- This topic has 19 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 53 minutes ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Jay Feldman has a few ideas on the sugar diets reasons for success and shares some thoughts on how to modify it to be a little more safer in terms of weight loss via bone and muscle mass loss.
The elimination of grains and hard to digest foods and the subsequent endotoxin reduction are a few of the benefits this diet could offer. But warning of upregulation of the stress hormone FGF21 being the primary factor for the benefits being the trade off. Looking at a lower fat (10 to 20 percent)diet in comparison with high carbohydrate and protein at 19 percent.
Maurito (one of the old school RPF posters) had an in depth response to Jay’s video you just posted, which is also worth a read-
I had never heard of FGF21 prior to the past few weeks, so I’m not sure it should be labeled a “stress hormone,” the same as cortisol or estrogen. I have no idea what “normal” levels of it would be, or if higher levels would be good or bad or neutral. Just because it can be elevated in response to stress doesn’t mean it’s causal. White blood cell counts are generally elevated in response to infection for example, but aren’t thought to be the cause. Maurito pointed out that some of it’s proposed mechanisms of action are beneficial, like an upregulation of thyroid hormone, mitochondria, and the klotho protein.
The discussion that you mention <span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@Zac”>@Zack-Vegas</span> is an interesting one and brings out some valid counterpoints to Jay’s viewpoint on the sugar diet.
But I think that trying to shoehorn this new type of diet into a one size fits all approach is not how this approach should be viewed either. Simply because of every persons own unique circumstances, and these need to be considered first and foremost.
The one issue for example would be the protein restriction until evening. Given the persons occupation this might be more difficult if they are a concrete worker or block layer for example their needs may require a more consistent level of protein throughout the day compared to someone working as a computer coder, who would have a lighter demand for physical lifting continuously but need higher energy for cognitive and mental focus in their occupational choice.I do not think that the Steve Jobs analogy would be an issue in this case, because the protein issue would be addressed and his issue was complete protein restriction. But with this diet as I am understanding it does put the protein restriction out there for a good portion of the day. So given the persons circumstances they could possibly be put into a similar situation for a period of time, whether that is beneficial to that person or not, well only they could say for certain.
JRK- I don’t think anyone is suggesting this as a “one size fits all” diet. Even Cole Robinson suggested that you tailor it to what works for you, and emphasized this is a fat loss diet. Obviously, someone who doesn’t need to lose fat wouldn’t need to try this.
It also isn’t that new. Fruitarians have been trying doing this for decades now. Often with great short term results, and detrimental long term results. So, it makes a lot of sense to suggest it’s use in the short term, and return to a more balanced diet in the long term. What is new it the type of people experimenting with it. These people don’t have a fear of meat or protein in general, so it’s a lot different to, say, use a high sugar diet for a month and then go back to a more balanced diet, than it is to try and force a fruit only diet for years and decades.
And you may be right about people with more active jobs, but those same people might actually benefit from a higher carb and lower protein diet during the day. Brad Marshall did some interesting videos on protein restriction and requirements, and one thing he found out was that both circulating FFAs and BCAAs compete with glucose for utilization. Also, obese and overweight folks tend to have higher fasting circulating BCAAs (and FFAs) than their lean counterparts. So, a high carb, low fat AND low protein diet may give a person the best energy during more demanding physical tasks. And maybe that protein should come more from gelatin/collagen than so called “complete” proteins, during the active period.
Here’s Brad’s video on how BCAAs and FFAs compete with glucose-
He also has one where he suggests that protein requirements might be much lower than suspected.
Mike Fave weighs in on the sugar diet and gives an example of a meal plan using chronometer to show how nutritional needs could be met using this diet style.
<span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@Zack”>@Zack-Vegas</span> would this be along the lines of thought you were considering incorporating in this diet?
Well, I just did my first 45 hour “Sugar Fast.” It was pretty enlightening. Similar in some ways to the “Intermittent Fasting” I used to do long ago.
One thing I noticed was that I felt much clearer and better, and seemed to be a bit more energetic afterwards. However, there was never a moment of ravenous hunger, as frequently could happen on IF back in the day. After the “Sugar Fast,” I seemed to have more energy, be more positive, and see a little clearer. Weirdly, the whites of my eyes looked the whitest in the mirror that I remember seeing them. The scale also dropped a couple pounds, might have dropped a few more if I had allowed the “Sugar Fast” to go to the normal time I weigh myself.
As for getting through the “sugar fast,” I pretty much came to the conclusion that it would be very difficult without smoothies. Which is fruit, fruit juice, and something like honey or simple syrup. This setup allowed me to go through the night without any real protein or fat.
Basically, I see three types of days with this-
Sugar Fast Days
“Super Peat” Days
Normal and Cheat Days
The Sugar Fast days are going to be just that…. pure sugar. I might do slight modifications like adding Glycine and Taurine to shakes, or adding some coconut milk to get a bit of fat in. But mostly, sugar. 95-99% sugary foods. Both protein will likely be under 10 grams, and fat under 5 these days (cronometer shows a bit of both fat and protein in most fruits).
