EDMW got dietitian or nutritionist?

[Mecisteus]

In the modern context, reducing carbohydrates whether refined or complex alongside lowering omega-6 intake offers far greater protection for metabolic health than merely switching to complex carbs while maintaining a high-carb diet.

Just look at the widely and available studies on the benefits of Mediterranean diet. Simple. Period.

Plus regular exercises including some high intensity.

 

[Mecisteus]

You are confused with glucose spike, hyperinsulinemia while conflating them with omega 6 intake.

A lot of folks (especially keto folks) use CGM then saw glucose spike and became overly worried about it. But they fail to understand many nuances and context. Preferring to jump to conclusions that this food is bad that food is good instead.

First. CGM is not perfect. Whatever you see on the CGM usually has some lag. Also some CGM sensors are just plain bad.

Second. Most people don’t know how the pancreas works when it comes to insulin. Do you know that insulin is a protein hormone and need time to synthesis? Do you know that pancreas has a small storage of ready-made insulin? Do you know that pancreas release insulin in stages after we eat? Do you know that if a person is on keto diet, or has little to no carb the previous meal, there will be little ready-made insulin stored in the pancreas? Do you know that this will then affect blood glucose level if one is to consume carb later?

Third. Having glucose spike is part and parcel of daily life. It’s like having stress is part and parcel of daily life. As long as the spike is not above 200 (preferably 180 mg/dL) and not for more than 2 hours. It is the same as i have stress from reading email during my job, so i should quit my job. Vs, my job is 9-9, my colleagues are nasty, my boss shouts all the time, and i am having suicidal thoughts, so i should quit my job. There is a difference between the above 2 examples. One is normal, and should not be over hyped. The other is bad, and should be avoided.

Fourth. Where did you get the data that MOST people in the population have chronically elevated insulin? I have never read that before. Please provide proof of this claim.

Fifth. If you are over worried about glucose spike, then why not promote eating carb together with protein and fibre? Protein are known to slow down stomach emptying. Protein also slightly increase insulin secretion which will help reduce glucose spike. Fibre are well known to lower GI. Hence, eating a balanced diet as a whole is never a concern for glucose spike.

Sixth. If you are over worried about glucose spike, then why not promote exercise after a meal? Muscle is the LARGEST glucose sink in the body. Just having a walk after a meal will prevent high glucose spike. Not to mention all the other benefits to bone, connective tissue, heart and mental health.

Seventh. If you are over worried about Chronic insulin level resulting in insulin insensitivity and finally T2D, then why not promote reduction of fats. Excess Fats (subcutaneous and visceral) are well known to cause insulin insensitivity and associated much more strongly to T2D then eating carb.

Over focus on carb/glucose spike/ hyperinsulnemia is not empowering to the masses. It spreads false information and unfounded fear. This should not be the overarching message to educate the population on how to achieve better health.

Very good points on the paranoia thing.

TLDR is BG spikes are normal. Prolong and elevated BG levels are NOT normal.

 

[Checkyrmed]

You are confused with glucose spike, hyperinsulinemia while conflating them with omega 6 intake.

A lot of folks (especially keto folks) use CGM then saw glucose spike and became overly worried about it. But they fail to understand many nuances and context. Preferring to jump to conclusions that this food is bad that food is good instead.

First. CGM is not perfect. Whatever you see on the CGM usually has some lag. Also some CGM sensors are just plain bad.

Second. Most people don’t know how the pancreas works when it comes to insulin. Do you know that insulin is a protein hormone and need time to synthesis? Do you know that pancreas has a small storage of ready-made insulin? Do you know that pancreas release insulin in stages after we eat? Do you know that if a person is on keto diet, or has little to no carb the previous meal, there will be little ready-made insulin stored in the pancreas? Do you know that this will then affect blood glucose level if one is to consume carb later?

Third. Having glucose spike is part and parcel of daily life. It’s like having stress is part and parcel of daily life. As long as the spike is not above 200 (preferably 180 mg/dL) and not for more than 2 hours. It is the same as i have stress from reading email during my job, so i should quit my job. Vs, my job is 9-9, my colleagues are nasty, my boss shouts all the time, and i am having suicidal thoughts, so i should quit my job. There is a difference between the above 2 examples. One is normal, and should not be over hyped. The other is bad, and should be avoided.

