• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
- - - - -

Want to be fat?


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#1 DukeNukem

  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 03 September 2006 - 08:30 PM


Wrote this for another group, sharing here, no charge...

~~~~~~~~~~~

Want to be fat? Here's what to do...

o Eat fried foods. Fried foods like the appropriately name french fries soak up fat/oil like a sponge. Making matters worse is that the oil used for nearly all fried cooking is hydrogenated oil (a.k.a. trans fat -- the bad stuff, banned in many countries). Even frying in non-trans-fat oil is recklessly fattening, and damaging to health because excessive heat damages fat molecules causing them to go rancid, and improperly integrated within the body (thus leading to higher cholesterol, inflammation, and even cancer in the long term).

o Eat processed grains/breads (versus whole grains). Practically all bread, rice, and pasta that American's consume falls into this category -- if it's white, you can be almost be sure it's processed and fattening. If you eat out, it's nearly impossible to find whole grain bread, whole grain brown rice, or whole grain pasta. And even when you see whole grain bread on a menu, as I sometimes do, four of five times it is not, and the restaurant is too clueless to know the real difference (I have verified this countless times at a long list of restaurants). Processed grains are essentially no different that pure sugar as far as your body is concerned. So, when you eat white bread, or white rice, know that you're really eating sugar -- in fact, many white breads have a higher glycemic index rating that table sugar! Processed grains are a terrific way to pack on the fat.

o Don't eat enough low-fat protein with you main meals. In other words, if you really want to be fat, avoid lean protein because protein slows down the insulin reaction to your meal, reducing how quickly the sugar and simple carbs in your meal are stored as bodyfat. Meals that consist of too little protein are more quickly converted into fat. It's that simple.

o Consume foods/drinks with fructose. Fructose is often touted as nature's (or natural) sugar because it occurs in fruits. But, humans ate only whole fruits throughout evolution, not foods with added fructose and without the nutritional benefits (and fiber) of whole fruits. Most breads have added fructose, as do most processed foods of ANY kind (especially foods touted as health foods, like Gator-Ade and health/protein bars). And especially fattening is a man-made super concentrated version of fructose called high-fructose corn syrup. A key reason fructose is perfect for weight gain is that it is not digested normally, and is instead processed by the liver. This is why it does not cause an insulin reaction like other sugars, and therefore wrongly positioned as a healthy sugar, especially for diabetics. But the truth is that fructose is very quickly converted by the liver into triglyceride, and then stored in fat cells. Fructose is a leading contributed to fatness, so if that's your goal, it won't be hard to find in foods.

o Skip breakfast. When you skip breakfast, you allow your body to maintain its self-imposed overnight fasting-protection mode, where it prefers to cannibalize muscle tissue for energy rather than fat cells. When the body gets low on blood glucose, as it does overnight as we sleep, it switches to a fasting mode that hangs onto fat cells, because the body is unsure when it's next meal will come and so survival is best assured by using metabolically costly muscle tissue as a food source, before turning to metabolically cheap fat cells for energy. When we eat, we break this fasting state, and stop burning precious muscle tissue. To grow fat, delay eating for as long as possible after you wake up.

Need more help getting fat, try these made-to-order foods:

o Sodas. Most people drink about 320 calories of soda each day (two cans). A pound of fat is 3500 calories. Drinking this average is an automatic 32 pounds fat per year. And sodas are a great source of fructose.

[Note: Edited #'s above thanks to Shepard.]

o French fries: The perfect blend of fat (typically trans-fat) and sugar. Sugar you ask? Yes. Potatoes are basically sugar as far as your body treats it. In this respect, french fries are no different than another highly fattening food: donuts. Mmmmm...donuts.

o Salad dressing. The vast majority of salad dressing is perfectly fattening. They are made of fructose and rancid vegetable oils (or hydrogenated oils). Avoid olive oil and vinaigrette if your goal is fat padding, instead go for the blue cheese, Italian or ranch.

o Cereal. Most is over-processed, non-whole-grain, low protein, high sugar candy. Add milk and it's high fat, too.

o Snack chips & potato chips. Like fries, a brilliantly fattening blend of fat and sugar-like processed grain with no protein or fiber, and no nutritional value.

