Really tough choosing food & exercise:

Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates – the slow burning ones with
low glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats – preferably
mono – unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
Personally, I think thats way too much protein – more like ½ a gram per
lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I’ve read a person who exercises
should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
preferably in multiple small meals.

There is some fairly solid evidence that weight lifting is the best kind
of exercise, not just because it burns calories but because it causes an
increased flow of testosterone, promoting release of glucagon, a fat
burning hormone. It is supposed to briefly inhibit the production of
estrogen and insulin the fat storers. In food, glucagon is released by
protein and insulin by carbs. But nothing is absolute, insulin can burn
fat too in the right proportions. I’m wary of it because insulin is
instrumental in triggering cell death and I’m afraid of what an excess
of it might do.

Yeah! So you find food that does all that – like peanuts – then you see
it is out of balance for omega fatty acids and high on calories. Maybe
it doesn’t matter too much about the calories, they are just a
measurement of heat – probably can be balanced by anti-oxidant or
anti-inflammatory food. And one can load up on the fish or fish oil to
up the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. So maybe peanuts and peanut butter
pass muster, given the counter measures. But not many foods do.

The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You
need all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to
balance a whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing
it. I’ve developed a new rule for myself – not to spend more time
researching than I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other
things to do in life. My other rules are to stay completely away from
fast foods, keep to my calorie restrictive eating habits, mild weight
lifting and taking a diet holiday once a week.
Oh, by the way, I had my winter wood delivered and clocked a pound lost
per chord stacked over two days.

I’m sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames – good –
just don’t be rude, maybe it’s helpful to someone.


Mal

"Mal" <malhamilton@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:E0Lxi.1646$6h3.1048@trndny05...
>
> Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates – the slow burning ones with low
> glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats – preferably mono –
> unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
> Personally, I think thats way too much protein – more like ½ a gram per
> lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I’ve read a person who exercises
> should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
> preferably in multiple small meals.

I'm doing low-carb, so we'll just have to disagree on that. However, I'd
like to point out an interesting article. You might want to check it out.

http://tinyurl.com/b7myu

I'm sure low-carb is not for everyone, but it works for me.


> The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You need
> all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to balance a
> whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing it. I’ve
> developed a new rule for myself – not to spend more time researching than
> I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other things to do in life.

I have a little carb counter on my keychain. My days of writing and adding
and fussing over what to eat "within x amount of calories" are over. When
I'm hungry, I eat, count the carbs, do my little counter thing and that's
it.

> I’m sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames – good – just
> don’t be rude, maybe it’s helpful to someone.

Interesting comments re. weight lifting. Its my favorite form of exercise.
Unfortunately, I don't have room for equipment and there are no gyms close
enough to me.

>

On Aug 18, 7:11 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates - the slow burning ones with
> low glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats - preferably
> mono - unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
> Personally, I think thats way too much protein - more like ½ a gram per
> lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I've read a person who exercises
> should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
> preferably in multiple small meals.
>
> There is some fairly solid evidence that weight lifting is the best kind
> of exercise, not just because it burns calories but because it causes an
> increased flow of testosterone, promoting release of glucagon, a fat
> burning hormone. It is supposed to briefly inhibit the production of
> estrogen and insulin the fat storers. In food, glucagon is released by
> protein and insulin by carbs. But nothing is absolute, insulin can burn
> fat too in the right proportions. I'm wary of it because insulin is
> instrumental in triggering cell death and I'm afraid of what an excess
> of it might do.
>
> Yeah! So you find food that does all that - like peanuts - then you see
> it is out of balance for omega fatty acids and high on calories. Maybe
> it doesn't matter too much about the calories, they are just a
> measurement of heat - probably can be balanced by anti-oxidant or
> anti-inflammatory food. And one can load up on the fish or fish oil to
> up the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. So maybe peanuts and peanut butter
> pass muster, given the counter measures. But not many foods do.
>
> The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You
> need all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to
> balance a whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing
> it. I've developed a new rule for myself - not to spend more time
> researching than I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other
> things to do in life. My other rules are to stay completely away from
> fast foods, keep to my calorie restrictive eating habits, mild weight
> lifting and taking a diet holiday once a week.
> Oh, by the way, I had my winter wood delivered and clocked a pound lost
> per chord stacked over two days.
>
> I'm sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames - good -
> just don't be rude, maybe it's helpful to someone.
>
> Mal

Why "mild" weight lifting? You won't get much benefit from lifting
weights that don't challenge you.

