Gyroscopic Investing

Benko wrote: Is the 8 hour feeding window this diet, or is MG doing intermittent fasting? (or is it part of MG's calorie restriction?)

Jaminet supports Intermittent Fasting, but it's not required. He believes there is evidence that some people can benefit from it.

And the "fast" is just a period of reduced calorie consumption — not zero food. He even offers recipes for what to consume during a fast:

See: Paul Jaminet: Food for a Fast

FYI: going long hours without food e.g. IF is a REALLY bad idea for anyone with adrenal issues.

Benko wrote: Is the 8 hour feeding window this diet, or is MG doing intermittent fasting? (or is it part of MG's calorie restriction?)

It is part of the PHD diet/book.  The 8-hour eating window is actually an alternative to calorie restriction or daily intermittent fasting.  It lets your body engage in autophagy, resensitivity and other cleanup/repair work for a full 16 hours.  For the majority of people, an 8-hour eating window is a lot more practical than calorie restriction or daily intermittent fasting.  When I started strength training once a week last year, I used to eat low carb meals every 4 hours (3 meals) and was actually hungry, but I must have adapted despite my workload increasing.

Gumby wrote: Sounds like you are drinking more water than the typical person on PHD. I was under the impression that high water consumption is a good idea for Very Low Carb or Zero Carb dieting. I wonder if you can now drink less water and feel less bloated now that you aren't VLC.

I paid more attention to my water intake and actually, I'm drinking less water because I'm just not as thirsty.  Its as hard for me to drink water if I'm not thristy as it is to eat a food if I'm not hungry.  But for sure, I was always hyper-thirsty on zero/low carb that I would worry now and then I was developing diabetes.  Then again, it's the middle of winter so who knows...

MachineGhost wrote: Your gut is already healing. Well done.

I'm not that confident.  I suspect that whatever infection I had that the glucose in rice was feeding, is now gone, unless it was brown rice toxins (hard to know if it is white or brown when something says "rich starch").  I'm still sensitive to tomato/tomato sauce and non-raw cheese.

Benko wrote: FYI: going long hours without food e.g. IF is a REALLY bad idea for anyone with adrenal issues.

I think I read somewhere the other day that the HPA axis being dysfunctional is directly related to insufficient "safe" carbohydrate intake.  Carbs blunts cortisol.

It's an interesting topic, though I have no desire to do it right now. Apparently the world's oldest man, Walter Breuning, ate most of his food at 7 am and 2-3 pm (with a small snack in the evening). Jaminet believes that this enhances the circadian rhythm as all food is eaten/digested during daylight hours and you sleep lightly fasted which should improve sleep quality and immune function.

See also: Paul Jaminet: What Makes a Supercentenarian

Paul Jaminet wrote: Centenarians live to 100; “supercentenarians”? live to 110. It is a much more selective club...Supercentenarian diets come in two basic flavors:

1)      Calorie-restriction and intermittent fasting.
2)      High (saturated and monounsaturated) fat low-carb diets.

Source: Paul Jaminet: What Makes a Supercentenarian

But, I completely agree with Benko that it's not for everyone. There are definitely reports of people having terrible reactions to IF — particularly women for some reason.

From a historical standpoint, breakfast was a good-sized meal, Dinner (now called "Lunch") was a big meal and Supper (now called "Dinner") used to be just a small snack. So, in a way, people used to practice IF all the time.

MachineGhost wrote:

Gumby wrote: Your gut is already healing. Well done.

I'm not that confident.

Time will tell. Any time you reduce a toxin load and starve out bad flora your gut will heal a bit. It takes time, but what you are saying is already a very good sign.

1.

Gumby wrote: . There are definitely reports of people having terrible reactions to IF — particularly women for some reason.

Intermittent fasting is an interesting idea and there are many different ways of doing it (I'm speaking strictly of the timing of when and for how long you get to eat and how long the fasting periods are).  It  might be something for people who want  to lose weight (and those who want to lose weight and work out).  People who can not do well  with long periods without eating would not do well on IF.  People who have done bad things to their adrenals e.g. from insufficeint sleep, would be doing themselves a really bad thing by trying IF.


2. "Jaminet believes that this enhances the circadian rhythm as all food is eaten/digested during daylight hours "
This strikes me as rubbish.  Does he present any evidence for this?

3. "Any time you reduce a toxin load and starve out bad flora"
The "toxins" in nuts and grains "feed"  "bad" gut flora?

Benko wrote:

2. "Jaminet believes that this enhances the circadian rhythm as all food is eaten/digested during daylight hours "

This strikes me as rubbish.  Does he present any evidence for this?

Seth Roberts does...

Paul Jaminet: Seth Roberts and Circadian Therapy

And there are a few studies referenced as well...

[1] Fuller PM et al. Differential rescue of light- and food-entrainable circadian rhythms. Science. 2008 May 23;320(5879):1074-7. http://pmid.us/18497298.