Fourth. Where did you get the data that MOST people in the population have chronically elevated insulin? I have never read that before. Please provide proof of this claim.

Fifth. If you are over worried about glucose spike, then why not promote eating carb together with protein and fibre? Protein are known to slow down stomach emptying. Protein also slightly increase insulin secretion which will help reduce glucose spike. Fibre are well known to lower GI. Hence, eating a balanced diet as a whole is never a concern for glucose spike.

Sixth. If you are over worried about glucose spike, then why not promote exercise after a meal? Muscle is the LARGEST glucose sink in the body. Just having a walk after a meal will prevent high glucose spike. Not to mention all the other benefits to bone, connective tissue, heart and mental health.

Seventh. If you are over worried about Chronic insulin level resulting in insulin insensitivity and finally T2D, then why not promote reduction of fats. Excess Fats (subcutaneous and visceral) are well known to cause insulin insensitivity and associated much more strongly to T2D then eating carb.

Over focus on carb/glucose spike/ hyperinsulnemia is not empowering to the masses. It spreads false information and unfounded fear. This should not be the overarching message to educate the population on how to achieve better health.

Most of what you said reflects a partial understanding of insulin physiology but misses how these mechanisms affect long-term metabolic health in real life. You are correct that glucose spikes are normal and that CGM readings can have a short delay, but the real issue is not the spike itself. It is the frequency, duration, and background insulin response that matter. The modern diet keeps insulin elevated throughout the day, not because of one sugary meal, but because carbohydrates are consumed at almost every meal and snack. Chronic exposure, not brief spikes, drives insulin resistance.

Yes, the pancreas stores some insulin and releases it in phases, but that capacity is limited and adaptive. In insulin-resistant individuals, the pancreas works harder to maintain normal blood glucose, keeping fasting insulin high long before glucose levels rise. Population studies such as NHANES have shown that hyperinsulinemia appears years before any visible glucose abnormalities. The reason it often goes unnoticed is that insulin testing is rarely prescribed in standard checkups.

Your analogy about stress actually supports this point. Occasional stress is harmless, but constant stress damages the body. Likewise, occasional glucose spikes are fine, but frequent spikes combined with constant insulin secretion lead to oxidative stress, inflammation, and fat accumulation.

Balancing carbohydrates with protein or fiber only slightly reduces spikes and does not solve the problem of chronically high insulin if total carbohydrate intake remains excessive. Post-meal walks are beneficial but cannot undo the cumulative damage of decades of elevated insulin and excess omega-6 intake.

The idea that fat causes insulin resistance is outdated. Controlled clinical studies show that reducing carbohydrates while increasing healthy fats improves insulin sensitivity, lowers triglycerides, raises HDL, and reduces liver fat. What drives insulin resistance is not fat itself but the combination of high carbohydrates and high omega-6 polyunsaturated fats that dominate modern diets.

This discussion is about diet and nutrition, not fear. Pointing out that most people are metabolically unhealthy is not alarmist, it is factual. Research shows that more than 80% of adults in many urban populations have some degree of insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome, most without knowing it. You can keep it simple by choosing foods that do not spike insulin, that support higher HDL, and that do not raise omega-6 levels.

 

[Mecisteus]

In support of what you said, prepare for a wall of text. ( in a good way)

The Randle Cycle, also known as the glucose-fatty acid cycle, describes the reciprocal relationship between the metabolism of glucose and fatty acids. It's a crucial regulatory mechanism at the cellular level, primarily in the mitochondria of our muscles.

In essence, it states: The presence of one fuel inhibits the oxidation (burning) of the other.

1. High Carbohydrate Availability (High Insulin): When you eat a carbohydrate-rich meal, blood glucose rises, triggering insulin release. Insulin facilitates glucose entry into cells and promotes its oxidation for energy. Crucially, the process of glucose breakdown (glycolysis) increases the production of a molecule called malonyl-CoA. Malonyl-CoA acts as a powerful signal that inhibits Carnitine Palmitoyltransferase-1 (CPT-1), the enzyme responsible for shuttling fatty acids into the mitochondria to be burned. Result: Fat is locked away in storage (adipose tissue) and cannot be used for fuel.

