If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote:
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, wrote: I eat rice for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Mostly short-grained white Japanese rice, with some genmai (Japanese brown rice) mixed in. So why are you participating in a low carb newsgroup? This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Rice is not low carb, and thus not on topic. Low carb diets may include some carbs. That's why you're still fat. LOL! I've maintained a low body fat percentage for four years now. 6'1", 170-something pounds. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, wrote: I eat rice for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Mostly short-grained white Japanese rice, with some genmai (Japanese brown rice) mixed in. So why are you participating in a low carb newsgroup? This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Rice is not low carb, and thus not on topic. Low carb diets may include some carbs. Rice is not low carb, and rice is the bulk of your diet. You're in the wrong newsgroup. That's why you're still fat, between the ears. LOL! DOH!! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote:
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, wrote: I eat rice for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Mostly short-grained white Japanese rice, with some genmai (Japanese brown rice) mixed in. So why are you participating in a low carb newsgroup? This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Rice is not low carb, and thus not on topic. Low carb diets may include some carbs. Rice is not low carb, and rice is the bulk of your diet. The statement made in the right-hand clause of this sentence is not supported by any information I have given. It was therefore produced by something other than an intelligent, rational thought process. That's why you're still fat, between the ears. From the quote marks, it appears as if I had quoted this line in my earlier followup, but in fact the original line that I quoted was different. LOL! DOH!! Similarly, this line is attributed to me by the quoting level, but I didn't write it. The original line reads only ``LOL!''. Editing the content of quoted material, other than for brevity (and with clear indications) is, to me, an unacceptable breach of Usenet etiquette. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
"Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-06, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, jcderkoeing wrote: "Kaz Kylheku" wrote in message ... On 2008-08-05, wrote: I eat rice for breakfast, lunch and dinner. Mostly short-grained white Japanese rice, with some genmai (Japanese brown rice) mixed in. So why are you participating in a low carb newsgroup? This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Rice is not low carb, and thus not on topic. Low carb diets may include some carbs. Rice is not low carb, and rice is the bulk of your diet. The statement made in the right-hand clause of this sentence is not supported by any information I have given. It was therefore produced by something other than an intelligent, rational thought process. That's why you're still fat, between the ears. From the quote marks, it appears as if I had quoted this line in my earlier followup, but in fact the original line that I quoted was different. You figured that out all by yourself? LOL! DOH!! Similarly, this line is attributed to me by the quoting level, but I didn't write it. The original line reads only ``LOL!''. Editing the content of quoted material, other than for brevity (and with clear indications) is, to me, an unacceptable breach of Usenet etiquette. You really care about Usenet etiquette? How about taking your non-low carb rhetoric to another newsgroup? |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
jcderkoeing wrote in message ... You really care about Usenet etiquette? How about taking your non-low carb rhetoric to another newsgroup? +1 Cheri |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Read the title of the group, if you can. It says alt.SUPPORT.diet.low-carb, Not alt.lets.debate.diet.low-carb. You cannot possibly be this stupid and remember to breathe. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
BlueBrooke wrote in message ... On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 17:17:13 -0700, "Cheri" gserviceatinreachdotcom wrote: jcderkoeing wrote in message ... You really care about Usenet etiquette? How about taking your non-low carb rhetoric to another newsgroup? +1 Cheri Maybe he's a Susan Powter refugee. LOL, is she still alive? I haven't seen or heard about her in ages. Cheri |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
On 2008-08-07, BlueBrooke wrote:
