Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It - Gary Taubes

I tried to do the atkins diet, and it caused me serious anxiety problems. Apparently my brain needs the carbs to function.

Or are you advocating we eat whole grain carbs, and leave out white rice and white bread? What is the most natural commercially prevalent carb? Is it the potato? Many places serve the potato with the skin, so the tuber itself has not been processed like with white rice or white bread.
 
I tried to do the atkins diet, and it caused me serious anxiety problems. Apparently my brain needs the carbs to function.

Or are you advocating we eat whole grain carbs, and leave out white rice and white bread? What is the most natural commercially prevalent carb? Is it the potato? Many places serve the potato with the skin, so the tuber itself has not been processed like with white rice or white bread.

What Taubes says is basically this:

-the more easily digestible the carb and the faster it can be broken down into glucose, the more it promotes fat storage

-slow-digesting carbs like leafy green vegetables do not elevate insulin near as much as potatoes, rice, bread, etc

What I would add is that whole grain rice and bread take longer to digest than white rice/bread, but they still contain a shitload of carbs. If your goal is to lose fat, you'll probably want to stick almost exclusively to leafy green veggies and perhaps the occasional piece of fruit as a carb source, but dietary fat is also a good source of energy. I thought I would be in a brain fog after lowering carbs and upping fats but I feel great.

Of note: the author states that in the presence of elevated insulin, the body craves carbohydrates because they can be broken down quickly and used to supply the rest of the body (organs, muscle tissue) with calories QUICKLY, even if the fat cells are hoarding most of the calories.

What this means is that people who eat lots of carbs will crave even more carbs as a result.

The fact that you felt shitty perhaps points to you not lowering carbs enough or giving yourself enough time.
 
It's not? Also to my other point, maybe Thomas Myers and his "Anatomy Trains" is a better analogy than Gabor Mate, since I don't think Myers is a Dr but he's revolutionizing the physical health industry and his stuff is now being taught in schools. Drs and Therapists take his classes.
No, an "appeal to authority" is a bit of misnomer. Experts and legitimate authorties (scientists, in this case) are not really included there, as it really should be called an "appeal to false authority."

For instance, listening to what Michelle Obama says about nutrition based on the fact that she's the First Lady is an appeal to authority, but listening to what somebody with legitimate scientific credentials says is not the same thing. That said, what Michelle Obama says may be sound info (not saying it is or isn't as I'm just using her as an example), but buying it solely because of her authority is the issue.

So no, listening to the experts in this field over taubes is not appealing to authority.
 
No, an "appeal to authority" is a bit of misnomer. Experts and legitimate authorties (scientists, in this case) are not really included there, as it really should be called an "appeal to false authority."

For instance, listening to what Michelle Obama says about nutrition based on the fact that she's the First Lady is an appeal to authority, but listening to what somebody with legitimate scientific credentials says is not the same thing. That said, what Michelle Obama says may be sound info (not saying it is or isn't as I'm just using her as an example), but buying it solely because of her authority is the issue.

So no, listening to the experts in this field over taubes is not appealing to authority.
Ok I hear u. I do think it's a mistake just to dismiss his position based the fact that scientists disagree with it though... That is if you are extremely passionate about the field and are in search of a better explanation.
 
No, an "appeal to authority" is a bit of misnomer. Experts and legitimate authorties (scientists, in this case) are not really included there, as it really should be called an "appeal to false authority."

For instance, listening to what Michelle Obama says about nutrition based on the fact that she's the First Lady is an appeal to authority, but listening to what somebody with legitimate scientific credentials says is not the same thing. That said, what Michelle Obama says may be sound info (not saying it is or isn't as I'm just using her as an example), but buying it solely because of her authority is the issue.

So no, listening to the experts in this field over taubes is not appealing to authority.

Yeah, I wouldn't call it appeal to authority. It's more like bad science that is now accepted unquestioningly because of ad populum.

In other words "Everybody knows the earth is flat!"

The scientists were wrong, the scientific consensus was wrong, the population at large didn't even look into the science but just accepted it because everybody else accepted it and it made intuitive sense.
 
Last edited:
I dont know if its been mentioned already but getting fat is usually a combination of psychological, genetic, or lack of education on basic nutrition.
 
I dont know if its been mentioned already but getting fat is usually a combination of psychological, genetic, or lack of education on basic nutrition.

There are certainly genetic and other "nature" factors at play. For instance, mothers can create an insulin sensitivity setpoint for their fetus/child depending on how elevated their own insulin is. So basically obese mother = fat baby.

However, Taubes argues (and I now agree) that obesity is not a psychological problem, and if we are going by the FDA and NIH's guidelines, it's not a problem of basic nutrition or lack of education. Eat more/move less in a vacuum doesn't work, and the results of that advice speak for themselves.

I would agree that lack of education is the problem insofar as carbs cause elevated insulin levels and therefore fat gain, but that's not what our health officials are using as a premise for their advice...which means they give us bad advice.

Indeed, many fat people are following the mainstream advice to a T and seeing zero results.
 
What Taubes says is basically this:

-the more easily digestible the carb and the faster it can be broken down into glucose, the more it promotes fat storage

-slow-digesting carbs like leafy green vegetables do not elevate insulin near as much as potatoes, rice, bread, etc

What I would add is that whole grain rice and bread take longer to digest than white rice/bread, but they still contain a shitload of carbs. If your goal is to lose fat, you'll probably want to stick almost exclusively to leafy green veggies and perhaps the occasional piece of fruit as a carb source, but dietary fat is also a good source of energy. I thought I would be in a brain fog after lowering carbs and upping fats but I feel great.

