Low Carb Cheating/Leptin boost theory, any thoughts?

Ask and answer questions, discuss research and applications

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, ianjay, stuward

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6610
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Fri Sep 24, 2010 4:43 pm

I didn't say anitiotics in meat was any more important than any other dietary factor. I just gave it as an example of something than can affect gut health. It's probably up there with bottle feeding in importance. I think over consumption of grains and sugars is a bigger factor.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Fri Sep 24, 2010 5:44 pm

anandsr21 wrote:
Ironman wrote:
We are practically carnivores, but not obligate carnivores. We do not convert enough amino-acids to protein to survive just on muscle meat. There are strict limits to how much proteins we can digest safely.
In this section I have quoted again, you are right on the first two, but the 2nd is wrong. There is no evidence to show that anyone with **NORMAL, HEALTHY** kindneys has any limits on protein.

Gluconeogenesis is a very inefficient process so you really don't have to worry about it. Your excess protein is not going to turn into glucose. It just passes through. Try eating an excessively large amount of lean protein at one time and see what happens. You will get gas and maybe even the protein craps. This shows that it just goes through.

You and Nightfall both seem to think that just because you eat something your body is obligated to digest it. That is just plain wrong. If it can it will, if it can't it won't.

Lack of research just means that is something we don't know. You can't just go by hunches. Besides a lot of your hunches must have been made quite some time ago because now we do have the data.
I agree that it will pass through, as it has no other way for it to go. But that is OK only when there are enough calories otherwise. If not then the body will try to get at that energy. That is when it starts to get poisonous. Rabbit Starvation is a fairly well documented phenomenon. It started from NightFall's 70%, 15%, 15%. That would be a dreadful diet on a long term basis. And it seemed by his post that it was his normal diet.

I am not sure about the kidneys capacity, because it would never get tested unless you have only one kidney. The body has a limited capacity to convert protein to glucose. So the ammonia created will be limited. I would think if you have a single kidney then, you would get problems with very high protein diets.

I would think it a waste of money to add the expensive protein in diet just to $h1t it out.
It will try to get at the energy, but it can't. The rabbit tests are utter bollocks. I can't believe you even mentioned them. The one major glaring, obvious problem, is that RABBITS ARE HERBIVORES! People are entirely different and no such thing was found in studies on people.

Travis
Novice
Novice
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 5:54 pm

Post by Travis » Fri Sep 24, 2010 6:11 pm

Its rabbit starvation-- a diet of only low fat meat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sat Sep 25, 2010 1:20 pm

Travis wrote:Its rabbit starvation-- a diet of only low fat meat

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabbit_starvation
That's right. The problem with that is a rabbit is an herbivore.


Now keep in mind I'm not arguing that you don't need either fat or carbs for energy. I'm also not saying that crapping out protein isn't a waste. I'm just saying it's not bad for people.

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6610
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Sat Sep 25, 2010 1:45 pm

A cow is a herbivore too but you don't get rabbit starvation from eating cows. The problem with small animals like rabbits and squirrels is that they don't have enough fat on them. A high protein diet with adequate fat is not dangerous, just wasteful as you said.

It sounded like you were criticizing rabbit studies, which are truly bogus, but irrelevant to this discussion.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sun Sep 26, 2010 12:44 pm

stuward wrote:A cow is a herbivore too but you don't get rabbit starvation from eating cows. The problem with small animals like rabbits and squirrels is that they don't have enough fat on them. A high protein diet with adequate fat is not dangerous, just wasteful as you said.

It sounded like you were criticizing rabbit studies, which are truly bogus, but irrelevant to this discussion.

I was talking about the rabbit being an herbivore because they fed the rabbit meat.

User avatar
callipygian50
Novice
Novice
Posts: 68
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 11:14 pm

Post by callipygian50 » Sun Sep 26, 2010 5:13 pm

ironman--
I think "rabbit starvation" is when humans eat nothing but very lean rabbit. The wikipedia page discusses it. It sounds like it causes problems when people eat rabbit meat only for a long time and also experience other environmental stress (like trying to survive a very long hard winter out in some cabin somewhere or having been stranded in Northern Canada when your boat can't make it during your attempt to find the Northwest passage or some such.)

I'd heard of this before, but I'm not very familiar with exactly when it's happened or what's required. But it does appear that a diet of 100% rabbit meat isn't functional.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Sun Sep 26, 2010 9:21 pm

Oh I see. In that case, I'm getting two completely different things mixed up.

Yea, if you eat nothing but protein, that isn't going to cut it. You can't really get much energy from that. You need fat to go with it. Well if that is what he was talking about that supports what I was saying more than it supports him.

I thought he meant that oddball study where meat damaged the kidneys of rabbits. I was wondering why anyone would bring some quackery like that.

anandsr21
Novice
Novice
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Sep 22, 2008 8:12 am

Post by anandsr21 » Mon Sep 27, 2010 1:40 pm

Ironman wrote:Oh I see. In that case, I'm getting two completely different things mixed up.

Yea, if you eat nothing but protein, that isn't going to cut it. You can't really get much energy from that. You need fat to go with it. Well if that is what he was talking about that supports what I was saying more than it supports him.

I thought he meant that oddball study where meat damaged the kidneys of rabbits. I was wondering why anyone would bring some quackery like that.
Good that it got cleared up while I was sleeping ;-). I think most of the studies are designed with the outcome in mind. Then the researchers, do everything possible to get the expected results, even fudging results. The bright ones will design it so that they don't have to fudge any results. That is a very big problem in science. But that is what the project grant system expects. You need to work on a theory that is already well accepted and add something to it. Going against the stream only makes your hard work get ignored.