[2] Rose SR et al. Hypothyroidism and deficiency of the nocturnal thyrotropin surge in children with hypothalamic-pituitary disorders. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1990 Jun;70(6):1750-5. http://pmid.us/2112153.

[3] Magrini A et al. Shift work and autoimmune thyroid disorders. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol. 2006 Oct-Dec;19(4 Suppl):31-6. http://pmid.us/17291404.

Benko wrote:3. "Any time you reduce a toxin load and starve out bad flora"
The "toxins" in nuts and grains "feed"  "bad" gut flora?

The toxins don't "feed" the bad gut flora. The toxins irritate the lining of the gut. However, grains can certainly "feed" bad gut flora. But, then again, safe starches can also feed bad bacteria as well. The whole purpose of the Select Carbohydrate Diet (and the GAPS diet, for that matter) is to starve out bad gut flora by reducing certain carbs (such as grains and starches) so that bad gut flora cannot thrive.

Chris Kresser wrote: Now, when you look at carbohydrate, eventually it gets broken down into the monosaccharides, like glucose and fructose, which are then absorbed and utilized—well, glucose is, at least. Fructose is shunted to the liver, where the liver tries to get rid of it, because it kind of treats it as a toxin, but glucose just passes right through the intestinal barrier, goes into the bloodstream, and is rapidly taken up by cells.

But in order to break down the carbohydrates we eat into those single monosaccharides, there’s a digestive process that needs to happen. And the longer chains are of those sugars, the more difficult they are to break down. And when someone has a compromised gut barrier, or has intestinal dysbiosis—which they tend to go hand in hand—they have difficulty breaking down those longer chain sugars, which are the disaccharides and polysaccharides. And then those sugars linger around in the gut, where they provide food for pathogenic bacteria that feed on them, and proliferate, and cause further dysbiosis and further leaky gut.

So the idea is to remove these disaccharides and polysaccharides so that you’re basically starving the pathogenic gut flora and kind of rebalancing the internal environment and allowing the gut lining to heal. So when I’m saying polysaccharides, I’m talking about starch. Like, the safe starches that I’m generally in favor of, like sweet potatoes and yams and taro, and all this stuff, but also all grains, including white rice. And then the disaccharides would be things like milk sugar.
Source: http://chriskresser.com/the-healthy-ske ... -episode-5

The problem is that the GAPS diet and the SCD diet are very restrictive and difficult to follow. But, they work by starving out the bad bacteria and rely on probiotics to replace bad gut flora with good gut flora.

Jaminet doesn't really focus on "gut healing" that much, but I think the lack of harsh grains probably helps heal the gut a bit.

Benko wrote: 3. "Any time you reduce a toxin load and starve out bad flora"
The "toxins" in nuts and grains "feed"  "bad" gut flora?

I'm thinking its more that if the bad gut flora crowds out the good gut flora, the good gut flora does not act to reduce the permeability of the leaky gut.  I've tried lots of probitiocs over the years and heve never seen a darn difference in food sensitivites other than less gas when that was an issue once.  So I suspect food toxins act more directly on the gut, not the flora.

MachineGhost wrote:

Benko wrote: 3. "Any time you reduce a toxin load and starve out bad flora"
The "toxins" in nuts and grains "feed"  "bad" gut flora?

I'm thinking its more that if the bad gut flora crowds out the good gut flora, the good gut flora does not act to reduce the permeability of the leaky gut.  I've tried lots of probitiocs over the years and heve never seen a darn difference in food sensitivites other than less gas when that was an issue once.  So I suspect food toxins act more directly on the gut, not the flora.

I agree. Though, I think there are some theories that poking holes in the gut (with toxins or grains or whatever) give bad gut flora a place to hide out in — and make them more difficult to remove. I sort of assume that reducing toxins would lead to less permeability and possibly less places for bad gut flora to hide out in.

I mean, you excrete tons of gut flora every time you poop, so there is something to be said about the theory of bad flora hanging out in the holes when the poop goes through.

Gumby wrote: 1)      Calorie-restriction and intermittent fasting.
2)      High (saturated and monounsaturated) fat low-carb diets.

I do all three at once.  120, here I come!!! 

Turns out that "raw" almonds are gassed with propylene oxide (PPO) -- a "probable human carcinogen" according to the EPA.  Wonderful.

MachineGhost wrote: Turns out that "raw" almonds are gassed with propylene oxide (PPO) -- a "probable human carcinogen" according to the EPA.  Wonderful.

I forgot about that. WAPF has been trying to fight it.

http://www.westonaprice.org/2011-action ... aw-almonds
http://www.westonaprice.org/2012-action ... or-almonds

Turns out that California almond farmers are forced to do this ridiculous gassing while foreign almonds are exempt.

Wow, there's a California Almond Board.