o Fruit juice. Any kind, including fresh squeezed. The problem is that fruit juice is stripped of the fiber, protein and complex carbs that slow down the insulin reaction. Pure fruit juice is like a quick high of sugar, and the body must react quick with a high insulin burst to store the sugar as fat. Making matters worse is that much of the sugar is fructose, which is also easily and quickly converted to fat by the liver. Bottom-line for fat seekers: Drink fruits, don't eat them.

Edited by dukenukem, 14 December 2006 - 04:48 PM.


#2 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 03 September 2006 - 09:08 PM

Good stuff. I like how it does not say "don't" every other word.

#3 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 03 September 2006 - 10:50 PM

o Skip breakfast. When you skip breakfast, you allow your body to maintain its self-imposed overnight fasting-protection mode, where it prefers to cannibalize muscle tissue for energy rather than fat cells. When the body gets low on blood glucose, as it does overnight as we sleep, it switches to a fasting mode that hangs onto fat cells, because the body is unsure when it's next meal will come and so survival is best assured by using metabolically costly muscle tissue as a food source, before turning to metabolically cheap fat cells for energy. When we eat, we break this fasting state, and stop burning precious muscle tissue. To grow fat, delay eating for as long as possible awake you wake up.

o Sodas.  Most people drink about 500 calories of soda each day (two cans). A pound of fat is 6000 calories. Drinking this average is an automatic 30 pounds fat per year.  And sodas are a great source of fructose.


These are the only ones that I have issue with. The first because we have evidence that skeletal muscle isn't that affected by short-term fasting. Everything that I've seen points to hunger control being the issue with non-breakfast eaters.

The second is just that a typical soda isn't quite 250 Calories, and a pound of fat isn't 6000.

sponsored ad

  • Advert

#4 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 03 September 2006 - 11:24 PM

Shepard, you're definitely right about the 6000 figure being wrong -- it's 3500-ish. Big-time brain goof there. And the 250 per can is wrong, too, it's closer to 160. The figure I grabbed turned out to be from the bigger plactic bottles.

Anyway, the corrected figures actually makes the problem a little worse, with a person gaining 32 (rather than 30) pounds of fat yearly from two cans of soda per day.

(I have edited the original post.)

#5 Trias

  • Guest
  • 270 posts
  • 0

Posted 03 September 2006 - 11:25 PM

nice guide!

But why the extremism?

You won't get "fat" by eating all of these foods on principle. My father, for instance, eats 3 meals a day and in each and every one of them - he eats something fried (says its his favorite taste), he uses Canola-oil and makes sure to fry the food under low temperature to avoid saturation. He has been eating in this fashion for more than 40 years. He's 59 yrs old, bout 12-13% bf (I'm about 10%). The bottom line is that he eats vver-very little.

And that's what mostly matters when it comes to being fat or slim. Overall energy balance.

#6 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 03 September 2006 - 11:51 PM

One thing I love about LA (Los Angeles, "la la land," etc) is the abundant excellent restaurants that offers foods that can fulfill the requirements Duke has set fourth (as stuff to avoid)...yes, some are vegan/vegetarian, some are not, though, check out these:

Real Food Daily
http://www.realfood.com/ (100% organic vegan food that tastes great)

Their cookbook:

http://www.realfood....merchandise.htm

Solar Harvest
http://www.solarharv...m/food/food.htm
*Free range animals
*All organic
(problem: portions are smaller than average)

Urth Cafe (Does not have their food menu online, but EXCELLENT!)
http://www.urthcaffe.com/index.html
*All organic foods, free range animals (I think)

Whole Foods Market
http://www.wholefood...ucts/index.html

*Offers a wide variety of free range animals fed organic feed, never given hormone injections. The Whole Foods Market I visit has a customized sandwich bar, a customizable buritto bar, a salad bar, a freshly prepared food bar, THE BEST pizza, espresso and juice bar, 1000 different cheeses, wines...they are a bit expensive, but you have to pay for quality foods. ONE RAD thing Whole Foods does: offsets 100% of their energy requirements to renewable energy credits

http://www.wholefood...r_01-10-06.html

Whole Foods Market Makes Largest Ever Purchase of Wind Energy Credits in United States

Historic renewable energy credit purchase to offset 100% of company's electricity use

Austin, Texas — January 10, 2006.

