- This topic has 13 voices and 53 replies.
-
Posts
-
I don't think it's a stretch at all to say results for CNS are better with healthier food choices. In my experience, I did three months of CNS last year and all tolled dropped about 20# of bw. My food choices weren't very healthy either in ULC days or during carb nites. This cycle I've chosen to eat Paleo foods (grass-fed meats, pastured dairy, vegetables) and in six weeks I'm closing in on 30# of weight loss. Now granted I do not have bodyfat %s on both sides of those periods as evidence, but consider Mark Bell's story, which is what inspired me to do CNS in the first place:Pushing Harder than Ever - by Mark BellMark's CNS results, which he attained under the guidance of Kiefer's client Jesse Burdick, also incorporated a largely Paleo diet. He's mentioned on multiple videos how his carb choices on Carb Nite were mostly white rice and sweet potatoes, with one less healthy choice later in the evening like ice cream. I think his "after" photos speak for themselves.Does this mean people cannot/have not achieve(d) similar results eating donuts all night on CNS? Likely not. But if you want the best shot at making CNS work for you, I'm certain that healthier food choices will help your results along faster than unhealthy ones, and that goes the same for your ULC choices and carb quality on carb nites.Let's also consider adding up all of the donut binges over a 3-month period of CNS, vs. binges of white rice and sweet potatoes. That's at least four days of carb intake (assuming an 8ish-hour carb nite once a week). Consider the aggregate effects of crappy processed carbs vs. healthy carbs over 96 hours of intake. The recent Robb Wolf podcast with Kiefer is definitely a good one. Check it out here:Paleo Solution Podcast #204 - Kiefer
Some people have reported the opposite. You have to do what works best for yourself.
It's also worth noting that people generally have a very hard time letting go of previously held beliefs about food and what is considered healthy. Folks on this forum are no exception.Consider that both CNS and CBL (in the text) encourage cherry turnovers and cheesecake or pizza. Foods commonly considered very unhealthy. Also consider that Kiefer has mentioned that when ppl try to implement CBL but swap "unhealthy" refined carbs for "healthier" carbs such as brown rice, it backfires due to insulin response varying.
True.. but as ibob said, these diets aren't about healthy.. They're about results.
That is not 100% true. Dr. Patel is using a version of CNS specifically with patients who have the singular goal of health and are achieving that goal.I think a big mistake many make is recognizing the HUGE difference in bodily responses between continual junk food snacking and short term junk food cycling.
Exactly. He's using a version. If you read the book (as well as listen to Kiefer) Carb Nite was created for maximum fat loss while maintaining muscle mass. It wasn't seen as healthy until later on. As I said, Carb Nite is as healthy as the user makes it. However, it doesn't have to be healthy. You can eat junk and still get excellent results.
Agreed. I would be curious as to the health consequences of longer term use of CNS with "junk" or non-junk food. I'm wondering if what we are considering "junk" is just an emotional issue we all have to some degree but the body doesn't recognize or respond to the difference. My hope is Kiefer and Dr. Patel can dig out more information and bring it into light for us.It may be that in the weekly short term cyclic use as in CNS that it doesn't make any difference in overall health. I could easily see in a program like CBL if "junk" were used daily it could make a much bigger difference. Very interesting to be sure.
Agreed. I would be curious as to the health consequences of longer term use of CNS with "junk" or non-junk food. I'm wondering if what we are considering "junk" is just an emotional issue we all have to some degree but the body doesn't recognize or respond to the difference. My hope is Kiefer and Dr. Patel can dig out more information and bring it into light for us.
I may be mis-reading, but isn't there a bit of a disconnect between your desire for grass-fed beef, but your wondering if there's a health consequence of donuts vs. sweet potatoes? There's nothing emotional about the contents of true junk food. For example, here are the contents of a Dunkin Donuts Blueberry Cake Donut (i.e. my favorite):Enriched Wheat Flour [Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Reduced Iron, Niacin, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Water, Sugar, Palm Oil, Partially Hydrogentated Vegetable Shortening (Soybean and Cottonseed Oil), Flavor Crystals [Sugar, Corn Syrup, Corn Cereal, Modified Food Starch, Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (Cottonseed and/or Soybean Oil), Artificial Flavor, Red 40, Green 3, Blue 1], Soybean Oil, Egg Yolk Powder, Soy Flour, Leavening (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Baking Soda, Sodium Aluminum Phosphate), Nonfat Milk, Salt, Pregelatinized Wheat Starch, Soy Lecithin, Dextrin, Gum Arabic, Konjac Flour, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Carrageenan Gum, Citric Acid; Glaze: Sugar, Water, Maltodextrin, Contains 2% or less of the following: Mono and Diglycerides, Agar, Cellulose Gum, Citric Acid, Potassium Sorbate (Preservative), Artificial Flavor.Here are the ingredients of a sweet potato: A Sweet Potato
Agreed. I would be curious as to the health consequences of longer term use of CNS with "junk" or non-junk food. I'm wondering if what we are considering "junk" is just an emotional issue we all have to some degree but the body doesn't recognize or respond to the difference. My hope is Kiefer and Dr. Patel can dig out more information and bring it into light for us.
