Firstly, I want to say that I am not responsible for your dietary decisions after reading this article. You are an intelligent person that can make decisions like any real adult should. I also want to say that everything I put in this article is not necessarily dogma or scripture; mix it up as you like. Lastly, I offer what has worked for me and my peers, not necessarily scientific evidence. Remember, "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
Who is the article for? It is mostly for the metabolically unhealthy, but also for the ignorant. The goal of this article is to help someone achieve metabolic flexibility (that is, being able to use fat, sugar, or whatever for energy), as well as inform them about nutritional deceptions. Since most of America is sugar-addicted, this will be very anti-carbohydrate, not because carbs are bad, but because running strictly on carbs is generally unhealthy. In the prescence of sugars, the human body will not use body fat; if the body is never out of sugars, then the body will never use fat. In order to achieve metabolic flexibility, I believe it is important for every insulin resistant person to try a low-carb-high-fat (LCHF) diet until they can just as easily use fat for energy as sugar. Once metabolic flexibility is achieved, one can be more lenient with the carbohydrate count.
One of my greatest interests of the year so far has been nutrition, and the science of fat loss so I have spent countless hours reading books, internet articles, and watching a few good doctors on the internet speak on the topic. To say the subject is complex would be an understatement: truthfully, we still do not know much, but I intend to share what I know to be true. I may keep the article up-to-date if I find anymore useful information. This is going to be a long one so you may want to just find whatever topic you are looking for rather than reading the whole thing. Firstly, let's get the lies out of the way so that no one falls for them.
What is a calorie anyway? A calorie is an abstraction; it is a measurement of what is burned (literally) in a bomb calorimeter. Do our bodies "burn" calories? Not exactly. There are no calorie receptors in the body, so I would argue that it is pointless to even bother counting, but the body does know all about macronutrients, micronutrients, vitamins, and minerals and it treats each of these differently. We are not zombies shambling around looking "calories" to consume, we are humans with certain nutritional requirements. Whether or not what we eat measures as a caloric deficit or surplus is irrelevant as long as those nutritional requirements are not met. After all, how then could we explain the skinny guy who eats like an absolute horse but never gains weight, and the obese man who eats very little yet cannot lose weight, perhaps even gains weight? Do not fall for the calorie restriction starvation diet.
Carbohydrates are a macronutrient which are plant-based; they come in the form of sugars, starches (long strands of sugar), and fiber. Out of those listed, only sugars and starches are totally digestible. This requires the hormone insulin to bring the newly created/assimilated glucose into the body's cells for use as energy. Carbs are kind of like the nitrous for our bodies: it gives us a quick boost that does not last all that long. While this is just a high-school level explanation, it should be clear that it isn't simply "burned."
Protein, without a doubt the most important macronutrient, is used for building body tissue. Proteins are broken down into amino acids in the stomach and absorbed in the intestines. Since we always need new cells, we need a good and continuous supply of protein to keep us built correctly. I am referring to animal proteins of course; we'll discuss plant protein in the next lie/deception. As you can see, protein isn't simply "burned;" it has a unique function.
Fats, excluding transfats, are important for our bodies to get essential fatty acids and can act as an alternative fuel source. Fats are also better at stimulating satiety (fullness) than the other macros. The main notion that fats are bad for us comes from the fact that 1g of fat is roughly 9 calories in a calorimeter, but as I have shown with the other macronutrients, we don't just "burn" everything we consume. Consuming quality animal-based fats is just as important as consuming quality animal-based proteins for the essential fatty acids.
There are of course a million things to add to this like information on vitamins and minerals. As far as the vitamins and minerals go though, if we eat whole foods instead of processed junk, we generally get everything our bodies need. The point is don't fall for the calorie deception! Not all foods are treated the same by the body!
This deception is one of the most insidious things to ever come into the health conversation, because it purposefully sets us up for failure. It depends upon the above deception being true as well. Let's start with the simplest part: exercise is great for you, but it is a terrible way to lose weight; we simply cannot use enough energy for it to be significant. In short, you will never lose weight working out, but you should work out for the many other benefits like muscle mass and cardiovascular function. Further, it promotes the idea of "buying" calories, that is, "If I burn X amount of calories, then I can afford to eat that piece of cake." What a sorry state! Any sensible person would just eat the cake or not instead of bargaining with the calorie budget.