Whole Foods Market, the world's leading natural and organic foods supermarket, has made a landmark purchase of renewable energy credits from wind farms to offset 100% of the electricity used in all of its stores, facilities, bake houses, distribution centers, regional offices and national headquarters in the United States and Canada. This is the largest wind energy credit purchase in the history of the United States and Canada and makes Whole Foods Market the only Fortune 500 Company purchasing wind energy credits to offset 100% of its electricity use.

"Whole Foods Market is a leader in the natural and organic foods movement, and that involves caring about our communities and respecting our environment. This purchase of wind energy credits is a natural extension of that leadership and is integral to our core values," said Michael Besancon, Whole Foods Market Southern Pacific regional president and Green Mission task force leader. "Offsetting 100% of our electricity use with renewable, clean energy strengthens our commitment to be a leader in environmental stewardship by helping to clean the air and reducing our dependence on fossil fuels."

As of December 9, 2005, Whole Foods Market is purchasing more than 458,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) of renewable energy credits from wind farms. This purchase will avoid more than 700 million pounds of carbon dioxide pollution this year. To have the same environmental impact, more than 60,000 cars would have to be taken off the road or more than 90,000 acres of trees would have to be planted.

"Whole Foods Market has made the largest ever corporate purchase of renewable energy credits in the nation," said Kurt Johnson, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Green Power Partnership director. "Conventional electricity generation is the largest industrial source of air pollution in the United States and wind power is a clean and renewable alternative. Whole Foods Market's commitment to wind power is providing an outstanding example of environmental leadership." Renewable energy credits make nationwide wind power transactions possible since it would be physically impossible to deliver electrons from a wind farm directly to all of Whole Foods Market's stores, facilities, and businesses. When a wind farm produces electricity, renewable energy credits are issued to track the exact amount of power created.

Whole Foods Market has chosen Boulder, Colorado-based Renewable Choice Energy as its exclusive supplier of renewable energy credits after an extensive search process. Renewable Choice Energy is a leading national provider building the market for clean and renewable sources of energy. "Renewable Choice Energy is thrilled to have been chosen to make this record-setting renewable energy credit purchase possible," said Quayle Hodek, Renewable Choice Energy chief executive officer. "Whole Foods Market's commitment is an inspiration to everyone looking for a leader to demonstrate that wind power is ready for the mainstream."

To help evaluate options and facilitate the purchasing process, Whole Foods Market involved the Washington, DC-based nonprofit environmental think tank World Resources Institute (WRI). Since 2000, WRI has been working with a number of Fortune 500 companies to increase their use of renewable energy. "By making this purchase, Whole Foods Market is taking a huge step toward advancing corporate renewable energy purchases," said Jonathan Lash, WRI president. "Corporate leadership is essential to the growth of wind power and Whole Foods Market's historic purchase has set a new benchmark for the industry."

EDITORS NOTE: Wind farm and Whole Foods Market store b-roll available upon request. Wind farm photos available at http://www.wholefood...a/windfarm.html


Yes, some of these restaurants offer high sugar foods...but I think it's okay to eat sugar occasionaly (definately at weddings, birthday parties, etc.) as long as you excercise and are in good shape.

Edited by nootropikamil, 04 September 2006 - 12:13 AM.


#7 Guest_da_sense_*

  • Lurker
  • 0

Posted 04 September 2006 - 07:41 AM

What's the point with of this article?
I know some people who eat like this and are skinny. I also know some who eat healthly but are still fat.

Better title would be How to eat unhealthy. Somebody who's underweight and want to get some (needed) fat shouldn't follow this.

#8 kenj

  • Guest
  • 747 posts
  • 67
  • Location:Copenhagen.

Posted 04 September 2006 - 11:16 AM

I don't think it was Duke's intention, to help skinny people gain weight, but rather point out the staggering illogic in consuming "conventional", processed foods, all the while complaining about the decline in the mirror, also handing over ones independent health to McD and the mainstream supermarket chains; -
while a calorie is still a calorie, the donut and the french fries pack a whole LOT of them, really do not contain anything useful for the body, and are just POISON for the body and brain, and should be TREATED as such IMO, to avoid them.

