Bulletproof coffee

I find myself agreeing with Rat.
It's uncomfortable. It's going to take some getting used to.
But the dude is right on this. Calories in, Calories out is as outdated as right and left brains.

 

No, calories in, calories out is completely valid

People who don't understand that don't really understand the dynamics of the human body correctly.

 

for what it's worth, he's also on TRT as well

 

For weight loss, perhaps, but not overall health.

 

^^From an overall health perspective, but also from a weight perspective.

While I don't deny that cutting calories will cause a person to lose weight, I also realize there is such a thing as starvation mode, where the body retains fat from not getting enough calories. It's also a known fact that when your insulin levels spike, as a result of eating sugar, starch and wheat, your body holds on to fat. This doesn't hold true with calories one gets from eating vegetable carbs, protein and saturated fat. These are not stored as fat like the others, but are utilized directly for energy while boosting the metabolism. So with this known, I don't see how one can say it is as simple as calories in/calories out when it comes to weight gain/loss.

I don't believe that eating 2500-3000 calories a day will cause a person to gain significant (if any) weight from fat if they are eating things like avocados, coconut oil, raw nuts, butter, pastured eggs and chicken, and grass-fed beef. I don't think the same holds true if a person is eating the same amount of calories in the form of trans and polyunsaturated fats from fried chicken, fast food and Little Debbie snack cakes.

I myself eat at least 3,000 on most days, yet haven't gained any weight in the form of fat. My waist size has shrunk as I have simultaneously gained mass in the form of muscle.

No offense, Fitzy, but your opinion does not surprise me, since, from what I have gathered, you see nothing wrong with GMOs and conventionally-farmed meat either.

 

But don't you also incorporate exercise?

 

I wouldn't say I don't see anything wrong with them...but i also don't see it as such an important issue as anti-gmo/anti-conventional farming people make it out to be either. the truth is more likely to be somewhere in the middle. i won't eat farm raised fish, and i generally try to eat grass fed beef...but i'm not going to lose a nut if I didn't or don't always have access. But i'm not worried about hormone injected animals as those hormones are destroyed once they reach our GI tract - i'm not going to forgo milk or milk based products because someone says humans shouldn't consume the milk of another animal - those people are loony if they believe a certain part of the animal should be eaten but another part shouldn't.

on the other hand, i'm not going to decry corporations that make it easier to produce more food to feed the masses through GMO production. it's an overwhelmingly good thing these people are able to be fed

Generally speaking, i support more people eating lean animal protein, consuming healthy fats, and loads of green veggies...and then modifying based on your goals from there. For some, that's performance based; others its weight gain where they generally need to eat loads more than they believe they're eating; and for those who need to lose weight, need to eat less. but this is when and where you start breaking down what the person is eating on a macro-nutrient basis - are they getting enough protein, fats, carbs? what quantities, etc


now, calorie in vs. calorie out is valid...but this statement is the simplified version of the equation. When you look at the true complexity of it, there really is no denying that it holds true. It's not a static model, and each variable does change, from both side of the equation. So, it's not simply what you eat vs what you put out...a lot more goes into it, but its valid. To deny it is to deny the complexity of the human body and how efficient it is in managing it's energy sources.

yes, there's much truth in the sort of nutrition you glean from different foods, as well as the efficacy of your body using that nutrient...but these are variables that change in the calories in, calories out model

...and to be more precise, it really should be energy in, energy out.

 

I have a question

Why?

Why do I need to put butter in my coffee? Why not just have coffee

 

Sounds tasty but I'd rather just drink coffee and put coconut oil in my smoothies in the morning. I've looked at asprey's stuff before and came away with the same conclusion - a couple of good ideas covered in a bunch of hokey marketing and ridiculous claims. He's just like Tim Ferris, another guy who claims to have accomplished all of these amazing things, and then you fond out that he pops provigil all the time.

 

Heart Specialist Calls for Major Repositioning on Saturated Fat, as it’s NOT the Cause of Heart Disease

Great article. Must read!

http://articles.***********/sites/articles/archive/2013/11/04/saturated-fat-intake.aspx

 

FDA moves to ban trans-fats.