2. High Fatty Acid Availability (Low Insulin): In a fasted state or on a low-carbohydrate diet, insulin is low, and fatty acids are released from fat stores. High levels of circulating fatty acids are taken up by cells and oxidized for energy. The byproducts of this fat oxidation (specifically Acetyl-CoA and NADH) actively inhibit the key enzymes of glycolysis (Pyruvate Dehydrogenase and Phosphofructokinase). Result: Glucose oxidation is blocked, and glucose is largely spared for the brain (which can use ketones) or for glycolytic pathways.

The Critical Takeaway: The body is designed to be metabolically "monogamous." It prefers to burn one primary fuel at a time. Trying to burn both simultaneously—as happens on a high-carb, high-fat diet—creates metabolic competition and inefficiency.

Connecting the Randle Cycle to the Optimal Animal-Based Diet

The proposed optimal diet—high in animal fats/protein and low in carbohydrates—is perfectly engineered to work in harmony with the Randle Cycle, promoting metabolic health and flexibility.

1. It Eliminates Fuel Competition and Promotes Metabolic Clarity.

· Standard Modern Diet (High-Carb/High-Fat): This diet, rich in sugars, grains, and vegetable oils, constantly floods the system with both glucose and fatty acids. The Randle Cycle explains the metabolic chaos this creates:

· After a meal, high insulin from carbs shuts down fat burning. The dietary fat you just ate has nowhere to go but into storage (de novo lipogenesis) or, worse, into ectopic fat deposits in the liver and muscles, contributing to insulin resistance.

· The body is constantly switching between fuels inefficiently, a state described as "metabolic confusion." This is a primary driver of hyperinsulinemia and Type 2 Diabetes.

· Optimal Animal-Based Diet (High-Fat/Low-Carb): This diet provides a single, dominant fuel source: fat.

· Low carbohydrate intake means low baseline insulin and low malonyl-CoA.

· With the CPT-1 "gate" wide open, the abundant dietary and body fats flow effortlessly into the mitochondria to be oxidized for energy.

· There is no glucose to compete. The Randle Cycle is operating in its clean, preferred "fat-burning mode." This state of metabolic clarity is the foundation for stable energy and hormonal balance.

2. It Fosters Metabolic Flexibility, Not Rigidity.

This is a crucial point. The goal is not to never burn glucose, but to have the flexibility to burn whatever fuel is available.

· On the optimal diet, your primary fuel is fat. When you do consume carbohydrates (e.g., from seasonal fruit), the body can handle them. The insulin response will be sharp and appropriate, the glucose will be used or stored as glycogen, and then, because the diet is fundamentally low-carb, the body will seamlessly transition back to fat oxidation once the glucose is cleared.

· In contrast, a chronic high-carb diet destroys metabolic flexibility. The system is so saturated with glucose and insulin that the fat-burning machinery is permanently suppressed. The individual becomes a "sugar-burner," reliant on constant carbohydrate intake and vulnerable to energy crashes and hunger when glucose dips.

3. It Aligns with Our Evolutionary Fuel Source.

From an evolutionary perspective, the Randle Cycle makes perfect sense. Our ancestors did not have access to constant carbohydrate intake. Their metabolic survival depended on being able to efficiently burn fat (from animal kills) for energy during periods of fasting or scarcity.

· The Randle Cycle ensured that when game was caught and fat was consumed, the body could immediately and efficiently use it as its primary fuel, without competition from a non-existent constant glucose stream.

· The ability to inhibit glucose oxidation when fat was abundant was an advantage, sparing glucose for the few tissues that absolutely required it.

Conclusion

The Randle Cycle is not merely a biochemical curiosity; it is a foundational principle of human metabolism. The standard high-carbohydrate modern diet directly violates this principle, forcing the body into a state of constant fuel competition that leads to metabolic dysfunction.

The optimal animal-based diet, rich in animal fats and low in carbohydrates, is biochemically congruent with the Randle Cycle. It:

· Minimizes insulin and malonyl-CoA, unlocking the body's ability to burn fat as its primary, clean-burning fuel.

· Eliminates metabolic competition, providing "fuel clarity" and preventing the fat-storage signaling caused by mixed macronutrient intake.

· Restores true metabolic flexibility, allowing the body to efficiently utilize both dietary fats and occasional carbohydrates as nature intended.

In short, the Randle Cycle provides the detailed biochemical "why" behind the metabolic superiority of a low-carb, high-fat, animal-based diet.

lmao google flaws of Randle Cycle. I don't wish to copy pasta.