Also, there's a big motivating difference between the vague "unhealthy", and the very concrete "FAT!"...

#9 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 04 September 2006 - 03:15 PM

What's the point with of this article?

Merely that telling people how to get fat, is maybe a better way to tell them how to avoid being fat. And Kenj is right, "fat" is merely more tangible code for "unhealthy."

This article was written for a group of friends whom are total newbs at nutritional health.

#10 Infernity

  • Guest
  • 3,322 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Israel (originally from Amsterdam, Holland)

Posted 04 September 2006 - 03:58 PM

I don't think it's hard to be fat .........


-Infernity

#11 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 04 September 2006 - 06:08 PM

just because someone can eat tons of sugar and processed foods now and remain slim doesn't mean they will stay that way. Metabolic syndrom and type II diabetes is slowly developing. Some people are more resitant than others, but jesus, look how fat the developed world is.

#12 xanadu

  • Guest
  • 1,917 posts
  • 8

Posted 04 September 2006 - 06:16 PM

Very good post, Duke. Sugar and processed carbs that turn into sugar are a bane on humanity. They have no nutrients and not only produce fat but contribute mightily to diabetes which is becoming an epidemic in many developed countries. I just read today that an estimated 1 billion people in the world are overweight with many of them being obese. Sugar is the prime culprit in that along with unhealthy fats. People think bread is good for you but flour turns into sugar soon as you eat it. Whole grain flour may be a little better but it still has the sugar.

#13 Mind

  • Life Member, Director, Moderator, Treasurer
  • 19,055 posts
  • 2,005
  • Location:Wausau, WI

Posted 04 September 2006 - 06:55 PM

When I saw the deep-fried twinkie showing up at county fairs I knew things were getting out of hand.

It seems the most addictive and fattening foods have three things in common....sugar, fat, and often times salt. I wonder if there is some evolutionary basis to this. These things are all needed by the body so I suspect we developed and evolutionary craving for them. Our body is programmed to store fat whenever it can (for the tough times out on Serengeti). I supose we crave sugar because it is the primary energy source for our grey matter.

#14 JohnDoe1234

  • Guest
  • 1,097 posts
  • 154
  • Location:US

Posted 04 September 2006 - 07:11 PM

That was a really good read, thanks Duke!

#15 biknut

  • Guest
  • 1,892 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Dallas Texas

Posted 04 September 2006 - 07:19 PM

Today in the Dallas Morning News there's a story about Fried Coke Floats. Yuck!

#16 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 04 September 2006 - 08:46 PM

Support for Duke's theory in today's news (on sodas)...

Want to be fat? Drink lots of sodas...

http://www.commonvoi....asp?colid=5784

Coca-Cola in denial about it's role in the Obesity pandemic
Julia Havey
September 3, 2006

reprinted from my blog: www.JuliaHavey.typepad.com

I read this article today and have to share it with you:

More than 3000 experts are in Sydney for the International Congress on Obesity - one of medicine's most rapidly advancing fields. But an elite 35 delegates have also been invited to hear a very different, pre-conference spin on the science of weight gain, delivered by members of the so-called Beverage Institute for Health & Wellness.

If the institute's trademark looks familiar, this is because it is wholly owned by Coca-Cola, whose branding it unabashedly mirrors. And its science, too, is a selective echo of the learned literature on obesity - addressing one of the hottest questions in the weight debate: whether sugar, and sugar-laden soft drinks in particular, must shoulder a super-sized serving of the blame for the health crisis.

Abundant, cheap and extraordinarily tasty, especially to children, sugar is shaping up ahead of even fat and inactivity as a leading factor behind the upward spiralling worldwide epidemic of weight gain.

Ian Caterson, the conference co-chairman and the Boden Professor of Human Nutrition at the University of Sydney, said: "Soft drinks are probably a special case because they're high in energy and they're also liquid, and it seems that getting energy as a liquid, you don't get the same satiety [feeling of fullness]."