I'm sorry, everyone. I didn't vote for any of the neo-fascists who imposed this garbage.

I almost ate liver with onions today (for the first time in decades) but I opted for the broiled salmon with lots of olive oil instead.

I heard that organs worsen gout, so that's my excuse for not eating awful liver and the like, because back in my 3-a-day diet pop days I had bad gout.

If I'm going to gout flare, it's going to be because of beer, not liver!!

Moda,

Eating a bowl of cherries can help with gout flares.  There are other things that can help, and yes organ meats can be an issue for people with gout.

moda0306 wrote: I heard that organs worsen gout, so that's my excuse for not eating awful liver and the like, because back in my 3-a-day diet pop days I had bad gout.

If I'm going to gout flare, it's going to be because of beer, not liver!!

It's not simply about high protein/organ intake — there's a bit more to it than that. Benko was right about the cherries.

See: http://www.westonaprice.org/ask-the-doctor/gout

RE: food and the circadian thing,

I take it back. I was thinking about it wrong.

"Jaminet believes that this enhances the circadian rhythm "
I don't even know what the words "enhances circadian rhythm mean", but in terms of weight loss, this does make sense.

"A study in Cell Metabolism last May linked disruptions of the body clock to weight gain. Researchers put two groups of mice on the same high-calorie diet. One group was allowed to eat anytime; the other group was restricted to eating only during an eight-hour period when they were normally awake and active. The mice that ate only while active were 40% leaner and had lower cholesterol and blood sugar."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000087 ... 70544.html

Benko wrote: I don't even know what the words "enhances circadian rhythm mean"

See Chapter 42 in the PHD. It's just about all the benefits that come with keeping your body on a good schedule.

Then, see the following citations for Chapter 42:

http://perfecthealthdiet.com/notes/#Ch42

I had to laugh when he recommended the orange glasses I've been using. 

I took a fresh look at the "dietary glucose in" vs "glucose utilization" chart:

[align=center][/align]

It seems Jaminet is basing the chart on the standard 2000 calories, so the 600 calories crossover point is 30% and the 20% calories that he now claims PHD targets (as opposed to 30% in the book) is actually only 100 grams (not 75 grams which I had assumed) and appears at odds with the 125 minimum which is also stated in the book.  125 grams only equates to 25% at 2000 calories.  The inconsistency is annoying.

Also, neglected to be clarified is whether or not this intake is net carbohydrates devoid of fiber or non-starchy vegetables, or total carbohydrate intake.  If it is the former -- as I suspect -- it frees up even more calories for filling in with even more fat.  It is a bottomless fat pit!

So essentially so far, as a rule of thumb, the PHD diet goes like this:

[align=center]75 grams min to 150 grams max of protein per day.
100 grams min to 150 grams max of carbohydrates per day.
55 grams min of fat per day.[/align]

At the minimums, it is only 1195 calories, so the maximum fat intake should be ad libitum up to the daily calorie requirements.  That is also not addressed by PHD, so you are left wondering what the optimal daily calorie requirement is.  I am quite satiated on just <1500 calories a day with no need to load up on the fat.  But surely, there has to be a hormetic response to calorie intake as well.

Also unclear is with [net] carbohydrate intakes below 30%, how much extra protein is needed above the muscle-preserving minimum to make up the gluconeogenesis difference.

This week I gave up on shooting for three meals a day.  Just too much food volume and cleanup work in too short a period of time.  Far easier to up the fat content of two meals and not feel deprived by stretching only 1T of fat total per meal among cooking, starch and veggies.

MachineGhost wrote:The inconsistency is annoying.

You should leave a comment/question on his blog. He makes a point to personally answer nearly every one.

Also, I think he may have tweaked things slightly between the first edition and the second edition, so that could explain some inconsistency between old blog posts and the 2nd edition of the book.

There's a pretty cool free recipe generator site at http://www.eatthismuch.com/&nbsp; Since the last time I chcked it out, its been greatly expanded so you can easily customize your carbs/fats/protein to to PHD zones and omit non-PHD food categories.

The paid version will automatically do a week's worth of recipes and send you a grocery shopping list too.  Now all we need is a robot cook/butler and automated home delivery of groceries...

I've been looking for some protein powder and don't tolerate whey or egg or soy.  There is a proliferation of plant based protein powders to choose from:

1. are sprouted grains any less harmful on the intestinal track from the point of view of this diet? 

plant fusion contains: pea protein isolate, artichoke protein, and sprouted amaranth and sprouted quinoa
vega sport contains: pea protein, sacha inchi protein and sprouted brown rice. 

Another protein states A proprietary blend of organic plant enzymes are used to separate the fiber and carbohydrates from the protein portion of the organic, whole grain, sprouted brown rice

2. I presume that:  "organic cranberry protein, raw pea protein, raw organic hemp protein" should be OK from the point of view of this diet?
Sun warrior blend

Thanks.