The real problem with high protein is that say you eat 300gms of lean protein. Lets say that 100gms are required for body building. The remaining 200gms is going to be converted to glucose. To get 200gms glucose you need to burn 30% of the energy (I am not sure but it seems to me that this energy must come from fat). So you need about 200*4*3/(10*9) = 27gms of fat to go with it, just to be able to use the remaining 200gms of protein. In addition our body requires a lot of fat as a building material. Without this fat you will burn your own fat, and if you don't have enough body fat, you will be in trouble. This kind of leaning out is called Rabbit Starvation.

The other problem is Kleiber's law. Our body has a surface area, with which we discard heat. The metabolic system in our body is very old. It developed even before mammals developed. So all mammals generate heat only proportional to their surface area or approximately relative to their mass. It is a fact that all mammals have an average metabolic rate proportional to their mass to the power of 3/4.

Now for humans our brains are enormous, and they use a whole lot of energy as much as 600calories which would be about 25% of total energy usage of a normal person. That 3 pound organ (<2% of human body) uses up more than 20% of the energy. If you convert 200gms of proteins to glucose you are producing 250kcal of heat during the conversion. This is also part of your metabolic rate.

The effect of the above is that we have a set ideal metabolic rate. There will be a range that is good for us, but the range is not infinitely stretchable. Moderation seems to be an important key.

Travis
Novice
Novice
Posts: 85
Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 5:54 pm

Post by Travis » Mon Sep 27, 2010 2:04 pm

But that 200gm of protein isn't necessarily converted to glucose-- if there are more efficient ways to fuel the body (ie carbs, fat, alcohol) that excess protein will be excreted.

frogbyte
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1455
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2007 3:46 pm

Post by frogbyte » Mon Sep 27, 2010 5:41 pm

anandsr21 wrote:Without this fat you will burn your own fat, and if you don't have enough body fat, you will be in trouble. This kind of leaning out is called Rabbit Starvation.
Most of the civilized world is dramatically overweight - an almost purely protein diet would probably do them no harm for weeks or months as fat stores deplete.

Jebus
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1106
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:04 pm

Post by Jebus » Mon Sep 27, 2010 7:06 pm

Also just a tip, you wont get rabbit starvation if you eat everything, organs, bone marrow, etc. obviously.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Wed Sep 29, 2010 5:19 am

anandsr21 wrote:
Ironman wrote:Oh I see. In that case, I'm getting two completely different things mixed up.

Yea, if you eat nothing but protein, that isn't going to cut it. You can't really get much energy from that. You need fat to go with it. Well if that is what he was talking about that supports what I was saying more than it supports him.

I thought he meant that oddball study where meat damaged the kidneys of rabbits. I was wondering why anyone would bring some quackery like that.
Good that it got cleared up while I was sleeping ;-). I think most of the studies are designed with the outcome in mind. Then the researchers, do everything possible to get the expected results, even fudging results. The bright ones will design it so that they don't have to fudge any results. That is a very big problem in science. But that is what the project grant system expects. You need to work on a theory that is already well accepted and add something to it. Going against the stream only makes your hard work get ignored.

The real problem with high protein is that say you eat 300gms of lean protein. Lets say that 100gms are required for body building. The remaining 200gms is going to be converted to glucose. To get 200gms glucose you need to burn 30% of the energy (I am not sure but it seems to me that this energy must come from fat). So you need about 200*4*3/(10*9) = 27gms of fat to go with it, just to be able to use the remaining 200gms of protein. In addition our body requires a lot of fat as a building material. Without this fat you will burn your own fat, and if you don't have enough body fat, you will be in trouble. This kind of leaning out is called Rabbit Starvation.

The other problem is Kleiber's law. Our body has a surface area, with which we discard heat. The metabolic system in our body is very old. It developed even before mammals developed. So all mammals generate heat only proportional to their surface area or approximately relative to their mass. It is a fact that all mammals have an average metabolic rate proportional to their mass to the power of 3/4.

Now for humans our brains are enormous, and they use a whole lot of energy as much as 600calories which would be about 25% of total energy usage of a normal person. That 3 pound organ (<2% of human body) uses up more than 20% of the energy. If you convert 200gms of proteins to glucose you are producing 250kcal of heat during the conversion. This is also part of your metabolic rate.

The effect of the above is that we have a set ideal metabolic rate. There will be a range that is good for us, but the range is not infinitely stretchable. Moderation seems to be an important key.
Now you are contradicting yourself. Which is it? You convert it to glucose or you get rabbit starvation? As for bodybuilding with 100 grams of protein, that isn't going to cut it unless you are a tiny little guy.

As for the rest of that, what does it have to do with what we are talking about?

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6610
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Post by stuward » Wed Sep 29, 2010 7:19 am

What he said was that if you need to convert protein to glucose but you have insufficient fat resources, you get rabbit starvation. I don't see the contradiction in that.

User avatar
Ironman
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 3991
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2006 11:40 am

Post by Ironman » Thu Sep 30, 2010 3:21 am

stuward wrote:What he said was that if you need to convert protein to glucose but you have insufficient fat resources, you get rabbit starvation. I don't see the contradiction in that.
That's just a side issue, and it depends on the exact cause of rabbit starvation which we are not sure of. The point however was that there is not much conversion to glucose and excess protein is not bad for you.

Then of course there is the point of why did he bring up rabbit starvation when I questioned his silly ideas about gluconeogenesis and claims about excess protein being bad for you. Rabbit starvation is a straw man because I never said that is all you would be eating.

Post Reply