Sweetened drinks account for half the 150 to 300 extra calories Americans consume daily, a national survey of more than 75,000 people found. In Australia, roughly half of 16- to 18-year-old boys consume nearly a litre of soft drink a day, according to analysis by Tim Gill from the NSW Centre for Public Health Nutrition at the University of Sydney.


But Coke remains more concerned about the difficulties of getting enough fluids into recalcitrant children. The website of its Beverage Institute subtly plays on parents' worries that their children may become dehydrated or undernourished.

"Several studies show that children consume about 45 to 50 per cent more liquid when it's flavoured," the site says.

"Beverages like milk, some soy beverages and some fortified juices provide a convenient way for children to get nutrients like bone-building calcium and vitamin D [giving] picky eaters choice and parents peace of mind."

John Foreyt, director of the Behavioural Medicine Research Centre at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, is one of four scientists who will address Monday's breakfast guests. Sweetened drinks, he told the Herald this week, had been "demonised … it's a single-culprit theory". He rejected the US findings that most excess calories were coming from soft drinks. "That's looking at the epidemiology. That's correlation, not causation," Dr Foreyt said. "Epidemiology is not science."

The bottom line, Dr Foreyt said, is personal responsibility. "We're getting heavier, we're a fat world. The way to go is balance, variety and moderation."


Dr Foreyt was unapologetic about his financial links with Coca-Cola. "I'm a consultant to them. I also do lots of work with drug companies … I write grants and get them funded. I run a research institute. That's what I do."

Adam Drewnowski, professor of epidemiology at the University of Washington and director of its Centre for Public Health Nutrition, is also on the breakfast meeting ticket.

He believes policy-makers need to look closely at weight patterns in different suburbs of the same town; obesity may be five times more common in poorer areas.

"Foods we used to think of as staples are slipping out of reach, never mind cherries and tomatoes," Professor Drewnowski said. "What's staying in people's price range is things like doughnuts … Fruit juice has not been associated with obesity and yet the sugar content is much the same. How come? Juice is drunk by rich people. Is sugar evil or is it merely cheap?"



#17 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 05 September 2006 - 05:46 AM

I would add some more more points:
o Do not eat an expensive diet full of organic meats, veggies, fruits and exotic items (the average person cannot afford this anyway, so it's a no-brainer).
o Do not take 100s of nutritional supplements every day to enhance every aspect of your health (again, not affordable to most people so it's not important).

#18 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 05 September 2006 - 07:01 AM

Pablo:

On both points you made, there are clearly cases where there is much evidence to support a counter argument. Without attacking anyone, can you support your assertions with some evidence, please? Duke provided information that is consistent with the evidence I've seen with respect to the topic name: Want to be fat?

If you have evidence and an argument suggesting otherwise, please present it. :)

#19 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 06 September 2006 - 06:30 AM

The following topics reinforce the need to not be fat:

Obesity is the world's major cause for chronic diseases, disability
September 5, 2006
http://www.imminst.o...=171&t=12339&s=

Proof' behind high protein diets
Wednesday, 6 September 2006
http://www.imminst.o...=171&t=12340&s=

#20 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 06 September 2006 - 07:39 AM

Supersize: Bigger than you think
http://www.usatoday....fast-food_x.htm
Posted Image
A small 2.6-oz. serving of McDonald's french fries is 250 calories; a 4-oz. medium is 380 calories; a 6-oz. large is 570 calories.

#21 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 06 September 2006 - 09:54 PM

Obesity 'doubles sight-loss risk'. I would just cross post this at ImmInst, but this outdated forum software's quote glitch is getting more and more on my nerves.

#22 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 18 September 2006 - 05:54 AM

A bump on Duke's excellent topic on how to be fat; also see this:

Certain veges hold the key to killing cancer cells

#23 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 18 September 2006 - 07:09 AM

Pablo:

On both points you made, there are clearly cases where there is much evidence to support a counter argument.  Without attacking anyone, can you support your assertions with some evidence, please?  Duke provided information that is consistent with the evidence I've seen with respect to the topic name: Want to be fat?