Good luck with the sky high LDL. Obviously its not a concern for a superhuman like you. But do check your arterial health regularly.

For the general population, they should keep LDL or ApoB in check while also promoting good insulin sensitivity.

 

[rogze79]

lmao google flaws of Randle Cycle. I don't wish to copy pasta.

Good luck with the sky high LDL. Obviously its not a concern for a superhuman like you. But do check your arterial health regularly.

For the general population, they should keep LDL or ApoB in check while also promoting good insulin sensitivity.

Go ahead. Tell us what you know.

And I'm still working for your studies that you claimed.

Dun behave Like a kid. Learn how to talk as an adult should do.

 

[rogze79]

Seventh. If you are over worried about Chronic insulin level resulting in insulin insensitivity and finally T2D, then why not promote reduction of fats. Excess Fats (subcutaneous and visceral) are well known to cause insulin insensitivity and associated much more strongly to T2D then eating carb.

1. How do you promote the reduction of excess fats? What should one do and eat?

 

[entry-level]

Most of what you said reflects a partial understanding of insulin physiology but misses how these mechanisms affect long-term metabolic health in real life. You are correct that glucose spikes are normal and that CGM readings can have a short delay, but the real issue is not the spike itself. It is the frequency, duration, and background insulin response that matter. The modern diet keeps insulin elevated throughout the day, not because of one sugary meal, but because carbohydrates are consumed at almost every meal and snack. Chronic exposure, not brief spikes, drives insulin resistance.

Yes, the pancreas stores some insulin and releases it in phases, but that capacity is limited and adaptive. In insulin-resistant individuals, the pancreas works harder to maintain normal blood glucose, keeping fasting insulin high long before glucose levels rise. Population studies such as NHANES have shown that hyperinsulinemia appears years before any visible glucose abnormalities. The reason it often goes unnoticed is that insulin testing is rarely prescribed in standard checkups.

Your analogy about stress actually supports this point. Occasional stress is harmless, but constant stress damages the body. Likewise, occasional glucose spikes are fine, but frequent spikes combined with constant insulin secretion lead to oxidative stress, inflammation, and fat accumulation.

Balancing carbohydrates with protein or fiber only slightly reduces spikes and does not solve the problem of chronically high insulin if total carbohydrate intake remains excessive. Post-meal walks are beneficial but cannot undo the cumulative damage of decades of elevated insulin and excess omega-6 intake.

The idea that fat causes insulin resistance is outdated. Controlled clinical studies show that reducing carbohydrates while increasing healthy fats improves insulin sensitivity, lowers triglycerides, raises HDL, and reduces liver fat. What drives insulin resistance is not fat itself but the combination of high carbohydrates and high omega-6 polyunsaturated fats that dominate modern diets.

This discussion is about diet and nutrition, not fear. Pointing out that most people are metabolically unhealthy is not alarmist, it is factual. Research shows that more than 80% of adults in many urban populations have some degree of insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome, most without knowing it. You can keep it simple by choosing foods that do not spike insulin, that support higher HDL, and that do not raise omega-6 levels.

As i have already mentioned in a previous post. You cannot extrapolate ONE cellular pathway or mechanism to human health outcome. The body is way more complicated than that.

i have already typed enough but if you still think i only have partial understanding of insulin physiology, its not a problem for me.

My take home message is this: taking regular bubble tea is bad. Taking regular balanced diet is not a problem.

LC diet can works. I am not oppose to it. However, not everyone in the population can benefits from low carb diet. Some see their weight gain instead.

When i mentioned fat in the previous post, I don’t mean dietary fat. I mean adipose fat tissues.

Lastly, there is no data suggesting MOST people in the population has chronically elevated insulin level. Please don’t conflate this with “some degree if insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome”. There are not the same thing.

 

[Raitei-Q]

Yeah as much possible I recommend avoiding meds and do the natural ways.

But some people just cannot exercise or due to bad genes or family history, they have to end up with meds eventually.