I may be mis-reading, but isn't there a bit of a disconnect between your desire for grass-fed beef, but your wondering if there's a health consequence of donuts vs. sweet potatoes? There's nothing emotional about the contents of true junk food. For example, here are the contents of a Dunkin Donuts Blueberry Cake Donut (i.e. my favorite):Enriched Wheat Flour [Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Reduced Iron, Niacin, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Water, Sugar, Palm Oil, Partially Hydrogentated Vegetable Shortening (Soybean and Cottonseed Oil), Flavor Crystals [Sugar, Corn Syrup, Corn Cereal, Modified Food Starch, Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (Cottonseed and/or Soybean Oil), Artificial Flavor, Red 40, Green 3, Blue 1], Soybean Oil, Egg Yolk Powder, Soy Flour, Leavening (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Baking Soda, Sodium Aluminum Phosphate), Nonfat Milk, Salt, Pregelatinized Wheat Starch, Soy Lecithin, Dextrin, Gum Arabic, Konjac Flour, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Carrageenan Gum, Citric Acid; Glaze: Sugar, Water, Maltodextrin, Contains 2% or less of the following: Mono and Diglycerides, Agar, Cellulose Gum, Citric Acid, Potassium Sorbate (Preservative), Artificial Flavor.Here are the ingredients of a sweet potato: A Sweet Potato
+1 this made me smile
Agreed. I would be curious as to the health consequences of longer term use of CNS with "junk" or non-junk food. I'm wondering if what we are considering "junk" is just an emotional issue we all have to some degree but the body doesn't recognize or respond to the difference. My hope is Kiefer and Dr. Patel can dig out more information and bring it into light for us.
I may be mis-reading, but isn't there a bit of a disconnect between your desire for grass-fed beef, but your wondering if there's a health consequence of donuts vs. sweet potatoes? There's nothing emotional about the contents of true junk food. For example, here are the contents of a Dunkin Donuts Blueberry Cake Donut (i.e. my favorite):Enriched Wheat Flour [Flour, Malted Barley Flour, Reduced Iron, Niacin, Thiamin Mononitrate, Riboflavin, Folic Acid], Water, Sugar, Palm Oil, Partially Hydrogentated Vegetable Shortening (Soybean and Cottonseed Oil), Flavor Crystals [Sugar, Corn Syrup, Corn Cereal, Modified Food Starch, Partially Hydrogenated Vegetable Oil (Cottonseed and/or Soybean Oil), Artificial Flavor, Red 40, Green 3, Blue 1], Soybean Oil, Egg Yolk Powder, Soy Flour, Leavening (Sodium Acid Pyrophosphate, Baking Soda, Sodium Aluminum Phosphate), Nonfat Milk, Salt, Pregelatinized Wheat Starch, Soy Lecithin, Dextrin, Gum Arabic, Konjac Flour, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Carrageenan Gum, Citric Acid; Glaze: Sugar, Water, Maltodextrin, Contains 2% or less of the following: Mono and Diglycerides, Agar, Cellulose Gum, Citric Acid, Potassium Sorbate (Preservative), Artificial Flavor.Here are the ingredients of a sweet potato: A Sweet Potato
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
Forgive me, as I was addressing a question, not a point so I apologize for my misdirection.The question about healthier food choices only being perceived as healthier, and our bodies not knowing the difference was what I meant to respond to. My failed reply meant to point out a rather obvious fact that a healthy natural food like a sweet potato is more well-received by the body than a donut. I'm not talking about on-paper effectiveness for CNS results. I also thought it was interesting the question came from someone who consciously made beef quality part of their identity and forum name, but still inquired as to whether or not food quality meant anything to the body.
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
Forgive me, as I was addressing a question, not a point so I apologize for my misdirection.The question about healthier food choices only being perceived as healthier, and our bodies not knowing the difference was what I meant to respond to. My failed reply meant to point out a rather obvious fact that a healthy natural food like a sweet potato is more well-received by the body than a donut. I'm not talking about on-paper effectiveness for CNS results. I also thought it was interesting the question came from someone who consciously made beef quality part of their identity and forum name, but still inquired as to whether or not food quality meant anything to the body.
