A Weightloss and diet forum. WeightLossBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » WeightLossBanter forum » alt.support.diet newsgroups » Low Calorie
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Uncovering the Atkins diet secret



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #111  
Old February 13th, 2004, 04:16 AM
kvs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Uncovering the Atkins diet secret

"J Stutzmann" wrote in message ink.net...
Thermodynamics --- a law we can't live without! [grin]


It's not a law but a collection of laws. Thermodynamics is about the
aggregate statistical behaviour of systems, assuming a Boltzman
distribution for the energy in the states of the system. You cannot
reconstruct the microphysics of a system starting with thermodynamics.



wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s53...
In sci.med.nutrition tcomeau wrote:
: Maybe the lesson to be learned is that calories really have little
: bearing when it comes to weight gain or loss in humans.

1) Please learn to trim quotes
2) Have you somehow forgotten the laws of thermodynamics? It is quite
simple: if energy in energy out, the body will gain mass.


Wow. The reverse of a nuclear explosion! There are no mass-energy
conversions in chemical reactions. You gain mass because the various
chemical reactions in your body that keep you alive start storing some
of the mass that you consume instead of extracting chemical energy
from it and excreting the mass. Now what triggers this mass storage?
It isn't thermodynamics, it is the design of the the cellular
chemistry and cell microphysics. Different people have sufficiently
different microphysics (e.g. number of insulin receptors in their cell
membranes) that assuming that one energy balance model works for
everyone is absurd. One person who consumes several slices of bread
or any other starchy food will respond to the induced insulin spike by
producing more heat while another will respond by storing fat created
from the starch (which is a collection of glucose molecules). The
system of each of these individuals will obey the laws of
thermodynamics but clearly the result is different.

If
energy out energy in, the body will lose mass.


Yes, just like in the fission of Unranium nuclei....
  #112  
Old February 13th, 2004, 10:21 AM
Moosh:)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Uncovering the Atkins diet secret

On 12 Feb 2004 19:16:05 -0800, (kvs) posted:

"J Stutzmann" wrote in message ink.net...
Thermodynamics --- a law we can't live without! [grin]


It's not a law but a collection of laws. Thermodynamics is about the
aggregate statistical behaviour of systems, assuming a Boltzman
distribution for the energy in the states of the system. You cannot
reconstruct the microphysics of a system starting with thermodynamics.



wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s53...
In sci.med.nutrition tcomeau wrote:
: Maybe the lesson to be learned is that calories really have little
: bearing when it comes to weight gain or loss in humans.

1) Please learn to trim quotes
2) Have you somehow forgotten the laws of thermodynamics? It is quite
simple: if energy in energy out, the body will gain mass.


Wow. The reverse of a nuclear explosion! There are no mass-energy
conversions in chemical reactions.


Who said there were?

You gain mass because the various
chemical reactions in your body that keep you alive start storing some
of the mass that you consume instead of extracting chemical energy
from it and excreting the mass.


Or you store excess chemical energy in your food intake as chemical
energy in the body. A gram of fat stores 9 calories, and a gram of
carb and protein stores 4 calories of energy.

Now what triggers this mass storage?


Excess energy in the system.

It isn't thermodynamics,


Thermodynamics is just a succinct statement that energy can neither be
created nor destroyed, something that some here seem to overlook, at
times.


it is the design of the the cellular
chemistry and cell microphysics.


No, excess energy in the system is just stored as chemical energy in
the body tissues. No excess, no storage.

Different people have sufficiently
different microphysics (e.g. number of insulin receptors in their cell
membranes) that assuming that one energy balance model works for
everyone is absurd.


Less receptors just means the reaction is slower. The end point is
the same however.


One person who consumes several slices of bread
or any other starchy food will respond to the induced insulin spike by
producing more heat while another will respond by storing fat created
from the starch (which is a collection of glucose molecules). The
system of each of these individuals will obey the laws of
thermodynamics but clearly the result is different.