If you have evidence and an argument suggesting otherwise, please present it.  :)

Adam: What I meant is that there are more factors to being overweight than the simplistic ones Duke presents. You cannot, as Duke has done, simply contemptuously blame people for their weight. For example, the government heavily subsidizes corn and soy, lowering the price on Duke's favorites, high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils (these obviously go into junk food, making unhealthy food cheap). While certain diets definitely ARE healthier, they are more expensive, and some people simply do not have the means to pursue such diets. Poor people cannot afford the massively healthy diet Duke espouses. Bad food is cheap. According to this article, "[o]ver the past decade, consumer prices for fresh fruit and vegetable have risen at a much faster pace than prices for all food at home." So poor people a) have bad diets, b) lack supplements that increase insulin sensitivity and all that jazz and c) are generally uneducated and ill-informed about basic nutrition, let alone the many exotic, organic, high-ORAC, body-alkalizing miracle things that Duke eats, drinks and ingests in supplement form. I'm sorry, but his high tower criticism just rubs me the wrong way. The guy has a successful company, granted, and a bookshelf full of health books. In MY book, that makes him no more an expert than me or anyone else. Duke has fallen "prey" to quackery, such as with the pseudoscientific nonsense that is alkalized water.

#24 doug123

  • Guest
  • 2,424 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Nowhere

Posted 18 September 2006 - 07:05 PM

Wow, that's an intense post. I guess I will have to take it one sentence at a time. I start school today, so I am back on my ADD stack, so you might get more articulate posts from me until the end of the quarter...:-)

What I meant is that there are more factors to being overweight than the simplistic ones Duke presents.


I don't recall if Duke stated: "this is the only way to be fat." His summary is solely with respect to diet. And in this case, I think he is on the ball.

You cannot, as Duke has done, simply contemptuously blame people for their weight. For example, the government heavily subsidizes corn and soy, lowering the price on Duke's favorites, high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils (these obviously go into junk food, making unhealthy food cheap).


I have not been able to find where Duke blamed anyone for their weight -- what I see is, instead -- a way to be fat. Duke has not claimed that corn or soy is not subsidized -- I don't see what your point is there. Duke says not to eat foods with a high glycemic index; such as foods with high levels of high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils.

While certain diets definitely ARE healthier, they are more expensive, and some people simply do not have the means to pursue such diets. Poor people cannot afford the massively healthy diet Duke espouses.


I would have to disagree. I was homeless for a while (living in my car, trying to "make it" as a musician...I had no money most of the time). I went to the Krishna temple on a daily basis and they had a free feast every night at 8 pm -- open to the public -- there was always extra food and you can take some with you. At times, I also would eat there for lunch; but I would feel compelled to do some service to assist the temple; such as cleaning gardens; and I assisted building the George Harrison Memorial garden (this is back in summer of 2001; edit: the city has since destroyed the George Harrison Memorial Garden) at the LA temple: International Society for Krishna Consciousness of Los Angeles.

I don't know what your definition of "poor" is; but if you live in a developed country such as the USA and can't manage to earn enough money to pay for food -- then that implies you are probably just plain lazy. On the other hand, I guess your point might apply to someone living in an unindustrialized nation without access to education and a workforce as diverse and demanding as that in the USA. Get a job, master your field, and put your best effort in to be successful. We live in a land of opportunities...not a land of limitation. As in Duke's case, he did not even need to finish college to become successful on grand scale -- so you might learn a bit from him about how to proceed to eat a more nutritious diet. Or join the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, do some community service. Your work will be valued and your stomach will be full. If it's not, let me know. I'll see what I can do.

Bad food is cheap.


Bad food for a vegetarian is actually more expensive than good food for a non vegetarian.

So -- good food is cheaper. Go to the market and buy canned black beans and corn. You have a complete protein, fiber, and whatnot.

According to this article, "[o]ver the past decade, consumer prices for fresh fruit and vegetable have risen at a much faster pace than prices for all food at home." So poor people a) have bad diets, b) lack supplements that increase insulin sensitivity and all that jazz and c) are generally uneducated and ill-informed about basic nutrition, let alone the many exotic, organic, high-ORAC, body-alkalizing miracle things that Duke eats, drinks and ingests in supplement form. I'm sorry, but his high tower criticism just rubs me the wrong way.