I look at my senior relatives. They are eating all the "good" foods and happy with life but relying on medicines though. They have some chronic diseases. You tell them to opt for LCHF, keto or carnivore, I think they rather die earlier.

i see many in those few gym i go that have reverse their health back to green zone, their change are just simple stuff like reduce sinful food, some had to remove/avoid as they discover they are allergic to them which cause discomfort

what they believe ( including a successful individual in health & fitness section) is that protein/fat/carb are not evil, fast food ( sinful yes) are not evil if they are consume when better choices are not available, moderation to sinful food, consume what is needed and essential to allow the body operate and function.

as adjustment made to diet, food choices by using blood work as a guide help greatly as well.
example myself i need to intake a potassium and sodium more as i lose them fast on days where i cardio, thus adding 2 to 3 banana a day to my diet daily is to regulate it, sodium wise i did add some salt here and there to my pre workout or water + salt to topup ( i had 2 blood test tell me i am i have low blood pressure and potassium) so adjustment had to be made.

reduce intake of ultra process food is something i do but i do have them once a while, there are time i go vegen due to prayers i avoid mock stuff as much as possible and only select leafy greens and potato to swop out rice when i got bored

so far health is still in a good zone.

 

[Raitei-Q]

As i have already mentioned in a previous post. You cannot extrapolate ONE cellular pathway or mechanism to human health outcome. The body is way more complicated than that.

i have already typed enough but if you still think i only have partial understanding of insulin physiology, its not a problem for me.

My take home message is this: taking regular bubble tea is bad. Taking regular balanced diet is not a problem.

LC diet can works. I am not oppose to it. However, not everyone in the population can benefits from low carb diet. Some see their weight gain instead.

When i mentioned fat in the previous post, I don’t mean dietary fat. I mean adipose fat tissues.

Lastly, there is no data suggesting MOST people in the population has chronically elevated insulin level. Please don’t conflate this with “some degree if insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome”. There are not the same thing.

with 100% sugar you mean for the BBT part, i do take BBT @ Zero sugar with no pearls lol ( i just want cold tea)

LC diet can works. I am not oppose to it. However, not everyone in the population can benefits from low carb diet. Some see their weight gain instead.<-- for me i believe end day if you go over 200 - 500 calories of ur needed calories for that day. ur body will store it as fat for later use..... but people often tell me there is no such thing as you eat fats to burn fats under this diet...

 

[entry-level]

You are still stuck with the notion that all carbs are equal. And every carb behave exactly the same.

You purposely ignored the underlined bold ?

A diet high in both carbohydrates and excess omega-6 fats can increase the risk of health issues like inflammation, weight gain, and cardiovascular problems, especially when omega-6s are from refined sources and the omega-6 to omega-3 ratio is unbalanced. Excess carbs, particularly refined ones, and a high omega-6 intake can lead to an elevated, unbalanced omega-6/omega-3 ratio, which promotes pro-inflammatory responses, insulin resistance, and contributes to weight gain and disease.


Well I agree with you its the whole package.

My observations are people are less physically active looking at the people around me.

I think it's fair assumptions that humans can be lazy and like to take shortcuts.

Eating a well balanced diet + exercising OR
Eating keto, carnivore, LCHF + no exercise

The latter strategy is much easier to adopt when trying to fix any metabolic or chronic health issues.

Just to add on.

A researcher once asked an African tribe man whom runs 40km+ everyday to gather food if he exercise?
The African man stares at the researcher with a look of confusion. After a moment, he replied: Who would be so stupid to exercise?

Human by default are made to be “lazy” in order to conserve those precious calories. It takes a lot of conviction and determination to want to exercise. Human by default are only physically active when their survival depends on it.

So I don’t blame people whom are “lazy”. It’s their very own nature. We just need to use more encouragement and motivate them.

When come to discussion on chronic disease, people will debate to the end of the world on what type of diet is best for them. But NO ONE will debate on what type of exercise regime is best for them. Not surprising. But an unfortunate reality.

 

[rogze79]

Fifth. If you are over worried about glucose spike, then why not promote eating carb together with protein and fibre? Protein are known to slow down stomach emptying. Protein also slightly increase insulin secretion which will help reduce glucose spike. Fibre are well known to lower GI. Hence, eating a balanced diet as a whole is never a concern for glucose spike.

isn't there a better way?

Bg doesn't spikes. Only eat primarily animal protein and fats. Fibre is not needed.

 

[Checkyrmed]

As i have already mentioned in a previous post. You cannot extrapolate ONE cellular pathway or mechanism to human health outcome. The body is way more complicated than that.

i have already typed enough but if you still think i only have partial understanding of insulin physiology, its not a problem for me.