Of note: the author states that in the presence of elevated insulin, the body craves carbohydrates because they can be broken down quickly and used to supply the rest of the body (organs, muscle tissue) with calories QUICKLY, even if the fat cells are hoarding most of the calories.

What this means is that people who eat lots of carbs will crave even more carbs as a result.

The fact that you felt shitty perhaps points to you not lowering carbs enough or giving yourself enough time.

Leafy greens have carbs? Is broccoli and string beans considered leafy greens? Sorry if stupid question.

But I think I was eating leafy greens when on the atkins, and still apparently was not getting enough sugar in my brain.

I believe I did lower it enough. I litterally eat very little traditional carbs, and I was doing it for almost two and half years.
 
There are certainly genetic and other "nature" factors at play. For instance, mothers can create an insulin sensitivity setpoint for their fetus/child depending on how elevated their own insulin is. So basically obese mother = fat baby.

However, Taubes argues (and I now agree) that obesity is not a psychological problem, and if we are going by the FDA and NIH's guidelines, it's not a problem of basic nutrition or lack of education. Eat more/move less in a vacuum doesn't work, and the results of that advice speak for themselves.

I would agree that lack of education is the problem insofar as carbs cause elevated insulin levels and therefore fat gain, but that's not what our health officials are using as a premise for their advice...which means they give us bad advice.

Indeed, many fat people are following the mainstream advice to a T and seeing zero results.

I just mentioned psychological cause some people resort to food out of depression, boredom or as an escape. Self destructive behaviour

Lack of education I would direct to those that try and follow fad diets or just dont have a clue whats healthy and whats not. On top of lack of exercise
 
I just mentioned psychological cause some people resort to food out of depression, boredom or as an escape. Self destructive behaviour

Lack of education I would direct to those that try and follow fad diets or just dont have a clue whats healthy and whats not. On top of lack of exercise

Lack of exercise has little to no effect on fat loss, despite it being great for health and for accumulation of muscle.

Psychologically being driven to eat fats and proteins would have negligible effect on fat gain... a hormonal addiction to carbohydrates (perhaps prompted by stress, which creates cortisol and also promotes fat storage) would.
 
Leafy greens have carbs? Is broccoli and string beans considered leafy greens? Sorry if stupid question.

But I think I was eating leafy greens when on the atkins, and still apparently was not getting enough sugar in my brain.

I believe I did lower it enough. I litterally eat very little traditional carbs, and I was doing it for almost two and half years.

Yes, everything edible is either a protein, fat, or carb source. Most green plants (lettuce, spinach, broccoli, kale) are carbs. Their carb content is lower than grains and starches and they have indigestible fiber, so their impact on insulin levels is neglible.

Broccoli is a leafy green, string bean isn't.

LeafyGreens.jpeg


You don't need carbs to get sugar to your brain. Your body can convert fat and protein to glucose, just not as quickly as carbs.

Carbs are the "fast burn" food source you might want if you're about to run for your life from a bear. But they are quickly deposited as fat. Dietary fat and protein are still fine as an energy source. Carbs are not necessary at all for health or well-being and have the property of elevating insulin which dietary fats and proteins do not.
 
Yes, everything edible is either a protein, fat, or carb source. Most green plants (lettuce, spinach, broccoli, kale) are carbs. Their carb content is lower than grains and starches and they have indigestible fiber, so their impact on insulin levels is neglible.

Broccoli is a leafy green, string bean isn't.

LeafyGreens.jpeg


You don't need carbs to get sugar to your brain. Your body can convert fat and protein to glucose, just not as quickly as carbs.

Carbs are the "fast burn" food source you might want if you're about to run for your life from a bear. But they are quickly deposited as fat. Dietary fat and protein are still fine as an energy source. Carbs are not necessary at all for health or well-being and have the property of elevating insulin which dietary fats and proteins do not.

The things is, I was still eating some leafy greens when on the Atkins. I was still going bonkers. I did not feel better until, and drank a sugary drink one day, and that is when I broke the atkins, and went back to regular carbs like rice and bread, and it helped.
 
There are certainly genetic and other "nature" factors at play. For instance, mothers can create an insulin sensitivity setpoint for their fetus/child depending on how elevated their own insulin is. So basically obese mother = fat baby.

However, Taubes argues (and I now agree) that obesity is not a psychological problem, and if we are going by the FDA and NIH's guidelines, it's not a problem of basic nutrition or lack of education. Eat more/move less in a vacuum doesn't work, and the results of that advice speak for themselves.

I would agree that lack of education is the problem insofar as carbs cause elevated insulin levels and therefore fat gain, but that's not what our health officials are using as a premise for their advice...which means they give us bad advice.

Indeed, many fat people are following the mainstream advice to a T and seeing zero results.

Man you gotta just give it up. Realize Taubes is not a scientist and his ideas have been really torn to shreds by reputable people. Refer to the links to Stephen Guyenet's breakdown of the insulin hypothesis (he's also got a lot more of it on his website on similar topics).
 
So in a nutshell mass produced food is Fn garbage.

Anyone who doesn't know this should be forced to live in a colony in the ocean.
 
Eating too much of any food will make you fat. Doesn't matter if it's 4,000kcal/day of Twinkies, Broccoli or Protein Shakes.


If you eat a 2000 calorie diet of twinkles you're gonna look way worse tHan if you ate a clean 2000 calorie diet.
 
All i know is ive been doing 50 or less carbs 6 days a week for 2 months and i've lost 15 lbs of fat and feel great. On my cheat day i feel like a sloth
 
Back
Top