On Wed, 6 Aug 2008 21:11:45 -0700, "Cheri" gserviceatinreachdotcom wrote: BlueBrooke wrote in message .. . Maybe he's a Susan Powter refugee. LOL, is she still alive? I haven't seen or heard about her in ages. Cheri I actually checked. She's got a website, but the front page is all Flash (which I have disabled) so I frankly have no idea what she's got to say. But yeah! She's still there! I don't know if she's still doing infomercials. Now that I have satellite, I'm spared those indignities. ;-) I remember, I saw this woman on television many years ago. It couldn't have been later than around 1991 because that was around the time I stopped watching TV. She was on some talk show, introduced as an outspoken advocate of eating better and exercising, who personally lost a lot of weight. I thought she was a more than a little over-the-top, but that's what made her memorable. Anyway, wow, she looks amazing. Even better than she did then, dare I say. She's kept it up. Though she's older, she is thinner, and more conscious about image, which make up for it. Whatever she has believed and done over the years has obviously worked for her. It's not clear why you two pigs brought her up. Are you trying to say that this woman /doesn't/ know what she's doing when it comes to losing fat and getting into shape? What does it mean to say that someone is a ``refugee from Susan Powter''? It sounds to me like some sort of skinny-bashing, fat-acceptance rhetoric, which has to do with hating people who are more successful than you are. That's hardly a position from which you can legitimately support others. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
On 2008-08-07, john wrote:
This is a discussion group where everyone is entitled to his opinion, provided it is on topic. Read the title of the group, if you can. It says alt.SUPPORT.diet.low-carb, Not alt.lets.debate.diet.low-carb. Fact is that the low-carb supporters do use this newsgroup to debate. Without opposing views, there is no true debate. The ``support'' part refers to helping people who are trying to diet. It doesn't refer to supporting the dieting ideology itself! People who are dieting are not helped by lies, such as that energy doesn't matter. As a successful dieter, and one who doesn't envy and hate even more successful dieters, I'm actually more in a position to support others. I've tried a lot of different ways of eating. All the ways that worked had only one thing in common: reduced calories. You cannot possibly be this stupid and remember to breathe. Insulting like this is completely ineffective when it's the bulk of your message. You will earn the privilege of insulting me properly when you actually cobble together a coherent argument. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
low carb diets, not necessarily
The ``support'' part refers to helping people who are trying to diet. It doesn't refer to supporting the dieting ideology itself! Apparently you still haven't learned how to read. The support refers to the low-carb diet. Read the title of this group, if you can. People who are dieting are not helped by lies, such as that energy doesn't matter. I think you are citing the first law of thermodynamics. Of course, that theory is basically irrefutable for all our collective knowledge but that the problem is that this scientific law is being grossly misapplied. Issue 1: The body is not a perfect system. We leak all over, our lungs, our noses, and more importantly our genitalia and our anuses constantly expunge matter. It is uncontestable that fat is turned into ketoids and we release those ketoids is all sorts of different ways without necessarily storing it as fat. Issue 2: Calories are not a physical entity, they are a measure of potential energy. However, we don't burn "fat", our cells utilize ketones and glucose. Furthermore there at least 4 different path ways that foods become usable energy, and by definition, there are most likely as many discrete levels of efficiency for all these processes. Two of these are dramatically different in nature (ketones vs. glucose) which makes the assumption of equal efficiency suspicious. Issue 3: A calorie is _not_ equal to how or why your body stores fat. One is measure of heat, and the other is a complicated metabolic process. We are concerned with storing fat. It is on its face an improper comparison. I've tried a lot of different ways of eating. All the ways that worked had only one thing in common: reduced calories. There have been documented studies which demonstrate that equal calorie diets based on different caloric composition result in different degrees of weight loss. It's not magic. Its not a subversion of physics. It's simple biology. Our body has two ways of processing energy and demonstrates different propensity for fat storage with each one. It's not a stretch unless you're insisting on a naive model of how the body operates. You cannot possibly be this stupid and remember to breathe. Insulting like this is completely ineffective when it's the bulk of your message. You will earn the privilege of insulting me properly when you actually cobble together a coherent argument. I earned the right to insult you because you are an idiot. You take stupidity to a new level. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bibliograph of Low-Carb studies? (was: Why Do Scientists Refuse to Recommend Lower-Carb Diets for Diabetes?) | John101 | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 5 | January 28th, 2008 05:12 PM |
Possible Benefits of LDL Cholesterol -- It Isn't Necessarily AllBad | Jim | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 4 | January 11th, 2008 06:03 PM |
Comparison of isocaloric very low carb/high sat fat and high carb/low sat fat diets on body composition and cardio risk | Roger Zoul | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 2 | January 31st, 2006 06:05 PM |
Low Carb Diets Really Low Calorie Diets | John WIlliams | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 27 | October 7th, 2004 10:19 PM |
Low Carb Diets Really Low Calorie Diets | John WIlliams | General Discussion | 24 | October 7th, 2004 04:03 PM |