Also, eat less? As in fewer calories? We don't stand a chance if that diet doesn't provide enough nutrients, because the body senses that it is not getting enough materials and will send hunger hormones to eventually force us to eat. The human body looks for macronutrients and micronutrients, not calories. This is why processed garbage "foods" have no meaningful nutrients; despite having bulk, processed food has no nutritional value and leaves us wanting to eat more.
Another point against the "calories in, calories out" model: the frankenfood manufacturers would love for us to fall for this deception, because it says, "Hey bucko, you can afford that Coke; calories are just calories after all, you just have to keep them around 2,000." Sure. Let's completely ignore decades of nutrition research and complex hormone interactions and just say "all calories are created equal." Ask a class of 1st graders what is healthier, 500 calories of sugary soda, or 500 calories of pork, and you will see just how bogus the calorie hypothesis really is.
Here is yet another point against the CICO (Calories-In-Calories-Out) hypothesis: this guy. Sure, this is not a peer-reviewed scientific study, but it certainly raises questions what causes unhealthy weight gain. Mathematically, this downright disproves CICO since this guy should have gained 16.5 pounds, but, in fact, gained only 3.5 pounds.
Grocery shopping has become very cringe in the last few years with all the plant-based marketing. We have it in our heads that plants are objectively healthier for us than animal foods, but I beg to differ. First, let us consider protein, because I am sure you have seen products with labels like "6g of plant-based protein!" in your store. There is a big problem with plant protein: it is NOT as absorbable as animal protein, because it is NOT complete in the essential amino acids. Animal proteins are complete proteins which means that the essential amino acids will get absorbed and used in the creation of new tissue, but the incomplete plant proteins cannot be used to build tissue; they are instead used for energy (unless carefully combined with other plants that have the missing amino acids). If you ever wondered why most vegans look emaciated now you know.
Another problem with a plant-based diet is the fact that vitamins and minerals are not in as great a concentration as they are in animal-based diets, nor are those micronutrients as absorbable. The most usable form of B12, for example, is absent from a plant-based diet. It is basically nutrient starvation in slow motion, and I can promise that if we are nutrient deficient we will become unhealthy. One of my aquaintences who is in her mid-sixties was perfectly healthy while her mid-twenties daughter, a vegan, became ill with covid (supposedly covid, of course).
Another concern for plants: GMO. As far as I know, there are not any GMO animals on the market yet, but almost every grain product, many vegetables, and other plants are GMO'd. While one could make the case that there is no real evidence that GMO food is dangerous, I can say for a fact that people were not eating such food even 50 years ago. Generally speaking, we should all eat more like our ancestors.
Now if you think the word "propaganda" is a bit too strong, please explain to me why I saw a cigarette advertisement at a gas station the other day claiming to use "plant-based menthol." That had me laughing quite loudly while I was pumping gas. If the plant-based diet isn't an agenda, then I don't know what is.
All this being said, I don't want to condemn plants (healthy plants anyway), but I do believe they have been far overestimated in their nutritional value. It is because of this overestimation, plus GMOs, that plants should always be a side dish rather than the entree. Vegetables are valuable from a hormesis perspective too which is an interesting plus. Overall though, don't fall for the plant-based agenda.
Is your cholesterol under 350? Then you will most likely be fine.
Cholesterol is a waxy, fatty substance moved around our bodies on lipoproteins called HDL and LDL (there are many types of LDL by the way). Our brains are about 20% of their weight in cholesterol so lowering it seems to me a bad thing. In fact, we know that old people with low cholesterol have a greater tendency to develop dementia, and those with so-called "high" cholesterol (around 225 or so) tend not to develop dementia.
Cholesterol kind of acts like a bandage in the body by covering damaged spots found in the arteries. This is likely why cholesterol is thought to be artery blocking, but in reality it is trying to fix some damaged arteries. Therefore, we must ask why the arteries are damaged in the first place; we'll cover that later.
"Oh no! Our bodies are so stupid they are making the poisonous cholesterol!" Calm down dear bugman, this is normal and healthy. Our bodies (specifically the liver) make somewhere around 70% - 80% of all our cholesterol without the aid of food. Because of this fact, dietary cholesterol has only a small effect on total cholesterol. I don't know about you, but I trust our Creator would not have made our bodies stupid enough to poison themselves. Cholesterol is a precious and necessary substance, so precious that it is even produced while fasting!
