
I've lost just over 1 stone in 5 weeks by taking his advice on board. I'm sure somebody else out there will find this beneficial.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 10:51, Reply)

by eating less and exercising more...
FACT!!!
but seriously, whatever gets you there safely. Well done on your loss :-)
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 10:54, Reply)

In less than 10 minutes you could find out how ignorant this belief is.
EDIT: But you should watch the whole talk. I don't care if you do, I'm not trying to sell you anything but you may just be amazed at what you learn.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 10:57, Reply)

as it has worked and I lost 3 stone?
I exercise purely to get fit. Whats the point of losing all that weight, and still being a slob? It also sheds a few calories, but not the amount I need to lose me fat.
edit: I have watched it, and I havent seen any evidence yet. Just an assumption.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:01, Reply)

I still go to the gym 3 or 4 times a week because I enjoy getting fitter and stronger. I'm with you on that.
Just watch the lecture already! :)
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:03, Reply)

I'm sure you'll find it enlightening. Congrats on your weight loss too btw!
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:13, Reply)

Didn't change my calorie intake and I've always worked out. That sounds a bit like Atkins but that diet goes a lot further into Ketosis and the like. The main thing for me was realising the following: Carbs raise insulin levels and insulin puts fat into cells. I keep carbs low (no bread, cereal, pasta, chips, etc) to prevent this happening and the weight is literally falling off me. For two of those five weeks I was injured and didn't get to the gym and the weight loss remained constant.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:26, Reply)

interesting. A colleague at work went on a wheat free diet, and the same happened to her.
I have found it very good, that little video. But there are lots of things in it when I said to myself 'well, that can be explained, possibly through evolution and such'. such as the distribution of fat between males and females. And carbs are well know for being bad for you, and wheat free diets tend to work. But if you go wheat (carb) free for too long, your body can reject them when you do eat them again. and when you try and do a carb free diet again, you body goes 'NO WAY!!!' and is harder to do so.
This colleague of mine was basiscally anorexic doing that, now she is overweight again, and finds it hard to shed the pounds long term.
My diet is very cal determined, but I also limit fats and carbs. But dont cut them out completely, believe me. You will still lose weight :-)
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:37, Reply)

3 rashers, 2 sausages, 2 fried eggs and a tomato. All done with extra virgin olive oil.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:49, Reply)

I'm not carb free though. I've just limited them. I don't want to feel like I'm on a diet because people fall of diets. Also the problem with reducing calories is that your body will lower your metabolism when you do and will also raise your insulin sensitivity permanently so you're doubley screwed. This is most likely what happened to your colleague - she cut grain but did she replace the lost calories with protein or fat, I doubt it.
I don't agree that it's well known that carbs are bad for you. I still hear about low-fat more than anything else when it comes to public health although I believe the screw is starting to turn on that one.
I'm glad you have something that works for you, but the evidence is compelling when there are obese people living on bread and coffee that there is more to the equation than calories in vs calories out.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:47, Reply)

is that it is harder to burn. Calories are easier, but it you dont burn they turn into fat.
I shall take what this guy says on board, but I will have to research more before I go head on into it :-)
edit: the thing with his compelling evidence, is there is no counter evidence, really. There can be two sides to it also.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:53, Reply)

And that's not because the trials aren't being done. It's because the lipid hypothesis is wrong but they still flog it to this day.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:57, Reply)

Saying that calories are harder to burn than fat is like saying that brass bands are easier to hear than decibels.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 13:56, Reply)

my diet has not changed but my exercise level has. I am now quite sedentary and have gone from a lifelong lanky git into a tubby bastard.
Stephen Fry recently lost loads of weight by simply putting an audio book onto his mp3 player and going out for long walks.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:01, Reply)

Having constantly high blood sugar will keep your insulin levels elevated which will eventually render you insulin resistant, or, will knacker your pancreas.
That's how people get Type II diabetes.
EDIT: I'm sure if Stephen Fry is putting effort into going for long walks he has probably altered his diet too. Another problem with calorie restricted diets is that you lose weight in the ratio of 60/40 fat/muscle but because they raise your insulin sensitivity you become more likely to put the weight back on. It has been found that the weight usually goes back on 80/20 fat/muscle. This is why people yo-yo diet.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:11, Reply)