Re nutrient ratios: Opinions vary, and I'm not really interested in
arguing with you about it, but I prefer to get about 40% protein, 40%
carb, 20% fat (and yes, I exercise). What is your rationale for
limiting protein?

Chris
262/130s/130s

On Aug 18, 4:11 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates - the slow burning ones with
> low glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats - preferably
> mono - unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
> Personally, I think thats way too much protein - more like ½ a gram per
> lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I've read a person who exercises
> should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
> preferably in multiple small meals.
>
> There is some fairly solid evidence that weight lifting is the best kind
> of exercise, not just because it burns calories but because it causes an
> increased flow of testosterone, promoting release of glucagon, a fat
> burning hormone. It is supposed to briefly inhibit the production of
> estrogen and insulin the fat storers. In food, glucagon is released by
> protein and insulin by carbs. But nothing is absolute, insulin can burn
> fat too in the right proportions. I'm wary of it because insulin is
> instrumental in triggering cell death and I'm afraid of what an excess
> of it might do.
>
> Yeah! So you find food that does all that - like peanuts - then you see
> it is out of balance for omega fatty acids and high on calories. Maybe
> it doesn't matter too much about the calories, they are just a
> measurement of heat - probably can be balanced by anti-oxidant or
> anti-inflammatory food. And one can load up on the fish or fish oil to
> up the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. So maybe peanuts and peanut butter
> pass muster, given the counter measures. But not many foods do.
>
> The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You
> need all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to
> balance a whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing
> it. I've developed a new rule for myself - not to spend more time
> researching than I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other
> things to do in life. My other rules are to stay completely away from
> fast foods, keep to my calorie restrictive eating habits, mild weight
> lifting and taking a diet holiday once a week.
> Oh, by the way, I had my winter wood delivered and clocked a pound lost
> per chord stacked over two days.
>
> I'm sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames - good -
> just don't be rude, maybe it's helpful to someone.
>
> Mal

I agree in general with your post including the amount of protein a
person needs and also the 10% fat. The govt. says up to 30% is OK, but
I like the 10% figure. Lots of people are allergic to peanuts. It is
the second leading food allergy after milk, and people can do just
fine and never touch peanuts of course. I don't. Like you say, they
are loaded with fat and calories. I also don't think you can
counteract calories with antioxidants. Once you swallow them, they
stay calories.

There are lots of opinions about what is a good diet. There is also a
whole lot of gimmick health claims where they take one esoteric peice
of research and try to build that into some huge physiologic
process...like Kevin Trudeau does with his "cures", so you have people
becoming religious about green tea, or shark's fin or noni juice, or
chromium, etc. etc. Those folks are just out to make money for the
most part, while others are just not very good at separating facts
from opinions and/or poor or sketchy research.

As an example, for years were were bombarded with ads from the Dairy
Council...and still are, about milk being good because of the calcium
which "help develop strong bones". The fact is however that Africans,
where almost everyone is lactose intolerant and do not drink milk once
they are weaned, have less of a problem with osteoporosis. It turns
out that calcium in milk isn't absorbed so well. Now they put it in
orange juice though, which seems like a better idea if you want or
need more calcium. Another opinion has to do with protein. I'm not
sure why, but people seem preoccupied with how much protein they need
and fears of not getting enough. There again, the govt says about 1/2
gram per pound is enough for 90% of the population....and it is very
easy to get. Then you have body builders, etc. who often take in 5
times that claiming they need it. Protein is easy to get, including
for those of us who are vegetarian and DO need to think a little more
about protein. There again, actual protein deficiencies in this
country are extremely rare. The TV shows starving children in a 3rd
world country with a distended belly which most people think of as
protein deficiency, and it probably is. The problem there is that the
child is STARVING. They aren't getting enough food, period. Feed them
anything.....rice, beans, bananas, and the problem is gone. The moral
here is that if you are getting enough calories and eat anything
approaching a balanced diet, you WILL get enough protein. The facts
are mostly there, but some people put important stuff on the same
level as the garbage research, I think. Anyway, that's my 2 cents
worth on protein, suplements, and a balanced diet. dkw