My take home message is this: taking regular bubble tea is bad. Taking regular balanced diet is not a problem.

LC diet can works. I am not oppose to it. However, not everyone in the population can benefits from low carb diet. Some see their weight gain instead.

When i mentioned fat in the previous post, I don’t mean dietary fat. I mean adipose fat tissues.

Lastly, there is no data suggesting MOST people in the population has chronically elevated insulin level. Please don’t conflate this with “some degree if insulin resistance or metabolic syndrome”. There are not the same thing.

You are right that human metabolism is complex, but complexity does not erase consistency. Decades of research clearly show that chronic hyperinsulinemia precedes insulin resistance and metabolic syndrome by years. This is not extrapolating one cellular mechanism but well-documented physiology observed in population studies, including NHANES and multiple cohort analyses showing steady increases in fasting insulin long before glucose levels rise.

The issue with the so-called balanced diet today is that it is no longer what it once was. Modern eating patterns are filled with refined carbohydrates and excessive omega 6 intake, leading to frequent insulin spikes throughout the day. Over time, this keeps insulin chronically elevated even in people with normal glucose readings. That is why metabolic syndrome and prediabetes rates now affect more than a third of adults globally, many without a formal diagnosis.

Low carb diets are not about one size fits all restriction. They simply lower the frequency and magnitude of insulin spikes, allowing metabolic repair. Weight gain in some cases is due to transitional adaptation, not a failure of the diet itself.

Adipose fat is indeed a problem, but it does not appear spontaneously. It accumulates because of chronic hyperinsulinemia. Ignoring that early driver only treats the symptom, not the cause.

The body may be complex, but the principle remains simple. Keep insulin spikes low, maintain metabolic flexibility, and reduce omega 6 intake. The balanced diet most people follow today does the opposite.

 

[rogze79]

with 100% sugar you mean for the BBT part, i do take BBT @ Zero sugar with no pearls lol ( i just want cold tea)

LC diet can works. I am not oppose to it. However, not everyone in the population can benefits from low carb diet. Some see their weight gain instead.<-- for me i believe end day if you go over 200 - 500 calories of ur needed calories for that day. ur body will store it as fat for later use..... but people often tell me there is no such thing as you eat fats to burn fats under this diet...

I'm not sure the some that you are referring to that gained weight on lc is correct. It depends on their definition of lc. Or are they someone you know personally.

Despite what I eat, I have difficulty putting on weight/muscles.

 

[Checkyrmed]

Just to add on.

A researcher once asked an African tribe man whom runs 40km+ everyday to gather food if he exercise?
The African man stares at the researcher with a look of confusion. After a moment, he replied: Who would be so stupid to exercise?

Human by default are made to be “lazy” in order to conserve those precious calories. It takes a lot of conviction and determination to want to exercise. Human by default are only physically active when their survival depends on it.

So I don’t blame people whom are “lazy”. It’s their very own nature. We just need to use more encouragement and motivate them.

When come to discussion on chronic disease, people will debate to the end of the world on what type of diet is best for them. But NO ONE will debate on what type of exercise regime is best for them. Not surprising. But an unfortunate reality.

That story is entertaining, but it misses the point of the discussion. The African tribesman was not “lazy.” His life was built around movement as a natural part of survival. He did not need an “exercise regime” because his diet and lifestyle were aligned with human physiology. He ate unprocessed, low omega 6, low glycemic foods, and his energy expenditure came from purposeful activity, not artificial workouts to undo hours of sitting or overeating refined food.

Modern humans, on the other hand, live in a completely different environment. Sedentary jobs, processed food, and chronic snacking create a metabolic burden that no amount of gym exercise can fully offset. That is why the discussion on chronic disease cannot be reduced to willpower or motivation to exercise. The foundation is diet and nutrition.

Exercise is beneficial, but it does not reverse the damage caused by high insulin, excess omega 6, and continuous carbohydrate load. Studies show that even athletes develop insulin resistance when consuming high omega 6 and high carb diets. The tribesman did not need exercise for health because his diet did not create metabolic dysfunction in the first place.

So the real lesson is not about encouraging people to exercise harder. It is about removing the need to compensate for a broken diet. If food quality is fixed, movement becomes natural again, just as it was for that tribesman.

 

[Raitei-Q]

Just to add on.

