Low-Fat Diet, Hypocaloric Diet, Weight Loss, Metabolism

[Zachs]

Yea, it's tricky though because a lot of overweight people are relatively healthy because fat gain is often the bodies way of protecting itself. Once fat loss occures, people usually end up worse health wise than they started. that's why I think the mechanism for fat loss I described would be ideal.

Best bet is to just not get overweight in the first place.

 

[RPDiciple]

Zachs: hehe yeah kind of, but its also the way they loose the fat or often times weight that is the problem. People go on this starve plans with tons of cardio, esp women wich does have little nutrition and very little protein. So they actually loose mostly weight aka lean mass and bad stuff and not just fat. So when their weight loss journey is over they are starting off way worse because their metabolic rate got much lower because ofc they are at a lower weight but they lost muscles wich are metabolic active tissue.

So i think you can loose fat safetly with the RP foods, and yes no fat /low fat i also think is an ideal way to do it for sure. Since if you overeat on sugar it will just get stored as the best saturated fat wich will not cause issues when it gets mobilized for usage when you want to loose the fat.

Also back to the thing in terms of people that loose weight is also like i said in terms of nutrition and the nutrition they use and the way they get back after a weight loss phase. Most people just binge on crap foods wich then stores alot PUFA again etc etc etc bad cycle.

Yupp that is the best way for sure :)

 

[Such_Saturation]

There does not need to be a calorie deficit. That guy went so high, for example, that his body decided to completely discard its own energy budget, hence burning all that food as well as more.

Have you ever read RP`s answers in regards to fat loss? 2-3 quarts skimmed milk and 1 quart oj will take care of most of the stress he replied. Well thats 1000-1400 kcals.

That's interesting, I never realized how little that is.

I'm not sure RP means that anyone, regardless of age, gender, health status, activity levels etc. need only have 2-3 quarts of milk and some juice and all their nutritional and caloric needs are met. Surely it's just a minimum requirement to reduce stress if fat/weight loss is needed?

I think in that case Ray Peat was just thinking "do my thing but using skimmed milk" without considering how many less calories that is.

 

[tara]

I have never said that milk and oj is all you should eat either. Im saying that it covers almost everything to make you loose fat at an insane fast rate without causing stress. That is the maxiumum amount of fat loss of week he says is safe.

I do not think I could live on 2l milk +1l OJ for even a few days without it causing fairly severe stress. I've certainly had days when I've had more than this but still not enough to avoid stressful hunger (+sleeplessness etc). I do believe this may vary from person to person.

The reason i bring this is up is that most people here think that RP dont recommend calorie restrction for loosing fat

I don't know about most people - seems like a fairly broad range of opinions here.

and even the slighest calorie deficit will make one totally stressed out, binge like crazy, metabolic wreck and all that stuff which people associate with Minnesota Experiement and other crazy starvation stuff.

I have not read that opinion from anyone here. I have not seen anybody say that small energy deficits are guaranteed to produced major derangements in everybody. Attributing extreme views to people you disagree with makes them easy to refute, but may be missing the point. Personally, I think small deficits have small and in many cases probably avoidable risks, while large deficits are likely to have larger risks which may in the short-term be avoidable for some people, but probably not for all. (For people recovering from anorexia etc, any attempt at restriction is likely to pose a high risk to health. This can include some people who are currently considered fat. )

Calorie restriction and starvation cant not be mentioned in the same sentence because its so differrent.

Complete starvation is the extreme end of calorie restriction. I don't see why they shouldn't be discussed together. They have some features in common, especially when it comes to extreme restriction.

The Minnesota (semi-)starvation experiment had the men eating about 1600 cals. That is a level of calories that has been mentioned in this thread to produce a deficit. In this context, what is crazy about mentioning that when men were observed eating ~1600 cals, their physical and psychological health went badly down hill in a number of importat ways? Nobody said exactly the same thing would happen to everybody who tries a small deficit for a limited period. As I have said, I think current state and history are relevant. The men studied were in reasonably good health to begin with.