dkw12002@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Aug 18, 4:11 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates - the slow burning ones with
>> low glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats - preferably
>> mono - unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
>> Personally, I think thats way too much protein - more like ½ a gram per
>> lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I've read a person who exercises
>> should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
>> preferably in multiple small meals.
>>
>> There is some fairly solid evidence that weight lifting is the best kind
>> of exercise, not just because it burns calories but because it causes an
>> increased flow of testosterone, promoting release of glucagon, a fat
>> burning hormone. It is supposed to briefly inhibit the production of
>> estrogen and insulin the fat storers. In food, glucagon is released by
>> protein and insulin by carbs. But nothing is absolute, insulin can burn
>> fat too in the right proportions. I'm wary of it because insulin is
>> instrumental in triggering cell death and I'm afraid of what an excess
>> of it might do.
>>
>> Yeah! So you find food that does all that - like peanuts - then you see
>> it is out of balance for omega fatty acids and high on calories. Maybe
>> it doesn't matter too much about the calories, they are just a
>> measurement of heat - probably can be balanced by anti-oxidant or
>> anti-inflammatory food. And one can load up on the fish or fish oil to
>> up the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. So maybe peanuts and peanut butter
>> pass muster, given the counter measures. But not many foods do.
>>
>> The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You
>> need all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to
>> balance a whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing
>> it. I've developed a new rule for myself - not to spend more time
>> researching than I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other
>> things to do in life. My other rules are to stay completely away from
>> fast foods, keep to my calorie restrictive eating habits, mild weight
>> lifting and taking a diet holiday once a week.
>> Oh, by the way, I had my winter wood delivered and clocked a pound lost
>> per chord stacked over two days.
>>
>> I'm sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames - good -
>> just don't be rude, maybe it's helpful to someone.
>>
>> Mal
>
> I agree in general with your post including the amount of protein a
> person needs and also the 10% fat. The govt. says up to 30% is OK, but
> I like the 10% figure. Lots of people are allergic to peanuts. It is
> the second leading food allergy after milk, and people can do just
> fine and never touch peanuts of course. I don't. Like you say, they
> are loaded with fat and calories. I also don't think you can
> counteract calories with antioxidants. Once you swallow them, they
> stay calories.
>
> There are lots of opinions about what is a good diet. There is also a
> whole lot of gimmick health claims where they take one esoteric peice
> of research and try to build that into some huge physiologic
> process...like Kevin Trudeau does with his "cures", so you have people
> becoming religious about green tea, or shark's fin or noni juice, or
> chromium, etc. etc. Those folks are just out to make money for the
> most part, while others are just not very good at separating facts
> from opinions and/or poor or sketchy research.
>
> As an example, for years were were bombarded with ads from the Dairy
> Council...and still are, about milk being good because of the calcium
> which "help develop strong bones". The fact is however that Africans,
> where almost everyone is lactose intolerant and do not drink milk once
> they are weaned, have less of a problem with osteoporosis. It turns
> out that calcium in milk isn't absorbed so well. Now they put it in
> orange juice though, which seems like a better idea if you want or
> need more calcium. Another opinion has to do with protein. I'm not
> sure why, but people seem preoccupied with how much protein they need
> and fears of not getting enough. There again, the govt says about 1/2
> gram per pound is enough for 90% of the population....and it is very
> easy to get. Then you have body builders, etc. who often take in 5
> times that claiming they need it. Protein is easy to get, including
> for those of us who are vegetarian and DO need to think a little more
> about protein. There again, actual protein deficiencies in this
> country are extremely rare. The TV shows starving children in a 3rd
> world country with a distended belly which most people think of as
> protein deficiency, and it probably is. The problem there is that the
> child is STARVING. They aren't getting enough food, period. Feed them
> anything.....rice, beans, bananas, and the problem is gone. The moral
> here is that if you are getting enough calories and eat anything
> approaching a balanced diet, you WILL get enough protein. The facts
> are mostly there, but some people put important stuff on the same
> level as the garbage research, I think. Anyway, that's my 2 cents
> worth on protein, suplements, and a balanced diet. dkw
>



Thanx for your thoughtful post, DKW.
But Chris's post about protein is no doubt right for him - he has an
extremely active lifestyle with exercise, swimming and running. I guess
protein needs vary with the individual, as you said.

People don't get into the possible life extension benefits of diet on
this forum much. You might be interested in the work of James F Nelson
PHD at the University of Texas. He has done a lot of work with mice and
shown calorie restriction (CR) promotes life extension in them. Later
work showed CR didn't seem to help with tumor growth, as he had thought
at first. Still later work by the National Institute of Aging showed
similar life extension in primates.