This should have happened 40 years ago.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/breaking/chi-fda-trans-fat-20131107,0,5478599.story

"The Food and Drug Administration acknowledged Thursday for the first time that trans fats are unsafe, and took steps toward banning the artery-clogging substance from scores of food products.

The move follows a massive effort by food makers and restaurant chains to remove the fat during the last decade, as consumers become more educated about risks and vote for healthier alternatives with their wallets. The FDA has required nutritional labels break out trans fat content since 2006, a regulation that spurred many companies to alter their recipes.

Trans fats, used in a number of products from margarine and coffee creamer to frozen pizza, are still a big risk for Americans despite lower consumption during the last 20 years. The primary dietary source of trans fats in the American diet is from partially hydrogenated oils."

 

you dont need to. he said people were asking about this bullet coffee he makes and he shows how he makes it. what you put in your, or dont put in your coffee is your prerogative.

 

Coffee is cool yeah

This particular coffee sounds good too. Ray Peat (whom I listen to a lot) would support this I think.

My go-to for dealing with fat and many other issues is apple cider vinegar (specifically malic acid).

My second fave is coconut oil.

Hope that helps some people too

 

Trans-fats are bad news, but people are ultimately responsible for putting shit into their bodies. If people want to kill themselves with shit food, that's their prerogative. But at the same time I don't think I should have to pay for people who haven't taken care of themselves when they wind up in the hospital. I believe in personal responsibility and taking control of one's health.

There are scores of bad things found in processed food, from genetically modified soybean oil and lecithin, to refined sugar and high fructose corn syrup, to flavor enhancers and artificial sweeteners like MSG and Aspartame. Going after one thing isn't going to solve matters when people are still eating ungodly amounts of sugar and processed, starchy foods devoid of nutritional value.

When it comes to obesity, cholesterol, high blood pressure, diabetes and cancer, sugar is the biggest culprit of all, and I don't see a ban on that coming anytime soon. Most people couldn't go a day without consuming things with added sugar.

 

No doubt about it.

Coconut oil is an essential part of my diet. It's one of the best things a person can ingest. People think I am crazy because I eat it raw, straight out of the jar. But then again, they think drinking raw eggs, which I also do, is gross, too.

 

Children associate healthy vegetables often with gross as well

 

Rollin asked what happens if it doesn't work.

So I'm assuming your perspective is, why wouldn't it work?
The reason to even jump in on this thread is to challenge the assumption i see underlying most every comment here.

Not all human bodies work the same. I happen to be able to process and metabolize calories and fat better than average. But there are people out there that for whom taking advice like this and chugging pure fat would be a death sentence.

It might just be that the point of the OP is that eating real, natural, minimally processed whole foods in moderation has been the healthiest approach all along. Demonizing butter, eggs or carbs in some new trendy new diet fad is bad science, I'd agree.
Telling people that deriving more than 25% or more of your energy requirements from fats, transfats, unsaturated or whatever is good for you, is pretty flaky too.

funny, here's a quote

what's a Mediterranean-style diet?

http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mediterranean-diet/CL00011

So the mediterranean diet, full of sugars and carbs is better? Or... not?

 

The problem of trans-fats is glaring in the way that they were marketed to the general public as being a healthy alternative to something else that was supposedly bad for your health. Margarine and non-dairy coffee creamer as a replacement for butter and milk were mentioned earlier in the thread. It turns out that trans-fats are the unhealthiest fats of all. The general public was misled.

The trans-fat content wasn't required on labels in the U.S. until 2006. Being forced to show this ingredient was enough for some companies to scale back on trans-fat content.

Companies can still legally and misleadingly brag that their product has "zero grams of trans-fat" if it has less than one-half gram of trans-fat per serving. The consumer has to know enough to look for partially hydrogenated oil or shortening on the label to know that it actually has trans-fats when it says it doesn't.

The companies that were aggressively promoting trans-fats for decades should help pay for the health damage. If they were penalized for such behavior, they would think twice before launching yet another sneaky and misleading campaign at the general public to eat unhealthy food marketed as supposedly being a healthy alternative. Instead, the general public is now being penalized by a federal government mandate to pay for the resulting health problems that accumulated over the past few decades that are partly the result of processed foods with unhealthy contents, and the FDA is about four decades late in changing the rules.