But of course this different heat output is insignificant. Otherwise
folks would overheat. How is extra heat generated when muscular
activity is not increased? The BM generally produces enough metabolic
heat to keep folks comfortable. (In reasonable climates, that is

If
energy out energy in, the body will lose mass.


Yes, just like in the fission of Unranium nuclei....


WTF are you talking about? 1000 calories of food in, and 500 calories
of energy out, and you will have 500 calories of excess energy stored.

That will be a couple of ounces of fat, thankyou very much.

Moosh



  #113  
Old February 13th, 2004, 05:41 PM
kvs
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Uncovering the Atkins diet secret

"Moosh" wrote in message . ..
On 12 Feb 2004 19:16:05 -0800, (kvs) posted:

"J Stutzmann" wrote in message ink.net...
Thermodynamics --- a law we can't live without! [grin]


It's not a law but a collection of laws. Thermodynamics is about the
aggregate statistical behaviour of systems, assuming a Boltzman
distribution for the energy in the states of the system. You cannot
reconstruct the microphysics of a system starting with thermodynamics.



wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s53...
In sci.med.nutrition tcomeau wrote:
: Maybe the lesson to be learned is that calories really have little
: bearing when it comes to weight gain or loss in humans.

1) Please learn to trim quotes
2) Have you somehow forgotten the laws of thermodynamics? It is quite
simple: if energy in energy out, the body will gain mass.


Wow. The reverse of a nuclear explosion! There are no mass-energy
conversions in chemical reactions.


Who said there were?


Ever hear of sarcasm?


You gain mass because the various
chemical reactions in your body that keep you alive start storing some
of the mass that you consume instead of extracting chemical energy
from it and excreting the mass.


Or you store excess chemical energy in your food intake as chemical
energy in the body. A gram of fat stores 9 calories, and a gram of
carb and protein stores 4 calories of energy.

Now what triggers this mass storage?


Excess energy in the system.


Fat storage is triggered by specific chemical messangers. When you
eat a low fat, high carb diet malonyl CoA levels are high and inhibit
fatty acid oxidation by inhibiting carnitine-palmitoyl transferase I,
found in the outer mitochondrial membrane. As a result most fatty
acids end up as triglycerol for export in VLDL lipoprotein by the
liver. Fatty acid synthesis occurs in response to a high carb, low
fat diet. Glucose is converted into pyruvate in the cytoplasm, which
is then transported into the mitochondria and converted into
acetyl-CoA and carbon dioxide. Acetyl-CoA is converted into
Malonyl-CoA by acetyl-CoA carboxylase (ACC). Acetyl-CoA and
Malonyl-CoA are are two key stages of fatty acid synthesis. ACC is
inhibited by glucagon and epinephrine (i.e. a high protein diet and
exercise) but ACC is activated by insulin and citrate.

Receptors on adipose cell surfaces respond to the glucagon/insulin
ratio. If the ratio increases (fall in insulin or increase in
glucagon or both) then lypolisis is triggered. Glucagon increases the
phosphorylation of hormone sensitive lipase (HSL) by increasing cAMP
and the cAMP-dependent protein kinases. Insulin decreases HSL
phosphorylation through processes that decrease cAMP and activating
phosphatases that inactivate HSL by removing phosphates from it.


It isn't thermodynamics,


Thermodynamics is just a succinct statement that energy can neither be
created nor destroyed, something that some here seem to overlook, at
times.


it is the design of the the cellular
chemistry and cell microphysics.


No, excess energy in the system is just stored as chemical energy in
the body tissues. No excess, no storage.


I just described for you the physical difference between individuals
with different numbers of insulin receptors in their cell membranes.
Putting it in your terms, the insulin resistant individual will have a
much lower threshold for "excess" than the "normal" individual when it
comes to a high carb diet. So the advice for them is to avoid high
carb diets at all costs if they don't want to become obese. The same
number of calories for the same ideal body weight will make then gain
fat while the "normal" individual will gain nothing.


Different people have sufficiently
different microphysics (e.g. number of insulin receptors in their cell
membranes) that assuming that one energy balance model works for
everyone is absurd.