In extreme amounts of 350 and up, possibly. Otherwise, no. In the extremely high case, we must keep in mind that that is a genetic defect not commonly found in the population. Unless you're an extreme case, don't worry about it and refer back to "What is cholesterol anyway?".
Statins, drugs used to lower cholesterol like Lipitor, have serious issues besides the fact that there is no study demonstrating that they help prevent heart attacks and atherosclerosis. While they do indeed lower cholesterol by causing the liver to uptake more LDL, they don't fix the main problem that can happen with cholesterol: oxidized LDL. Oxidized LDL cannot be taken up by the liver, statin or no statin, so the oxidized LDL will float through one's arteries wreaking havoc. So, they don't fix the problem, but they do give you several! Here's a short list pulled from rxlist.com on Lipitor's side effects:
Do you think it is a coincidence that animal foods have cholesterol and it is the current establishment belief that cholesterol is bad for your health? I think not.
Cholesterol is a huge topic that'll I have to come back to and add more to this, but this will have to do in the meantime. In short, don't worry about it, and please do NOT take statins they are not good for you (like most drugs. Personally, I think they play a part in making us all fat, sick, and stupid.).
Absolutely, but there is a pretty serious catch: we do NOT need to consume carbs for glucose because our bodies can make their own through the process of gluconeogenesis. There are certain cells like those in the eyes that require glucose to function correctly, but the body can take proteins and fats and create its own glucose from those. The implications for this? Carbohydrates are nonessential for survival. While gluconeogenesis cannot produce enough glucose to be used as energy for the whole body (look up rabbit starvation), we can use fat as energy in the form of ketones.
I frankly find this argument not only silly, but deceptive. Everyone knows straight sucrose (table sugar) is bad, but we are misled when we are told about "complex" carbs like whole grains and legumes. We are told they have different carbs such as starch, sugar, fiber, and others instead of just straight sugar. But there is a problem: starches become sugar. Now, to the complex carbs crowd's credit, foods that have complex carbs do have more nutrients in them than sugary junk food, but the end result from a macronutrient perspective is the same: more sugar that we don't need (see previous paragraph).
Saturated fat has been demonized without any real evidence, and it should come as no surprise that most saturated fat comes from animal products (the plant-based agenda strikes yet again). The fallacious idea is that saturated fat clogs your arteries and leads to heart issues and strokes. Perhaps such things are true of polyunsaturated fats in literally rancid vegetable oils, but saturated fat has been a part of a healthy human diet for thousands of years. So yes, eat the chicken skin, the boston butt, and the delectably fatty ribeye steak. They won't hurt you.
Another quick point I want to make and this applies to all types of fat, minus transfat, is that there are several vitamins such as Vitamin D that are called "fat-soluble." This means that these fat-soluble vitamins are best absorbed in the prescence of dietary fat which conventional advice says we should severely limit.
See above. Interestingly, lean meat seems to have a higher insulin response than fatty meat.
This is very debatable. While I certainly won't tell someone to stop eating fiber, I find it hard to believe how a substance which we cannot really digest can be beneficial to us. At least don't take fiber supplements.
Eat when hungry. If you don't want breakfast, lunch, or a snack, then don't eat it. I'll cover more of this in the fasting section. Also, this is clearly a marketing ploy to get people to eat as much as possible which translates to profits.
What a load. It makes zero sense for the body to burn muscle first from a survival standpoint, because those very muscles are what help us survive. Not to mention it takes a lot more effort to transform our lean proteins into usable sugar via gluconeogenesis than it does to just use body fat. This is yet another way the big food manufacturers are trying to convince us all that we need to eat constantly which translates into profits.
This is the most important dietary tool we have. With it, we can fix many health problems, and it works as a reset button for when we eat garbage at family gatherings and such. Eat too many sugary sweets at Christmas? Fast for 24 hours or more. Its amazing just how versatile this tool is, no wonder the ancients used it all the time.
I personally follow a strict intermittent fasting schedule of 18 hours fasting (sleeping hours count) and 6 hours eating. All this means is that I can eat lunch at 12 if I wish and supper at 6 if I wish. If I'm trying to push past a certain weight setpoint, I will try One Meal A Day (OMAD) fasting for a while, or I may try extended fasting which is anything 48 hours or more. In case you're worried that fasting is dangerous, just read this story.