You keep saying you haven't seen any science that has shown these things can happen, and then you say we mustn't talk about this science. There is science demonstrating that there can be negative metabolic and health effects from calorie restriction. Maybe you just haven't seen it yet. If you refuse to even consider the science because you've already decided it is crazy or irrelevant, then your view of the science is likely to become increasingly skewed.

I have never said he recommends 1-1,4k eiehter. But you can get away with that for a long period of time depending on how much fat you have to loose ofc. Liver, shellfish etc also once a while for minerals and vitamins.

I agree adding liver and oysters seems like a good idea, but the amounts Peat recommends per week don't push the calorie count up very much. I don't believe most people can get away with calories <1600 for a long period of time without health costs. I do believe some people can probably get away with it for short periods, maybe sometimes with more health benefit than cost.

As far as the initial topic goes, I do like the idea of hastening PUFA depletion if it can be done with favourable cost-benefit outcomes. My guess is that for some people this may be consistent with small or brief calorie restrictions, in which manageable amounts of PUFA are liberated into circulation to be dealt with. I suspect that in cases of large PUFA stores, large deficits would risk negative overall effects by releasing overwhelming amounts of PUFA into active metabolism. Where the balance lies for an individual probably depends on multiple factors.

 

[RPDiciple]

tara: in terms of calorie restriction and starvation, i dont think they can. You are also here bending it to extreme calorie restriction. Definition of calorie retriction is just that you take in less calories that you burn, so that can be 2450 kcals and you burn 2500.

Starvation is when you dont have any more fat to burn and just left with the essential fat and the body starts using its own muscles, organs etc for fuel aka eating it self up. This is what happend in the Minnesota experiement and science has proven that and i have never said i dont believe that.

But to get down to starvation is INSANELY hard and people that have 20%+ bodyfat like MOST people have are throwing these starvation claims around like its so easy to get there. Yeah you will feel like you are starving after 1 week on low calories but you are not if you carry around 20% or more bodyfat.

tara: again what you believe is what you believe, i cannot change that and im not trying to. I just have to put out what RP have told me in terms of loosing fat and calorie restriction. Because it seems like nobody wants to accept that you can get FAT eating RP foods and its not healthy to do so.
That you believe that nobody can get away with 1600 kcals for a long time, is based on what? its to loose to throw that out there.

You have to take into account starting bodyfat%, activity level, nutrition just everything.

 

[RPDiciple]

There does not need to be a calorie deficit. That guy went so high, for example, that his body decided to completely discard its own energy budget, hence burning all that food as well as more.

Have you ever read RP`s answers in regards to fat loss? 2-3 quarts skimmed milk and 1 quart oj will take care of most of the stress he replied. Well thats 1000-1400 kcals.

That's interesting, I never realized how little that is.

I'm not sure RP means that anyone, regardless of age, gender, health status, activity levels etc. need only have 2-3 quarts of milk and some juice and all their nutritional and caloric needs are met. Surely it's just a minimum requirement to reduce stress if fat/weight loss is needed?

I think in that case Ray Peat was just thinking "do my thing but using skimmed milk" without considering how many less calories that is.

Well Billy Craig is the only one that can prove that and he has no proof of his claims, so then i just cant believe him. It makes sense and all that but without proof i cant believe it. Then it would have to start believing all the other stuff on internet of these gurus claiming you can put 1lb of butter in your coffee and you will loose fat like crazy and all that jazz. It leads nowhere.

No peat was not thinking that. I have over 200 emails with peat and many of them we have talked about fat loss and weight loss esp geared towards athletes wich will require even more fuel and care so that you not loose muscle. Once again, 3lbs he think is the maximum you can loose a week safetly. That is a big deficit, BIG one and if you do it you probably will feel shitty from time to time but it will go FAST you will loose the fat fast, get ridd of the PUFA and then its all over and you can start eating normal again with your better metabolism and all that.

RP also told me that yes to much sugar can also turn to fat if you eat in exess like me and Zach talked about earlier.

 

[tara]

Because it seems like nobody wants to accept that you can get FAT eating RP foods

I don't think I've seen anyone say this.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop exaggerating and deal with what people have actually said.