Nelson writes that long term human studies are impractical because of
expense. I sent him an e-mail suggesting he just puts up a web page with
a spreadsheet folks could fill out daily to give him the data he needs.
No reply as yet. Probably thinks I'm a nutcase. University professors
are sometimes tunnel visioned, they think research has to start with
begging for funds, building a new wing on the lab and devoting years of
time. Really, matters are much simpler with the internet and the study
could be run by grad students until it came time to publish. Wouldn't
cost much at all. I hope he thinks about it, but I suppose he is more
interested in publishing fast papers to support the work he is already
doing. He is certainly a prolific publisher.

On Aug 19, 6:16 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
..
> But Chris's post about protein is no doubt right for him - he has an
> extremely active lifestyle with exercise, swimming and running. I guess
> protein needs vary with the individual, as you said.

Um, Chris is a 59-year-old woman :-).

Honestly, I don't know what's really right for protein intake; I just
know what feels best for me.

Chris
262/130s/130s

Chris wrote:
> On Aug 19, 6:16 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> .
>> But Chris's post about protein is no doubt right for him - he has an
>> extremely active lifestyle with exercise, swimming and running. I guess
>> protein needs vary with the individual, as you said.
>
> Um, Chris is a 59-year-old woman :-).
>
> Honestly, I don't know what's really right for protein intake; I just
> know what feels best for me.
>
> Chris
> 262/130s/130s
>

Whoops! Sorry maam. Didn't pick up on your gender reading older posts.
Mal (male 69)

On Aug 19, 7:29 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
> > On Aug 19, 6:16 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> > .
> >> But Chris's post about protein is no doubt right for him - he has an
> >> extremely active lifestyle with exercise, swimming and running. I guess
> >> protein needs vary with the individual, as you said.
>
> > Um, Chris is a 59-year-old woman :-).
>
> > Honestly, I don't know what's really right for protein intake; I just
> > know what feels best for me.
>
> > Chris
> > 262/130s/130s
>
> Whoops! Sorry maam. Didn't pick up on your gender reading older posts.
> Mal (male 69)

No problem :-). I realize that "Chris" is ambiguous, but it's what
I've always gone by, rather than "Christine", which is my full name.
It's occasionally entertaining when I do something not so expected of
my gender. I still remember the time when I was captain of my high
school math team and we were at a meet, and one of the guys from
another school said to one of our team members, "Hey, this Chris Braun
guy from your school is currently in first place in the county; which
one is he?" I liked that -- back in the very-stereotyped 1960s.

I did always use "Christine" on technical publications, though (I was
in systems engineering) -- figured I owed it to my gender or some
such :-).

Chris (ex-geek)

