Scott Connelly on insulin

[MindSpin]

pp. 129-132

For a 200 lb'er the table says 300 gr protein + 100 gr of carbs + unlimited vegetables. Thats 300*4 + 100*4 = 1600 kcals give or take + the vegetables. For a 200 lbs man even without any exercise that is a serious caloric deficit or the person in question would have to eat a whole field of lettuce per day.

He is being very specific about the macro-nutrient recommendations and not the caloric intake.  If he though "a calorie was a calorie", he would just say eat 1600 calories of anything you want... 

[Moen]

The issue is that he presents things as if the law of thermodynamics doesnt apply, only to prescribe something that straight up bows for that very same law. He is prescribing a specific caloric intake, yet in an indirect manner if you will.

Whether you prescribe total calories, macronutrient percentages, 'portions' or whatever people are using to take attention away from the word 'kilocalorie', it still boils down to the same thing.

[Fatpanda]

now Van you know i love you...BUT.. saying glucose rarely goes to fat is an argument for high carb low fat diet...  yet you always advocate that only calories and protein matter and ratios carbs/fats didnt matter...    if glucose rarely goes to fat then high carb low fat diets(with adequate protein) are superior to other's..

this is correct assuming your bodies glycogen stores are not near full.

the human body stores between 600-1000g of carbs depending on individual fitness variances. (2400-4000cals)

if you were carb depleted after 2 days of no carb eating it would not matter if your calories came from fats or carbs because dnl does not happen in humans unless carb stores are full, or fat intake is zero (survival mechanism i.e. for enzyme production).

i also disagree with lyles comment

 people will point out that replacing carbs with protein leads to greater weight loss although they have the same calories; ergo the equation is wrong.  What they fail to realize is that protein has a higher thermogenic effect and this modifies the TEF value of the equation

which this is true (higher thermogenic effect from protein than carbs), studies show that this has very little impact on overall calories and overall weight loss. what is missed here is protein is not a primary energy substrate for the body - it will be used last for energy needs, and when it is forced to convert protein to energy there is around 80% loss in calorie per gram due to the process being highly inefficient.

[Van_Bilderass]

now Van you know i love you...BUT.. saying glucose rarely goes to fat is an argument for high carb low fat diet...  yet you always advocate that only calories and protein matter and ratios carbs/fats didnt matter...    if glucose rarely goes to fat then high carb low fat diets(with adequate protein) are superior to other's..

When I say glucose rarely goes to fat I don't mean you can't get fat from overeating carbs because you certainly can. It's just that the mechanism is different (the fat you do eat gets stored, and if fat intake is extremely low DNL goes up, and etc). Also the "doesn't matter" situation refers to fat loss diets. It doesn't appear to matter much in those situations from a fat loss perspective. There may be performance benefits from manipulating ratios, for example being able to eat carbs around workouts may be beneficial (less protein breakdown, increased blood flow from the insulin boost may improve protein synthesis and so on).

[LurkyLurker]

The issue is that he presents things as if the law of thermodynamics doesnt apply, only to prescribe something that straight up bows for that very same law. He is prescribing a specific caloric intake, yet in an indirect manner if you will.

Whether you prescribe total calories, macronutrient percentages, 'portions' or whatever people are using to take attention away from the word 'kilocalorie', it still boils down to the same thing.

Agreed.

[MindSpin]

Scott will tell you that you can have two people on diets with the exact same calories, nut varying macro nutrient compositions, and all else equal, they will experience different body composition results.

[Wiggs]

In other words...two people can eat the same amount of calories, AND the same amount of carbs, but depending on their insulin sensitivity or insulin resistance, one may gain or lose weight over the other. 

One way to CONTROL your insulin is simply by monitoring your carbohydrate intake.  sugary carbs spike insulin levels. 

Correct but Wavelength, tbombz and panda will disagree See my old thread for details.  According to wavelength all you have to do is lower calories and everything is all good you can eat what you want.  You won't gain fat or anything...  

[Fatpanda]

In other words...two people can eat the same amount of calories, AND the same amount of carbs, but depending on their insulin sensitivity or insulin resistance, one may gain or lose weight over the other. 

One way to CONTROL your insulin is simply by monitoring your carbohydrate intake.  sugary carbs spike insulin levels. 

protein and saturated fat also spikes insulin 

[YoungBlood]

Correct but Wavelength, tbombz and panda will disagree See my old thread for details.  According to wavelength all you have to do is lower calories and everything is all good you can eat what you want.  You won't gain fat or anything...  

Not sure where Wavelength stands or comes from in his theory, but to some effect I agree that if you lower the calories you will lose weight. You may not look how you would see in a magazine, but you will lose weight even though your body composition may not be that of Ronnie Coleman in the 98 Olympia.

You can have the same two people (or even same person at different times) eat the same amount of calories that is below their maintenance levels and they'll lose weight. Say the calorie level is 2k, and the person burns 2800/day. They'll lose weight even if they eat 2k calories from butter. They'll lose weight if it's nothing but beef. They'll lose weight if it's all ice cream, cookies and french fries. BUT, they will just be a smaller version of their previous self. Not transformed into a lean muscled person with a veins popping everywhere.

 

[Moen]

In other words...two people can eat the same amount of calories, AND the same amount of carbs, but depending on their insulin sensitivity or insulin resistance, one may gain or lose weight over the other. 

One way to CONTROL your insulin is simply by monitoring your carbohydrate intake.  sugary carbs spike insulin levels. 

There are also things called genes, this has absolutely nothing to do with what they eat, rather what they are to begin with. Ofcourse 'results will vary'. Put them on the exact same exercise regimen and results will vary. Make them cum on the same porn and semen volume will vary. What's the point?

I do see the issue though but these 'micro considerations' matter for people with metabolic disorders, not for most of us here. I shall assume most of getbig is fit and does not have Syndrome X or the like (perhaps naive) 

This is purely from a cosmetics standpoint, he does say a lot of interesting stuff regarding health in the full video.