I don't understand how the rising prices of fruit and vegetables is relevant to the topic name "want to be fat?"

I also don't understand how someone being "poor" has anything to do with the topic name: "want to be fat?"

Supplements weren't mentioned in Duke's article as far as I see.

Obviously you have studied Duke's supplement stack more than I have.

I'm sorry, but his high tower criticism just rubs me the wrong way.


The only criticism I see here seems to be coming from you.

The guy has a successful company, granted, and a bookshelf full of health books. In MY book, that makes him no more an expert than me or anyone else. Duke has fallen "prey" to quackery, such as with the pseudoscientific nonsense that is alkalized water.


I've interacted with a lot of folks with "successful" companies -- and I've had my own. To what extent, that's the judgement call of the individual who determines herself to be a success. Most of the REALLY successful individuals I know are never content with their performance and are always trying to better themselves. Duke seems to fit that criteria. He doesn't claim to know everything, yet is also is humble enough to join us here and share what he knows; without attacking anyone nor bragging about developing the most successful first person shooter released this year. In fact, many of us can learn a thing or two from him. That's what I've been trying to do.

Edited by nootropikamil, 28 December 2006 - 11:20 PM.


#25 DukeNukem

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 2,008 posts
  • 141
  • Location:Dallas, Texas

Posted 18 September 2006 - 09:14 PM

Pablo, what I posted, as I said, was original for some friends, and I merely copied it here in case anyone else was interested. It's certainly not a scientifically backed article, just one based on my general knowledge from all I've read and experienced. I never claim to be an true expert in health, nutrition, supplements, etc. I am ALWAYS pursuing further knowledge, trying to refine what I know.

I think Adam made some good counter statements, so I won't repeat them.

As for alkalized water, there's plenty of evidence showing benefits from this. More important, though, it would seem, is water where the cluster size has been reduced. HydraCel is a product I've used for years for this purpose, plus my home water purifier does this, reduces H2O clusters from 12 or so in size, to 4-6 in size, resulting in better inter-cell hydration. This is one area where I'm not as sure about the benefits, but I figure, hey, it can't hurt.

I have yet to use magnets under my pillow, if that makes you feel any better! ;-)

#26 Pablo M

  • Guest
  • 636 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Sacramento

Posted 18 September 2006 - 09:50 PM

I don't recall if Duke stated: "this is the only way to be fat."  His summary is solely with respect to diet.  And in this case, I think he is on the ball.

Yeah, the recommendations are generally sound, although it's also possible to lose weight with other means. When I was in 9th grade I lost a ton of weight with a high-carb diet that some nutritionist in the Idiot's/Dummies guide recommended.

I have not been able to find where Duke blamed anyone for their weight -- what I see is, instead -- a way to be fat.  Duke has not claimed that corn or soy is not subsidized -- I don't see what your point is there.  Duke says not to eat foods with a high glycemic index; such as foods with high levels of high fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated oils.

The angle of "how to be fat" just strikes me as a little disdainful, especially with such phrases as "Need more help getting fat, try these made-to-order foods." As I have pointed out, bad food is cheap. If you follow the links that I have provided, you will see economic reasons why this is. This makes it easier for poor people to afford bad food.


I would have to disagree.  I was homeless for a while (living in my car, trying to "make it" as a musician...I had no money most of the time).  I went to the Krishna temple on a daily basis and they had a free feast every night at 8 pm -- open to the public -- there was always extra food and you can take some with you.  At times, I also would eat there for lunch; but I would feel compelled to do some service to assist the temple; such as cleaning gardens; and I assisted building the George Harrison Memorial garden (this is back in summer of 2001) at the LA temple

Okay. What this anecdote tells us that in a certain neighborhood of Los Angleles, one can eat for free once-daily, and possibly twice. For you, poverty was a temporary condition. Not every homeless man goes on to start an online supplement company. Poverty is endemic to certain populations and areas of the country, and hard work, clean living and spit polish will likely not fix these problems.

