic and steric fatty acids [47-51]. Meaning that TLR4 can generate inappropriate signaling when exposed to certain saturated fats if in too great of frequency, amount, or homogeneity rather than in a more biological balance and dosage. Any resultant, abnormal signaling may lead to a misguided attack upon saturated fat when it is perceived as a bacterial invader [9,47-54]. The resulting inflammation in the gut can lead to a break down of barriers, allowing harmful substance to leak from the gut into the blood stream and contribute to immune dysfunction that worsens infection control [52,54,55]. Consistent with these in vitro and animal models, studies in humans reveal down regulation of TLR4 and increased LPS translocation occurring within hours of a bolus of saturated fat [54,56], while polymorphisms reducing TLR4 functioning are relatively protective against dyslipidemia, coronary artery disease, and metabolic syndrome [57,58]. “

  25. David on April 14, 2015 at 01:18

    LLVLC Episode 902: Dr. Vera Tarman Helping Food Junkies Beat Their Carbohydrate Addiction

    guest info-
    http://addictionsunplugged.com/
    Understanding Addiction, Food Addiction and Obesity

    See how that gets twisted? Food addiction only exists if you overeat carbohydrates.

  26. Dr. Curmudgeon G on April 14, 2015 at 13:22

    Jimmy et al like to call some “carb addiction” (i find that term quite offensive)

    Mark has become more moderate in terms of safe starch. but his recipes are still devoid of white potato & rice; still full of substitution of “cauliflower rice”, “cauliflower mashed” & celery root, etc.

    that’s OK w/ me, but i’d rather have the real things. (i’m not a fan of cauliflower nor celery root)

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.