On Aug 19, 3:16 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> dkw12...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Aug 18, 4:11 pm, Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
> >> Bod needs the right kind of carbohydrates - the slow burning ones with
> >> low glysemic load and high fiber, the right kind of fats - preferably
> >> mono - unsaturated and about a gram of protein per pound of body weight.
> >> Personally, I think thats way too much protein - more like ½ a gram per
> >> lb. Maybe a whole gram for athletes. I've read a person who exercises
> >> should be looking for 25% protein, 65% carbs and 10% fat in daily food,
> >> preferably in multiple small meals.
>
> >> There is some fairly solid evidence that weight lifting is the best kind
> >> of exercise, not just because it burns calories but because it causes an
> >> increased flow of testosterone, promoting release of glucagon, a fat
> >> burning hormone. It is supposed to briefly inhibit the production of
> >> estrogen and insulin the fat storers. In food, glucagon is released by
> >> protein and insulin by carbs. But nothing is absolute, insulin can burn
> >> fat too in the right proportions. I'm wary of it because insulin is
> >> instrumental in triggering cell death and I'm afraid of what an excess
> >> of it might do.
>
> >> Yeah! So you find food that does all that - like peanuts - then you see
> >> it is out of balance for omega fatty acids and high on calories. Maybe
> >> it doesn't matter too much about the calories, they are just a
> >> measurement of heat - probably can be balanced by anti-oxidant or
> >> anti-inflammatory food. And one can load up on the fish or fish oil to
> >> up the omega 3 to omega 6 ratio. So maybe peanuts and peanut butter
> >> pass muster, given the counter measures. But not many foods do.
>
> >> The further you dig into foods, the more complicated things get. You
> >> need all the nutrients, minerals and vitamins, you need to try to
> >> balance a whole lot of factors and you can spend your whole day doing
> >> it. I've developed a new rule for myself - not to spend more time
> >> researching than I do cooking & eating. There are just too many other
> >> things to do in life. My other rules are to stay completely away from
> >> fast foods, keep to my calorie restrictive eating habits, mild weight
> >> lifting and taking a diet holiday once a week.
> >> Oh, by the way, I had my winter wood delivered and clocked a pound lost
> >> per chord stacked over two days.
>
> >> I'm sure all this opinionated stuff will get a lot of flames - good -
> >> just don't be rude, maybe it's helpful to someone.
>
> >> Mal
>
> > I agree in general with your post including the amount of protein a
> > person needs and also the 10% fat. The govt. says up to 30% is OK, but
> > I like the 10% figure. Lots of people are allergic to peanuts. It is
> > the second leading food allergy after milk, and people can do just
> > fine and never touch peanuts of course. I don't. Like you say, they
> > are loaded with fat and calories. I also don't think you can
> > counteract calories with antioxidants. Once you swallow them, they
> > stay calories.
>
> > There are lots of opinions about what is a good diet. There is also a
> > whole lot of gimmick health claims where they take one esoteric peice
> > of research and try to build that into some huge physiologic
> > process...like Kevin Trudeau does with his "cures", so you have people
> > becoming religious about green tea, or shark's fin or noni juice, or
> > chromium, etc. etc. Those folks are just out to make money for the
> > most part, while others are just not very good at separating facts
> > from opinions and/or poor or sketchy research.
>
> > As an example, for years were were bombarded with ads from the Dairy
> > Council...and still are, about milk being good because of the calcium
> > which "help develop strong bones". The fact is however that Africans,
> > where almost everyone is lactose intolerant and do not drink milk once
> > they are weaned, have less of a problem with osteoporosis. It turns
> > out that calcium in milk isn't absorbed so well. Now they put it in
> > orange juice though, which seems like a better idea if you want or
> > need more calcium. Another opinion has to do with protein. I'm not
> > sure why, but people seem preoccupied with how much protein they need
> > and fears of not getting enough. There again, the govt says about 1/2
> > gram per pound is enough for 90% of the population....and it is very
> > easy to get. Then you have body builders, etc. who often take in 5
> > times that claiming they need it. Protein is easy to get, including
> > for those of us who are vegetarian and DO need to think a little more
> > about protein. There again, actual protein deficiencies in this
> > country are extremely rare. The TV shows starving children in a 3rd
> > world country with a distended belly which most people think of as
> > protein deficiency, and it probably is. The problem there is that the
> > child is STARVING. They aren't getting enough food, period. Feed them
> > anything.....rice, beans, bananas, and the problem is gone. The moral
> > here is that if you are getting enough calories and eat anything
> > approaching a balanced diet, you WILL get enough protein. The facts
> > are mostly there, but some people put important stuff on the same
> > level as the garbage research, I think. Anyway, that's my 2 cents
> > worth on protein, suplements, and a balanced diet. dkw
>
> Thanx for your thoughtful post, DKW.
> But Chris's post about protein is no doubt right for him - he has an
> extremely active lifestyle with exercise, swimming and running. I guess
> protein needs vary with the individual, as you said.
>
> People don't get into the possible life extension benefits of diet on
> this forum much. You might be interested in the work of James F Nelson
> PHD at the University of Texas. He has done a lot of work with mice and
> shown calorie restriction (CR) promotes life extension in them. Later
> work showed CR didn't seem to help with tumor growth, as he had thought
> at first. Still later work by the National Institute of Aging showed
> similar life extension in primates.
>
> Nelson writes that long term human studies are impractical because of
> expense. I sent him an e-mail suggesting he just puts up a web page with
> a spreadsheet folks could fill out daily to give him the data he needs.
> No reply as yet. Probably thinks I'm a nutcase. University professors
> are sometimes tunnel visioned, they think research has to start with
> begging for funds, building a new wing on the lab and devoting years of
> time. Really, matters are much simpler with the internet and the study
> could be run by grad students until it came time to publish. Wouldn't
> cost much at all. I hope he thinks about it, but I suppose he is more
> interested in publishing fast papers to support the work he is already
> doing. He is certainly a prolific publisher.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