Here is the problem I have with what you are arguing:1. Just because a food has a lot of ingredients doesn't mean it's bad. Which ingredients are bad and why? For instance hydrogenated oils: yes those are bad. Water, Salt, milk, sugar (sweet potatoes have quite a bit of sucrose), palm oil: no, none of these are bad. A lot of the other ingredients are benign.2. Not every doughnut is made this way. Let's say I make a homemade donut. The ingredients would likely be flour, eggs, lard, and sugar. None of which are really unhealthy.Yes a doughnut can be unhealthy. You can also make a sweet potato unhealthy by replacing the butter you put on it with Crisco and and drenching it with Mrs. Buttersworth instead of putting some sugar on it.Additionally, there are many chemicals that occur naturally in the food we eat. Did you know 99% of the carcinogens we are exposed to are chemicals that occur naturally in food? read this article: http://athlete.io/1891/the-sins-of-organic/
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
Forgive me, as I was addressing a question, not a point so I apologize for my misdirection.The question about healthier food choices only being perceived as healthier, and our bodies not knowing the difference was what I meant to respond to. My failed reply meant to point out a rather obvious fact that a healthy natural food like a sweet potato is more well-received by the body than a donut. I'm not talking about on-paper effectiveness for CNS results. I also thought it was interesting the question came from someone who consciously made beef quality part of their identity and forum name, but still inquired as to whether or not food quality meant anything to the body.
Here is the problem I have with what you are arguing:1. Just because a food has a lot of ingredients doesn't mean it's bad. Which ingredients are bad and why? For instance hydrogenated oils: yes those are bad. Water, Salt, milk, sugar (sweet potatoes have quite a bit of sucrose), palm oil: no, none of these are bad. A lot of the other ingredients are benign.2. Not every doughnut is made this way. Let's say I make a homemade donut. The ingredients would likely be flour, eggs, lard, and sugar. None of which are really unhealthy.Yes a doughnut can be unhealthy. You can also make a sweet potato unhealthy by replacing the butter you put on it with Crisco and and drenching it with Mrs. Buttersworth instead of putting some sugar on it.Additionally, there are many chemicals that occur naturally in the food we eat. Did you know 99% of the carcinogens we are exposed to are chemicals that occur naturally in food? read this article: http://athlete.io/1891/the-sins-of-organic/
So now that we're switching from my making someone's point for them to the issues you have with my lack of specificity in listing unhealthy commercial donut ingredients (forgive me palm oil I never meant to lump you in with sugar!), I see what you're saying, though it has nothing to do with what I'm saying.Yes you can make a donut that's healthier than the above donut. But it's still a donut. It's not healthier or better for your body than a sweet potato (circling back to the question at hand).
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
Forgive me, as I was addressing a question, not a point so I apologize for my misdirection.The question about healthier food choices only being perceived as healthier, and our bodies not knowing the difference was what I meant to respond to. My failed reply meant to point out a rather obvious fact that a healthy natural food like a sweet potato is more well-received by the body than a donut. I'm not talking about on-paper effectiveness for CNS results. I also thought it was interesting the question came from someone who consciously made beef quality part of their identity and forum name, but still inquired as to whether or not food quality meant anything to the body.
Here is the problem I have with what you are arguing:1. Just because a food has a lot of ingredients doesn't mean it's bad. Which ingredients are bad and why? For instance hydrogenated oils: yes those are bad. Water, Salt, milk, sugar (sweet potatoes have quite a bit of sucrose), palm oil: no, none of these are bad. A lot of the other ingredients are benign.2. Not every doughnut is made this way. Let's say I make a homemade donut. The ingredients would likely be flour, eggs, lard, and sugar. None of which are really unhealthy.Yes a doughnut can be unhealthy. You can also make a sweet potato unhealthy by replacing the butter you put on it with Crisco and and drenching it with Mrs. Buttersworth instead of putting some sugar on it.Additionally, there are many chemicals that occur naturally in the food we eat. Did you know 99% of the carcinogens we are exposed to are chemicals that occur naturally in food? read this article: http://athlete.io/1891/the-sins-of-organic/
So now that we're switching from my making someone's point for them to the issues you have with my lack of specificity in listing unhealthy commercial donut ingredients (forgive me palm oil I never meant to lump you in with sugar!), I see what you're saying, though it has nothing to do with what I'm saying.Yes you can make a donut that's healthier than the above donut. But it's still a donut. It's not healthier or better for your body than a sweet potato (circling back to the question at hand).
