Other traditional peoples that ate a meat-heavy, nearly plant-free diet are several groups of Plains Indians, and the Maasai of Kenya, whose warriors refused all plant foods, except medicinal herbs. Here’s a brief introduction to historical/traditional low-carb ways of eating: http://www.iuhpeconference.net/downloads/en/Programme/PDFs/Phinney-Stephen.pps.pdf

I think it’s flat out wrong to back Taubes into a corner and suggest that the other person is attacking him. This just increases his resistance and makes it harder for him to help us find the best answer. It’s not a boxing match.

The Chorleywood bread making process further introduces crap into the food chain. I can’t eat almost any bread produced in the UK anymore but when I do find *real* bread I munch it down in delight.

And though their life expectancy is lower, it’s not clear that it’s from their diet. It could be their extreme poverty and lack of access to medical care. 

Diet may not be the only factor, but clearly that’s not a good example of humans thriving on a carb free diet, it’s a case of humans getting by on a carb free diet, but fairing relatively poorly

The interesting thing is it seems Taubes main argument is against what Guyanet says is unarguable.  Thermodynamics.  That weight has to be connected to energy in, energy out.  But you don’t have to be a scientist to realize the human body is more complicated than that (even ignoring how much food and what kinds of food simply pass through the body as waste).  Even a rocket ship burns different kinds of fuel with different efficiency.  That the crudest form of thermodynamic reasoning took over in the 1960′s as the key dietary advice seems to be the source of a lot of current problems with obesity.   Yet Guyanet just throws it out again as if anyone who questions the logic of it thinks the Earth is flat.

 Further, there are entire societies who subsist entirely on meat and thus ingest virtually all meats and no carbs and they are perfectly healthy.

Which societies are these? I am pretty sure that every society relies on grains and legues along with any meat they might eat.

Thanks for the link!  BoingBoing has been on my blog sidebar for three years.  It’s required reading for me.  Cheers,

Stephan Guyenet

Next thought: the first question for any diet needs to be: does it provide adequate nutrition? There are essential amino acids, essential fats, essential vitamins and minerals, but no essential carbohydrates. So if you had a decent diet but were just eating too much, the portion that could be most easily reduced without affecting health would be your carbs.

Also, I recently read some blog posts about a study showing even *after* you control for total calories consumed, people who eat more fruits and vegetables lose more weight. Starchy vegetables, white flour, and refined sugar were a contributing factor in weight gain.

I personally find that the more bad carbs that I eat (Chips, bread, sugary things, fries, etc..) the more my willpower to eat well diminishes. 
If I keep carbs to a minimum, and eat them in whole grains, nuts, etc.. I find that I can maintain control over what I put into my body and feel zen about it. Carbs aren’t the enemy, yes… we need them. But personally, I have to take them in limited quantities. 

If I have access to decent salad bar, I’m eating 2-3 times less than usually and lose weight. (My base salad being: rucola, cut carrots, red beans, corn, tune fish and bit of olive oil.) I also need to eat only once or twice per day: I do not have random appetite spikes.

I I do not have access to salad bar, I’m eating three times per day and sometimes evening snacks.

What I’m trying to say here, from my own experience and experience of few other people, as long as body doesn’t get the doze of all nutritional elements it needs (acids, salts, vitamins, etc) it would feel hunger. Amount of calories in my experience is secondary. IOW, looking at the steak serving, it is not the steak which gets you through the day – it is the side dishes.

But umm can you tell me the difference between a refined carbohydrate and an unrefined one, do they have different energy content?
why starch? people have been eating starch for a long time before obesity took off.

“Stephan Guyenet has posted on why he does not believe in refined carbohydrates as a cause of obesity”

That is just. not. true.  sorry :-)

It was self evident back then because those items were not the staple of the diet as they are now so you could clearly see that people that ate an unusual amount of those foods were obese and the rest weren’t in most cases unless they had a genetic pre-disposition to fatness.

Three main points which are: hyperinsulinemia results in leptin resistance, long term hyperinsulinemia increases fat storage and makes us eat more and there are lots of studies that show that low carb diets reduce insulin levels.

Flashing red stop signs: “alternative”,  ”hypothesis”,  ”perhaps” and “proposition” FOLLOWED UP BY:
“are the ultimate cause”. My brain turns this into a math equation and it comes out total bunk. 

I call the use of these types of “disclaimers” as ‘I guess” phrases. 

This, I guess my guesses concering obesity constitutes three distinct guesses.  First, as I’ve said, are my basic guesses that obesity is caused by a regulatory defect in fat metabolism, and so a defect in the distribution of energy rather than an imbalance of energy intake and expenditure.  The second is that insulin plays a primary role in this fattening process, and the compensatory behaviors of hunger and lethargy.  The third is that carbohydrates, and particularly refined carbohydrates– and I guess the fructose content as well, and thus I guess the amount of sugars consumed– are the prime suspects in the chronic elevation of insulin; hence, they are the ultimate cause of common obesity.  

All I have to do is consider  if the hypothesis or the author is defective. And the hypothesis didn’t write itself. 

Your body will make the sugar necessary for your brain.  So no your body doesn’t need carbs, though infants body does need fat for proper brain development.  That is why pediatricians recommend whole milk for children under two.

Further, there are entire societies who subsist entirely on meat and thus ingest virtually all meats and no carbs and they are perfectly healthy.

Regards,

Joe Dokes

Taubes disappointed many of us at last week’s Ancestral Health Symposium by confronting Guyenet (and arguably insulting him) during a Q&A session.  Guyenet’s posting is in response to that event at the AHS (look a couple of postings back in Guyenet’s blog).

The current thinking (subject to change) is that the low-carb diet is effective not because of the low-carbs, per se, but because low carb diets go a long way in reducing the Neolithic Agents of Disease (NADs) that humans have been introducing into the diet since the advent of agriculture.

Required reading: 

http://paleohacks.com, hub of all things paleo

http://ancestryfoundation.org/ , home of the Ancestral Health Symposium

http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/ , Guyenet’s blog.  Very good reading

http://www.archevore.com/ , blog of Kurt Harris, M.D.  Excellent stuff here.

Edit: I meant to note that I’ve been VLC for about 10 years, but I’ve recently overcome my carb phobia.