Yep I had the same experience cutting out the fat and eating a low GI (glycemic index) diet.
" Eating shag all carbs. "
Fat dropped off me.
Beer sadly has a high GI, but vodka happily is okay!
An curious side effect to this diet is you are fuckin starving all the time, and the vodka makes you all fighty.
Because you are all fighty and now skinny and weak you will find yourself getting chinned rather more often.
Still you look trim whilst getting paggard
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:29, Reply)

Put the fat back into your diet and you won't be so hungry.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:32, Reply)

When a scientist steps well outside their field of expertise, there's a surprisingly high chance that anything they're telling you is complete and utter bollocks.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:02, Reply)

He is not a scientist. He is a journalist.
EDIT: Cough cough Galileo ahem..
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:04, Reply)

he's a journalist by trade, his background is in science and engineering, the latter discipline famously being wildly over-represented in the crank spectrum; and I hate to break it to you, but I have yet to come across a more reliable indicator of hard-core crankery than bringing Galileo into the conversation.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:30, Reply)

But don't let a nonce like me taint the lecture for you. He's not the only one advocating this kind of advice either.
I wouldn't post this here if I thought it was bollox. Like I said in the title, I'm having great success losing weight and I completely attribute that to reducing my carbohydrate intake.
Do you actually not believe the section on insulin controlling fat levels or what is your main problem with the lecture?
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:39, Reply)

by replacing cigarettes with a cake habit
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:03, Reply)

by sitting at my desk for 16 hours a day
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:43, Reply)

You put on 3 stone because your insulin is elevated from a carbohydrate rich diet (read normal western diet).
It has been proven in animals and sets of twins that activity levels do not determine fat levels.
/sorry for harking on. I really don't want to be that guy.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 11:55, Reply)

How can you be so certain?
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:21, Reply)

"You could have put on 3 stone..."
But the fact that activity levels do not determine fat levels is still true.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:26, Reply)

But yeah, those guys are just making a living out of helping people lose weight.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 13:54, Reply)

I will admit i made it to tubby bastard levels a couple of years ago by eating and drinking too much shit.
My ideal weight when i was 19 was 9 1/2 stone at 5'5"
I trained day in day out and was built like a proverbial (small) shithouse due to doing karate, gymanastics, football, rugby, you name it i've probably put my hand to it.
After starting working in offices i gradually started not exercising and putting it all into my job.
I got married at 13 stone when i was 25. I have now found that when i want to do it, i can drop my weight between 10-12 stone just by training and eating a varied diet, no cutting anything out, or limiting myself, but just by being generally healthy, or unhealty. Just think about ricky hatton. Does he lose all that weight and chunk by not training and just dieting. i hope not. training is what you need to do, and have a balanced diet.
Flame me all you like, but i'm healthy, fit, can still enjoy my food without having to listen to people who consider themselves experts.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:50, Reply)

I haven't found any scientific evidence whatsoever to argue the contrary.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:30, Reply)

I was 11st 8 a few days ago. Viral infections rule!
Viral infections in fact don't rule. Chronic diarrhoea alongside brain numbing headaches are rubbish.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:19, Reply)

..he wasn't getting anywhere and stated a lot of stuff as fact that raised some red flags. Plus he wants to sell us a book.
I've heard this kind of talk before. I've lost weight just by not eating crisps and chocoalate ect. I'm sure I could make that sound all scientific if I wanted to.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:35, Reply)

i have come to the conclusion that this is kinda a theistic approach to dieting. Where as it may work (for you) and calories work for others (me) it still sounds like slimming world or many other diets patched together. I did not find any of these lectures rational. It is a very 'point finger at facts that confirm my belief.' However, I am willing to do further research into it. If it has been accepted by any others scientists, and if there has been any studies providing evidence to its effectiveness. This really needs to be scientifically tested. And yes, I know I jumped on the calorie band wagon, but I have looked into it very deeply.
Any who, lets catch up in a few months time and see how we are both doing, I may be wrong, and you may be spot on :-)
Good luck, off for a sunbathe...
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 12:38, Reply)

Why would you bring religion into a discussion about weight loss?
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 14:01, Reply)

But after watching the first 2 I'm not convinced. I'm not seeing any strong evidence and I have issue with the Indian arguement. But I'll try and give it a chance, it'd be nice to actually be able to shift the weight :(
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 13:07, Reply)

I watched some more and it's not doing it for me. I don't think he's an out and out snake oil seller because he seems to lack any sort of charisma and presence. I do think he comes across as a slap dash researcher at best.
Oh well, back to the exercise bike for me.
( , Sun 27 Jun 2010, 13:37, Reply)