I'm not familiar with the study by Nolan specifically, but I read
about restricted calorie diets. That wouldn't be for me though. I
watch my calories, but a restricted diet means you eat quite a few
calories less than all the other indicators say you need. This brings
you below the present medical recommendation range for health which I
won't do. Those people border on being skeletal from what I've seen.
The article I read also said that even though the restricted diet
might increase longevity and did in mice, it also resulted in
undersized mice with smaller BRAINS. Obviously, this is nothing to
mess with, certainly not with a child. I presently weigh 135 and am
5'8" so I am near the bottom of my healthy weight range anyway. The
range for my height is 126-164. Also, I already look
thin....especially for this country. I would fit right in with the
Chinese though. Also, I have a hard time finding off-the-hanger
clothes. I'm hardly into clothes, but it is nice to get something to
fit. I wear waist size 28. Many brands start at 30....or the stores
just stock slacks and jeans starting at 30. Luckily, I can often find
size 18 in boys that are neither juvenile looking, nor too short, nor
too "crowded" in the crotch area. I also find many size small shirts
are too big for me, but I can also find some boys shirts that do
fit...especially in Walmart where they seem to make clothes for fat
kids...at least here in the San Antonio area which according to that
documentary on McDonalds food (Supersize Me) was the fattest town in
the US having just surpassed Houston for that dubious honor.

I sat in the McDonalds in a Walmart store a few days ago, and it
dawned on me that everyone who was there (except me) looked grossly
overweight and their must have been 20 people including the hefty
employees. Must be something in the water....(in the fajitas is
probably closer). They mostly looked happy though, so maybe there is
something to that "fat and happy" connection. If I got depressed by a
diet and felt better being overweight, or felt tortured with my diet,
I too would fatten up. Life is too short and living a couple of extra
years, even if it is true, is not everything. With me though, I feel
better about myself as thin. It's just that being thin really isn't
important to everyone and I can understand that. dkw

Mal <malhamil...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> People don't get into the possible life extension benefits of diet on
> this forum much. You might be interested in the work of James F Nelson
> PHD at the University of Texas. He has done a lot of work with mice and
> shown calorie restriction (CR) promotes life extension in them. Later
> work showed CR didn't seem to help with tumor growth, as he had thought
> at first. Still later work by the National Institute of Aging showed
> similar life extension in primates.

There was an article on it in a recent Discover magazine. Turns
out the biggest effect from CR was because of lowered insulin
output. Conveniently, low carb plans cause lower total insulin
output in addition to more steady insulin output. There's also a
bit on T3 output (dogs have 10 times the thyroid output, humans
live 7 times as long, it adds up). Turns out extreme low carb
plans on the order of 20 grams per day cause T3 to drop. Not
an approach for the lose phases but it just might be worth doing
in maintenance ...

> Nelson writes that long term human studies are impractical because of
> expense.

And because average human life is in, what, the 80s? And maximum
recorded is in the 130s though there's currently no one alive older
than 120. So do all the studies you want, I doubt I'll be around to
read the results in four centuries.

> I sent him an e-mail suggesting he just puts up a web page with
> a spreadsheet folks could fill out daily to give him the data he needs.
> No reply as yet. Probably thinks I'm a nutcase.

*I* probably think I'm a nutcase. Fair play I figure ...

On Aug 18, 6:16 pm, Chris <braun_ch...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Why "mild" weight lifting? You won't get much benefit from lifting
> weights that don't challenge you.

Some people (as in pretty much everyone except those who are
genetically gifted at packing on muscle) rapidly adapt to heavy
weights. They might put on a little bit of mass but quickly reach a
plateau.

On Aug 21, 3:52 am, Kaz Kylheku <kkylh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 18, 6:16 pm, Chris <braun_ch...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > Why "mild" weight lifting? You won't get much benefit from lifting
> > weights that don't challenge you.
>
> Some people (as in pretty much everyone except those who are
> genetically gifted at packing on muscle) rapidly adapt to heavy
> weights. They might put on a little bit of mass but quickly reach a
> plateau.

So this is a reason to back off and lift less?

Anyway, I don't really agree with our point. Sure, newbie gains don't
continue, but most people are able to continue building strength over
time, just a good deal more slowly than at first. (Anyway, my goal --
and probably most people's -- is building functional strength rather
than mass. Besides, particularly by the time you get to be my age,
you need to keep lifting challenging weights just to avoid muscle
loss.)

Chris
262/130s/130s