The “Super Peat” Days are something I was kicking around in my head for a while. Based around a lot of sugar, but also using gelatin and collagen in higher amounts, and a lot of coconut oil. Like, A LOT, to point where it’s pretty much the only real fat there is. The more acceptable starched, like potatoes and rice, are allowed on these days. And also, and I know this is gonna sound weird….. vegan cheese. Ugh, why, you say? Because there are many that are made with only coconut oil, and those cheeses actually taste pretty good, and melt pretty good, as well. Kinda like Cheese Whiz. I know, this might be a bridge too far for some, but if you really want to try to up the coconut oil in your diet, it seems like a great way to do it. The collagen and potatoes usually make this a day of about 70-80 grams of protein, which is about what Ray Peat usually recommended on the low end, I may add low fat meats to these days over time.
Last is the normal and “cheat” days. These are the days I have dinner with family or friends, and can go out to restaurants. These are also the days where protein will likely be a lot higher. I usually eat about 140-150g of protein when I eat normally, and I could see these days being something like 140-200g fairly easily.
I get where Mike Fave is coming from with protein, but still not sure if the target needs to be that high. I think some of the benefits come from lowering the protein, and thus lowering serum BCAAs and the inflammatory aminos Peat talked about (if lowering these is part of the goal, getting 40-50 grams of gelatin or collagen might make a “complete” protein with the aminos floating around in your blood). Carbs spare muscle, preventing the need to break it down for gluconeogenesis, and Brad Marshall showed some studies that showed normal weight men can be in protein balance on as little as 44g of protein a day, or even just 7g of amino acids (as they are apparently absorbed better).
Next, I am going to try the 72 hour sugar fast that Cole recommends. I think I can do it, and want to see what happens. I think this could be an incredible “weight loss weapon,” as he says, and remember, Peat himself suggested that a 24 fast could be beneficial, and using sugar during that “fast” would probably be even healthier.
Here is a study Maurito posted, showing that a low protein diet over 12 weeks did not impair muscle synthesis in humans. The low protein group ate 0.4g/kg of bodyweight, which translates to about 45 grams for a 250 pound man. This is in line with some of the studies Brad Marshall posted. I do think there could be issues with going this low in protein for periods longer than this (say, 6 months to years or more), but it does seem to suggest that using the Sugar Diet aggressively for 2-3 months would be okay. Also, the low protein group ate 60% of food as carbs, so this would apply to high carb diets-
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0137183
I might have mentioned this elsewhere, but it’s also worth nothing that we can’t directly measure bodyfat or muscle. These are always estimates. Someone like Mark Bell obviously has a high amount of muscle and lower amount of bodyfat, just from looking at him. I think this is the goal, we all want to look and feel better. Cari pointed out many times she is more compact and looks better at higher weights.
This is to say that no study is perfect. I like Cole’s idea of pushing the limits on some ideas, like sugar fasting, and also respect Mike Fave’s words of caution. I do think some of Fave’s diet setups are overly cautious during a “cutting” phase, but think they are better for the long term and maybe even a slower weight loss.
Still, there might be benefits to a more aggressive cutting phase, like Latchkey Genxer, who lost 30 pounds in a month. After that month, he deliberately added more protein and slowed weight loss, but he was still losing weight at a high rate. Maybe the “cutting” phase really helped improve his metabolism, so that even the diet he was eating previously would lead to better weight loss than it did before the aggressive month. TheBigPeatoski reported something similar after her two 6 week low fat diet stints on the old RPF.
@Zack-Vegas Years ago I did the Lemonade diet on and off for about 6-months. I didn’t do the diet the way it was suppose and instead just fasted from food and only drank the lemonade concoction which was fresh lemon in water with dark maple syrup and Cayenne pepper. The longest I went was five days because the lemonade got tiresome, but a day to three was doable and I really slimmed down fast doing the fast once a week until I got to where I wanted to be. Like you said it was freeing from food and left me time for other things. I slept good and was never hungry.
Just curious on your progress <span class=”atwho-inserted” contenteditable=”false” data-atwho-at-query=”@Zac”>@Zack-Vegas</span>? Is your goal to drop some weight for health reasons or are you intentions to go through a cutting phase as many in the bodybuilding community do for competition purposes? I think that Haidut once mentioned that from a health perspective bodybuilders tend to be in a higher state of health than when they go through the cutting phase as it is described. Certainly there have been examples of having to low of a level of body fat, which can have significant consequences to health.
I think that Mike Fave and Jay Feldmans point might be one to that effect where going too light on one macronutrient ie fat could have long term impacts if allowed to continue for too long of a duration of time.But I am happy to hear that you are seeing the desired results.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
Author
