- This topic has 5 voices and 10 replies.
-
Posts
-
Something that's been bothering me is: if ketosis without calorie counting makes one lean then why aren't eskimos shredded?!The answer seems to be that "the metabolism of the foodstuffs contained in the Eskimo dietary would not be expected to cause ketosis, because the calculated antiketogenic effect of the large protein ingestion was somewhat more than enough to offset the ketogenic effect of fat plus protein.""According to their data the average daily food partition is about 280 gm. of protein, 135 gm. of fat, and 54 gm. of carbohydrate of which the bulk is derived from the glycogen of the meat eaten."http://www.jbc.org/content/80/2/461.full.pdf
Something that's been bothering me is: if ketosis without calorie counting makes one lean then why aren't eskimos shredded?!
It's because Ketosis without calorie counting doesn't necessarily make you lean.
Some eskimos are not fat at all and i would say some are shredded or emanciated depending on how well the hunting season goes.
It's because Ketosis without calorie counting doesn't necessarily make you lean.
*I* know that but calorie counting is verboten on CNS and as they say: what you don't mesure, you can't improve.Having literally gone through a thousand odd posts, I'm pretty sure I can say not once have I seen the words "lower your calories" in response to someone stalling. 😮
It has happened once nightcall. One guy here was eating 8-9000 cals, and drinking cups of oil. Kiefer told him to lower his cals a bit.
Oh yeah! I remember!I think the main thing was to cut out the cups of oil... Or face the consequences! ;D
It's because Ketosis without calorie counting doesn't necessarily make you lean.
*I* know that but calorie counting is verboten on CNS and as they say: what you don't mesure, you can't improve.Having literally gone through a thousand odd posts, I'm pretty sure I can say not once have I seen the words "lower your calories" in response to someone stalling. 😮
I'm glad you know. You can still keep track of calories. Kiefer won't come out there and berate you for it. 😀 I think the whole reason you don't count them on CNS might be the fact that you'll spontaneously reduce your food due to the huger destroying effects of ketosis. So I guess, this keeps you from eating for some arbitrary caloric 'need'.The idea is that it's not possible to measure how your body uses those calories. Eating too much energy will stall your fat loss on a keto diet. (Or an Eskimo diet) It won't cause as much (if any) fat gain however. (all of this within reasonable calorie amounts)
I totally agree: the great advantage of a ketogenic diet is in the hunger control.I also agree that it's not possible to measure how your body uses those calories. That said in my opinion once someone has got to cruising speed on ketosis -ie has been in ketosis for a while, has lost weight and has stalled- it seems only fair to say they have hit their maintenance point for ketosis and should therefore tweak how much they eat to keep losing fat.
Right. Ketosis will probably get you to a healthy weight by default, but if you want to get ripped or even like 10-12% it'll probably take a bit of tweaking with training or food
Extended exposure to cold produces fat layers for insulation, hence big wide “fat” faces and no “shred”.http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev.an.09.100180.000431?journalCode=anthroEskimos probably aren't any more (or less) fat than other Canadians, and the rise of obesity in "Eskimo" populations mirrored the impact of Western foodstuffs (flour, milk, etc).http://www.ajcn.org/content/30/10/1623.full.pdf
Ketosis will probably get you to a healthy weight by default, but if you want to get ripped or even like 10-12% it'll probably take a bit of tweaking with training or food
Couldn't have said it better... Why can't I be that concise?! ;DI think the key to both the immediate initial fat loss and the widespread stalling is that the whole focus of CNS marketing is on ketosis, the flip side of that being a fear that any talk of lowering food intake would spoil the image.I'm rather dumbstruck by the fact that when a guy who works out, follows a diet originally geared towards women who don't work out and stalls on his way towards getting ripped, he's told it's because... he doesn't have enough muscle mass?! 😮The answer to that of course being to start a muscle building diet that -surprise- costs 4 or 5 times more than the original diet that still hasn't delivered the desired and promised results... Bait & switch?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.