 

[RPDiciple]

Yeah that was probably a little to harsh. But alot of people that are new to RP think that way and have said so to and talk about gaining alot of weight.

 

[tara]

I have over 200 emails with peat and many of them we have talked about fat loss and weight loss esp geared towards athletes wich will require even more fuel and care so that you not loose muscle.

If you have such a large store of information from Peat, would you consider sharing some of it in the Email Advice Depository thread (preferably including the context/questions you asked)? Obviously you don't have to if you don't want to - some of might be too personal to want to share, which is fair enough.
Continuing to complain that we don't know what Peat thinks while referring to information you have privileged access to makes the conversation a bit weird.

It sounds as though you are talking about a particular context - athletes. Not everyone here is an athlete, so maybe the optimal tactics might not be the same for everyone.

Fair enough to be sceptical of Billy Craig's uncorroborated story, though personally I'm inclined to believe his account is reasonably truthful and accurate. It's not an out of the blue story though. He based his experiment on ideas presented in the physiology classes he took - ie that the metabolism etc will adapt to the amount of calories supplied if they are consistent. He was being taught this as scientifically established fact.

 

[RPDiciple]

Ofc i can share everything

athletes just means that you have to be even more carefull in terms of how low you cut calories and stuff. So if an athlete can do those things for sure regular people can without problem.

The difference between athlete and not is just more of the same food becasue they need more fuel and a bit more protein.

I to believe Billy Craig is a good person but i cant believe what he is claiming when he is the only one in the whole world that has managed to do it and he has NO proof that he has done it.

 

[Such_Saturation]

Well Billy Craig is the only one that can prove that and he has no proof of his claims, so then i just cant believe him. It makes sense and all that but without proof i cant believe it. Then it would have to start believing all the other stuff on internet of these gurus claiming you can put 1lb of butter in your coffee and you will loose fat like crazy and all that jazz. It leads nowhere.

No peat was not thinking that. I have over 200 emails with peat and many of them we have talked about fat loss and weight loss esp geared towards athletes wich will require even more fuel and care so that you not loose muscle. Once again, 3lbs he think is the maximum you can loose a week safetly. That is a big deficit, BIG one and if you do it you probably will feel s****y from time to time but it will go FAST you will loose the fat fast, get ridd of the PUFA and then its all over and you can start eating normal again with your better metabolism and all that.

RP also told me that yes to much sugar can also turn to fat if you eat in exess like me and Zach talked about earlier.

You're lucky, Ray Peat stopped answering me but you are free to share if you have asked Ray Peat whether he realized that he advised for one-thousand-four-hundred kilocalories at one point. In Dave Asprey's defense, you know, the man eats no more than a teaspoon of carbohydrates in one day, I mean realize the biological implications of living and breathing fat. One pound is not that far out and he has visible abdominal muscles. Plus he probably goes through about fifty dollars of liposomal glutathione a week.

 

[tara]

I to believe Billy Craig is a good person but i cant believe what he is claiming when he is the only one in the whole world that has managed to do it and he has NO proof that he has done it.

Whether or not you believe him personally, you keep saying there is no science behind these ideas, and my point was that his teachers obviously thought there was.

 

[nikotrope]

No peat was not thinking that. I have over 200 emails with peat and many of them we have talked about fat loss and weight loss esp geared towards athletes wich will require even more fuel and care so that you not loose muscle. Once again, 3lbs he think is the maximum you can loose a week safetly. That is a big deficit, BIG one and if you do it you probably will feel s****y from time to time but it will go FAST you will loose the fat fast, get ridd of the PUFA and then its all over and you can start eating normal again with your better metabolism and all that.

RP also told me that yes to much sugar can also turn to fat if you eat in exess like me and Zach talked about earlier.

I am still waiting for you to give us your detailed personal experience. If you lost weight with a big calorie deficit while maintaining your metabolism, I want to know about it. If it is just email exchanges with peat, it is harder for me to believe what you say.