Less receptors just means the reaction is slower. The end point is
the same however.


For the appropriate level of caloric intake one individual will have
no weight gain while the other will have adipose fat storage working
for a longer period of time. The chemical energy that would have been
converted to heat through cellular respiration in the "normal"
individual will have to be stored as fat in the insulin resistant
individual. It would be nice if insulin resistant people could just
dump the fraction of glucose that they cannot burn compared to the
"normal" people but it doesn't work that way.



One person who consumes several slices of bread
or any other starchy food will respond to the induced insulin spike by
producing more heat while another will respond by storing fat created
from the starch (which is a collection of glucose molecules). The
system of each of these individuals will obey the laws of
thermodynamics but clearly the result is different.


But of course this different heat output is insignificant. Otherwise
folks would overheat. How is extra heat generated when muscular
activity is not increased? The BM generally produces enough metabolic
heat to keep folks comfortable. (In reasonable climates, that is


I percieve a noticeable increase in my heat output after a meal. Fat
accumulation is really slow. Of course by stuffing oneself fat
accumulation can be made quite rapid. My point is that a high carb
meal with the appropriate amount of calories will do different things
to different people. So insulin resistant people have to literally
starve themselves in order to eat high carb meals and not gain weight.
This is a recipe for morbid obesity and not health.
By shifting the protein and carb ratio of the meal, while keeping the
number of calories fixed, insulin resistant people can avoid the
nightmare.


If
energy out energy in, the body will lose mass.


Yes, just like in the fission of Unranium nuclei....


WTF are you talking about? 1000 calories of food in, and 500 calories
of energy out, and you will have 500 calories of excess energy stored.

That will be a couple of ounces of fat, thankyou very much.


You are missing the point, comletely.
  #114  
Old February 14th, 2004, 03:26 PM
nck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Uncovering the Atkins diet secret

Right on, Sister! Oh well, you can tell what era ***I*** come from!
One of the things that has happened to me as I stick to my eating plan is
getting an "inner guide" as to what I should or should not be eating. I was
pleased this week to notice that the chocolate cakes, cookies etc just no
longer appeal to me.
My doctor put it like this: we are born with the impulses to steal and lie,
etc but this gets trained out of us. Those of us who have internalized the
lesson are the ones who will pick up a fallen wallet full of money and get
it back to the owner instead of going on a spending spree. Those of us who
have learned what we should and should not be eating have internalized this
self-control issue and that's what will help keep it off once we get there!
This is important once the satisfaction element of seeing the scale-readings
move downward.
BTW, I just wanted to let the rest of us "losers" know that, with my falling
weight, my blood pressure has gone from elevated to readings of
normal-to-slightly-low...low being kind of "normal" for my family, so hang
in there on your own efforts!

in article , Carol Frilegh at
wrote on 2/12/04 9:11:

And they don't matter in the long run because people can't give
everlasting microscopic attention to every bite for a lifetime.

They have to develop an eating "cruise control" that they can use
without negative calorie theories and this fiber concept, Fiber is
important for good bowel function. Eating less, exercising more and
doing it ongoing is what will yield results. The one thing that stands
out IMO is this has to be a lifetime committment, not annual, seasonal
or now and then, not let's splurge weekends and start over Monday.

--
Diva
******
There is no substitute for the right food


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
You want PROOF - Here's Quackery Proof. marengo Low Carbohydrate Diets 173 April 17th, 2004 11:26 PM
Uncovering the Atkins diet secret Diarmid Logan General Discussion 135 February 14th, 2004 05:56 PM
Atkins diet may reduce seizures in children with epilepsy Diarmid Logan General Discussion 23 December 14th, 2003 12:39 PM
ARTICLE: Yet another study has shown that the Atkins diet works Jim Marnott Low Carbohydrate Diets 108 December 12th, 2003 04:12 AM
Was Atkins Right After All? Ken Kubos Low Carbohydrate Diets 5 November 23rd, 2003 12:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2018 WeightLossBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.