What would make a homemade donut anything less healthy or better for your body then a sweet potato?And saying it's empty nutrition is a poor argument because the things used to make that homemade donut would have fatty acids, amino acids, minerals, vitamins, anti-oxidents as well, they just may not be the same ones.
And yet you proved his point just by posting this.
Forgive me, as I was addressing a question, not a point so I apologize for my misdirection.The question about healthier food choices only being perceived as healthier, and our bodies not knowing the difference was what I meant to respond to. My failed reply meant to point out a rather obvious fact that a healthy natural food like a sweet potato is more well-received by the body than a donut. I'm not talking about on-paper effectiveness for CNS results. I also thought it was interesting the question came from someone who consciously made beef quality part of their identity and forum name, but still inquired as to whether or not food quality meant anything to the body.
Here is the problem I have with what you are arguing:1. Just because a food has a lot of ingredients doesn't mean it's bad. Which ingredients are bad and why? For instance hydrogenated oils: yes those are bad. Water, Salt, milk, sugar (sweet potatoes have quite a bit of sucrose), palm oil: no, none of these are bad. A lot of the other ingredients are benign.2. Not every doughnut is made this way. Let's say I make a homemade donut. The ingredients would likely be flour, eggs, lard, and sugar. None of which are really unhealthy.Yes a doughnut can be unhealthy. You can also make a sweet potato unhealthy by replacing the butter you put on it with Crisco and and drenching it with Mrs. Buttersworth instead of putting some sugar on it.Additionally, there are many chemicals that occur naturally in the food we eat. Did you know 99% of the carcinogens we are exposed to are chemicals that occur naturally in food? read this article: http://athlete.io/1891/the-sins-of-organic/
So now that we're switching from my making someone's point for them to the issues you have with my lack of specificity in listing unhealthy commercial donut ingredients (forgive me palm oil I never meant to lump you in with sugar!), I see what you're saying, though it has nothing to do with what I'm saying.Yes you can make a donut that's healthier than the above donut. But it's still a donut. It's not healthier or better for your body than a sweet potato (circling back to the question at hand).
Could you explain why?
I think this is a great conversation and one that most folks would never even think to have. As an example to my question, carbs in general can be very unhealthy as is shown by most modern populations. HOWEVER, carbs used in a specific amount for a specific purpose in a specific time frame as per this nutrition protocol can be used to achieve great health. Are some carbs better than other carbs used for this specific purpose and will those better choices create even greater health? I'm positive there are differences. Are the differences major or minor? Again, I'm positive there are some of both.My emotional limitations previously included things like is butter good or bad? I of course thought bad so I've had to open my mind with reason and logic and change my emotional dislike of butter. My main point was to ask if some of our aversions to certain foods are real or emotional or some of both?
Junk is only junk when its taken out of context. A diet of pop-tarts is a junk food diet. A diet which includes pop-tarts is only as good as the rest of the diet. You can also buy or make food that resembles junk food that doesnt have all the additives that would make it "bad".Also bare in mind that unless you are buying produce that is 100% truly organically grown (in soil that isnt depleted, isnt laced with pesticides and other chemicals and poisons, harvested correctly, allowed to rippen naturally and not irradiated and transported for thousands of miles) that you are probably NOT getting anywhere near the benefit of the food that you think you are getting. In this scenario its even less of an issue to have a pop-tart instead of an apple or whatever.
Yes you can make a donut that's healthier than the above donut. But it's still a donut. It's not healthier or better for your body than a sweet potato (circling back to the question at hand).
Ah, but what if you make the donut out of sweet potato? It's a paradox!
Junk is only junk when its taken out of context. A diet of pop-tarts is a junk food diet. A diet which includes pop-tarts is only as good as the rest of the diet. You can also buy or make food that resembles junk food that doesnt have all the additives that would make it "bad".Also bare in mind that unless you are buying produce that is 100% truly organically grown (in soil that isnt depleted, isnt laced with pesticides and other chemicals and poisons, harvested correctly, allowed to rippen naturally and not irradiated and transported for thousands of miles) that you are probably NOT getting anywhere near the benefit of the food that you think you are getting. In this scenario its even less of an issue to have a pop-tart instead of an apple or whatever.
I think you are hitting the nail on the head here. Why does it matter if you eat a pop-tart or some kind of junk food after already obtaining the minimum micronutrients needed to maintain health through the rest of your diet? Unless you have an intolerance to processed foods I see no reason why you shouldn't. Squeeze in all the junk you can get away with I say (if not for your sanity), unless you prefer 'eating clean' in which case go for it.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.