You're probably cringing already: "Oh great, another internet nutjob showing us how to eat correctly!" While that may be partially true, I am not going to tell you to eat several huge salads a day (good luck with that by the way), nor am I going to tell you to calorie restrict since we showed earlier how stupid calories are since the body doesn't know what they are. Nope, I am going to recommend any of the many variants of the Low Carb High Fat diet (LCHF). With every variant, remember that the most important thing is to stick to its carb limit, and secondarily, get the healthiest foods you can reasonably afford. These diets focus on eating real human food and will also lead to a healthy waistline.
The idea of LCHF is to keep carbs under 100g, eat adequate protein for your body's structure and size, and to reach satiety with healthy fats (no transfat nor too much polyunsaturated fat). This kind of diet places emphasis on meats, seafood, and non-starchy vegetables while generally excluding grains and added sugar. Some fruit can be eaten on LCHF but keep in mind modern fruit has been bred for maximum sugar. For some people this kind of diet may be enough to put them in ketosis (the state in which ketones, products of fat-breakdown, are used for energy), but for most it probably won't. Regardless, LCHF is many times healthier than the Standard American Diet.
I know, its everyone's favorite meme diet, but there is a reason it is popular and that is because it works. On most keto plans, the carb limit is 50g or lower. Again, some people may need to go lower than 50g to achieve ketosis if that is the goal; 20g or less is basically guaranteed to achieve ketosis. Like LCHF, focus on healthy meats, dairy, seafood, non-starchy vegetables while totally removing added sugars, starches, and grains. Just keep the digestible carbs under 50g.
This is what I am doing these days. In the Ketovore diet, the goal is to keep the carbs as low as possible. And the best way to do this? Focus on meats! Ketovore is really just Carnivore with the occaisonal vegetable.
Here it is, the most controversial diet around and wouldn't you know it is one of the best. Carnivore is exactly what it sounds like: animal foods only (dairy and eggs included, though you could be a strict meat eater). Go easy on the dairy though, because it does have milk sugar called lactose. Animal flesh and eggs have only miniscule amounts of carbohydrates (less than 1g) so this is as close as we can get to a 0 carb diet. You are guaranteed to be using fat for energy on this diet, and you will certainly have enough complete proteins to build a strong body.
It is often brought forward by conventional dietary advice (the "eat less move more" morons, as well as keto gurus) that a diet without vegetables is somehow deficient in key nutrients. To that I have two words: organ meats. They are nature's greatest multivitamins with highly absorbable forms of almost every vitamin and mineral. In fact, the best source Vitamin A is thought to come from carots, but beef liver has way more Vitamin A and it is more absorbable. Don't eat it everyday however, because it can actually give you a toxic dose of Vitamin A. Make it a weekly, or bi-weekly thing.
Here's the lamest excuse of all time. All of the diets showed above are perfectly doable on a small budget, yes, even Carnivore. Sure, you may not always buy grass-fed and free-range, but you can still do very well. I have developed a taste for canned meats like SPAM, and Vienna Sausages for when I need a little something extra, and they are cheap. Another thing to do for cheap protein is to find a local guy who sells sausage or other meats. I've got a man who makes wonderful turkey sausage with lard that is not at all expensive. You don't have to eat grass-fed ribeye every night! If you live in the country (as you should!), you could also hunt for turkey or deer, or butcher any extra roosters you have.
And it should go without saying, but I'll spell it out: vegetables are not expensive. Even organic vegetables are not expensive. Stop making excuses and cook your own food like an adult.
What follows is a list of great foods either for their nutritional value or simply inexpensiveness (sometimes both).
Absolutely. I started a ketogenic diet with 18:6 intermittent fasting in February of 2021 with the goal of getting to a healthy weight. Now, November 2021, I have lost 50 pounds. I started at 232, and I am now 182. In the past when I was 252, I calorie restricted down to 232, but it took A YEAR to do so, and every moment of it sucked because of compounding nutrient deficiencies. Considering that I have been obese since adolescence, I have never felt better.
Now, there's no need to be dogmatic about any of this information. I've fallen off the keto wagon a few times here and there, but it is an easy to fix with a 24 hour fast. And once I am happy with my gut, I intend to be more lenient in the way of healthy carbohydrates like those found in the Wise Traditions Diet.
Here are a few good websites as well as video doctors.