 

[RPDiciple]

Such_Saturation: and he uses drugs as well, testosterone etc etc
I asked RP about what he thought was the maximum of fat loss one can do without causing stress and he said max 3lbs a week. and like i said that is 10 500 kcal deficit a week. So thats all you need to know. You just observe what your BMR is daily multiply it with 7, take away 10 500 and divide that by 7 and you have your calorie intake for the day. Wich i guess will be very low for most. Take a standard 2500 kcal a day for an active male.
Thats 17500 a week - 10500 and u have 1000 kcals a day for 3 lbs fat loss a week. Fat loss is never that linear and all but still you can go much much lower then people here think without causing harm


tara: Well if they can prove it, im all theirs. But i dont see any papers out on it yet, so unntil then its just a good fairytale.

 

[RPDiciple]

No peat was not thinking that. I have over 200 emails with peat and many of them we have talked about fat loss and weight loss esp geared towards athletes wich will require even more fuel and care so that you not loose muscle. Once again, 3lbs he think is the maximum you can loose a week safetly. That is a big deficit, BIG one and if you do it you probably will feel s****y from time to time but it will go FAST you will loose the fat fast, get ridd of the PUFA and then its all over and you can start eating normal again with your better metabolism and all that.

RP also told me that yes to much sugar can also turn to fat if you eat in exess like me and Zach talked about earlier.

I am still waiting for you to give us your detailed personal experience. If you lost weight with a big calorie deficit while maintaining your metabolism, I want to know about it. If it is just email exchanges with peat, it is harder for me to believe what you say.

Why do you want my detailed personal experience ? i have done alot of weight loss on many different big calorie deficit approaches and my metabolism has not gotten worse from it, but i still havent had optimal metabolism in terms of temp and pulse like RP talks about so im working towards that ofc.

Also this was NEVER about me and my experience this is about what RP says and what science has proven.

So what on earth do you mean by "if its just email exchanges with peat its harder for you believe what i say"? how on earth would i else get RP answers to my question and provide his insight to it like i have written here.

 

[Such_Saturation]

No, you can eat a million a day and if the brown fat wants to it can suck the fat right out of your white fat and burn it, this if you don't ignite, of course. The body is not a laboratory reactor. Brown adipose tissue activity controls triglyceride clearance.

 

[tara]

Starvation is when you dont have any more fat to burn and just left with the essential fat and the body starts using its own muscles, organs etc for fuel aka eating it self up. This is what happend in the Minnesota experiement and science has proven that and i have never said i dont believe that.

I don't think everyone has to get down to 5% or 10% fat before those effects start to happen. My understanding of the science was that reduction in metabolism and catabolism of organs other than adipose often (note I am not saying always) begins at least in a small way when the calorie intake is insufficient to maintain the current set point, which varies significantly. There may be ways to change the set point, and no doubt choice of foods etc plays a role, but I was of the impression that the science around this is far from settled. There is some evidence suggesting that repeated calorie restricted diets are one way to increase the set point (as well as lower the metabolism etc).

I don't see why you think that if athletes can lose fat while maintaining muscle everyone else can do it more easily. Presumably athletes on average have an easier time gaining muscles in the first place, for whatever reasons, or they would be less likely to be athletes? And having a higher proportion of muscle than the average population, a athletes tend to have, confers some metabolic advantages.
Also not sure how athletes whotrain to keep muscle mass while losing fat address catabolism of all the other organs?

 

[Such_Saturation]

Such_Saturation: and he uses drugs as well, testosterone

What is your source on that? But thanks, I found out he takes T3 LOL

 

[tara]

I asked RP about what he thought was the maximum of fat loss one can do without causing stress and he said max 3lbs a week. and like i said that is 10 500 kcal deficit a week. So thats all you need to know.

It took you 200 emails to get to this? And none of the rest of it is relevant to the discussion? Then why did you mention them as support for your viewpoint? How fortunate for us that you have the wisdom to distill what we need to know.

 

[tara]

Such_Saturation: and he uses drugs as well, testosterone

What is your source on that? But thanks, I found out he takes T3 LOL

That's certainly relevant! Do you know if he was using T3 when he did that high calorie experiment?