I don't know what your definition of "poor" is; but if you live in a developed country such as the USA and can't manage to earn enough money to pay for food -- then that implies you are probably just plain lazy.  On the other hand, I guess your point might apply to someone living in an unindustrialized nation without access to education and a workforce as diverse and demanding as that in the USA.  Get a job, master your field, and put your best effort in to be successful.  We live in a land of opportunities...not a land of limitation.  As in Duke's case, he did not even need to finish college to become successful on grand scale -- so you might learn a bit from him about how to proceed to eat a more nutritious diet.  Or join the Red Cross, the Peace Corps, do some community service.  Your work will be valued and your stomach will be full.  If it's not, let me know.  I'll see what I can do.

False logic, in my opinion. The unemployment rate has, to my knowledge, never been zero. This is useful to the economy, in a sense, as it nudges wages lower. As for living in a "land of opportunity," that is just about the worst piece of Amerikan drivel I have ever heard. Not everyone can be an economic success. The capitalist system of the USA needs lowly paid people to clean toilets, pick crops, straighten up 5 star hotels, etc. These people's lots in life exist because of economic pressures. They can not all buckle down, get business degress, and get high-paying jobs. It is simply not possible. This would be somewhat analogous to a country printing lots of extra currency because it needed more money.

Bad food for a vegetarian is actually more expensive than good food for a non vegetarian. So -- good food is cheaper.  Go to the market and buy canned black beans and corn.  You have a complete protein, fiber, and whatnot.

I would agree that being vegetarian is cheaper. Too bad Duke eats so much organic free-range turkey, which incidentally is one of the most inefficient ways of producing food for people. Not everyone can be well-paid; similarly, not everyone can eat organic turkey.

I don't understand how the rising prices of fruit and vegetables is relevant to the topic name "want to be fat?"

I also don't understand how someone being "poor" has anything to do with the topic name: "want to be fat?"

I guess I am just too much the mentat. Where some people see simplistic reasons why people make themselves overweight, I see deep, system-wide problems that limit people's ability to control their situations.

Supplements weren't mentioned in Duke's article as far as I see.

Obviously you have studied Duke's supplement stack more than I have.

Well, I don't know if I have "studied" his supplements regimen, but offhand I could tell you the general regimen of a dozen or so ImmInst members. Just the way my brain is wired.

The only criticism I see here seems to be coming from you.

[wis]

I've interacted with a lot of folks with "successful" companies -- and I've had my own.  To what extent, that's the judgement call of the individual who determines herself to be a success.  Most of the REALLY successful individuals I know are never content with their performance and are always trying to better themselves.  Duke seems to fit that criteria.  He doesn't claim to know everything, yet is also is humble enough to join us here and share what he knows; without attacking anyone nor bragging about developing the most successful first person shooter released this year.  In fact, many of us can learn a thing or two from him.  That's what I've been trying to do.

One of the hallmarks of self-proclaimed experts is that they state their personal beliefs as absolute truths. If your read Duke's posts, more often than not the tone is exactly this.
  • dislike x 1

#27 eternaltraveler

  • Guest, Guardian
  • 6,471 posts
  • 155
  • Location:Silicon Valley, CA

Posted 18 September 2006 - 10:14 PM

good grief.

Most fat people are fat due to the first law of thermodynamics
  • like x 1

#28 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 18 September 2006 - 10:23 PM

good grief.

Most fat people are fat due to the first law of thermodynamics


Shhh. Don't tell anybody.

#29 Athanasios

  • Guest
  • 2,616 posts
  • 163
  • Location:Texas

Posted 18 September 2006 - 10:33 PM

good grief.

Most fat people are fat due to the first law of thermodynamics


most?

#30 Shepard

  • Member, Director, Moderator
  • 6,360 posts
  • 932
  • Location:Auburn, AL

Posted 18 September 2006 - 10:43 PM

Most fat people are fat due to the first law of thermodynamics


most?


Some people have severe hormonal abnormalities which predestine them to be obese with our current medical treatments. Although not violating laws of thermodynamics, the situation is so horrible that it pretty much isn't in the same category as this discussion.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users