A researcher once asked an African tribe man whom runs 40km+ everyday to gather food if he exercise?
The African man stares at the researcher with a look of confusion. After a moment, he replied: Who would be so stupid to exercise?

Human by default are made to be “lazy” in order to conserve those precious calories. It takes a lot of conviction and determination to want to exercise. Human by default are only physically active when their survival depends on it.

So I don’t blame people whom are “lazy”. It’s their very own nature. We just need to use more encouragement and motivate them.

When come to discussion on chronic disease, people will debate to the end of the world on what type of diet is best for them. But NO ONE will debate on what type of exercise regime is best for them. Not surprising. But an unfortunate reality.

in a funny way, that 40km runs to gather food = intensive + Overtime Exercise for us

 

[Checkyrmed]

lmao google flaws of Randle Cycle. I don't wish to copy pasta.

Good luck with the sky high LDL. Obviously its not a concern for a superhuman like you. But do check your arterial health regularly.

For the general population, they should keep LDL or ApoB in check while also promoting good insulin sensitivity.

That is a common misunderstanding of both the Randle cycle and lipid metabolism. The Randle cycle is not a flawed concept. It describes how glucose and fatty acids compete for oxidation, a fundamental physiological process that helps the body maintain energy balance. Problems arise not because of the cycle itself but because of chronic excess intake of glucose and omega 6 that keeps insulin elevated and fat oxidation suppressed.

LDL also needs to be viewed in proper context. Total LDL means little without knowing the particle size, oxidation level, and triglyceride to HDL ratio. A person with high LDL but low triglycerides, high HDL, and low inflammation has a very different risk profile compared to someone with high small dense LDL from insulin resistance. Studies on low carb and ketogenic diets consistently show better ApoB to ApoA1 ratios, fewer small dense LDL particles, and lower inflammation even when total LDL increases.

For most people, insulin resistance from refined carbs and excess omega 6 intake is the main driver of atherosclerosis. LDL only becomes harmful when oxidized or glycated in a high insulin, high glucose environment. Maintaining insulin sensitivity with a low carb whole food diet protects arterial health more effectively than focusing solely on lowering LDL. Treating the underlying metabolic dysfunction is far more meaningful than treating a lab number.

 

[Checkyrmed]

Very good points on the paranoia thing.

TLDR is BG spikes are normal. Prolong and elevated BG levels are NOT normal.

That statement oversimplifies the issue. While short and moderate glucose rises are normal, frequent and repetitive spikes from a high carb or omega 6 heavy diet lead to chronic hyperinsulinemia even when average blood glucose remains within range. Many individuals show normal fasting glucose yet already have elevated fasting insulin or HOMA IR values indicating early insulin resistance long before glucose rises. This makes it misleading to say glucose spikes are harmless just because they return to baseline.

Continuous glucose monitoring data shows that people on low carb or ketogenic diets maintain stable glucose with minimal insulin response while those consuming modern mixed diets experience repeated spikes throughout the day, each demanding more insulin. Over time this damages beta cell function, promotes inflammation, and accelerates metabolic syndrome.

It is not paranoia to avoid unnecessary glucose spikes. It is about reducing the frequency of insulin surges that drive energy storage, hunger, and long term insulin resistance. Normal does not mean optimal, and what is common in modern urban populations should not be mistaken for healthy physiology.

 

[Raitei-Q]

I'm not sure the some that you are referring to that gained weight on lc is correct. It depends on their definition of lc. Or are they someone you know personally.

Despite what I eat, I have difficulty putting on weight/muscles.

there is one thing for sure i know is that Fat have 5 calories more compare to carb and protein is 4 per 1g
there are some who can still go over their calories needed for the day even on LCHF

They hit their goal for fat macro but they forget to hit their minimum need for protein which is essential for muscle to rebuild, repair, growth, recovery
which come to a thinking of my, if one hit the macro for fat and the calories took a huge chunk of the pool where now the remain left calories for protein to be added is much lesser or than the needed minimum amount for muscle maintenance thus that is why one end up with no muscle growth at all?
now if one hit their protein minimum but not hit the fat minimum would that also cause the effectiveness of the diet to lose it's effect?

 

[Checkyrmed]

there is one thing for sure i know is that Fat have 5 calories more compare to carb and protein is 4 per 1g
there are some who can still go over their calories needed for the day even on LCHF

They hit their goal for fat macro but they forget to hit their minimum need for protein which is essential for muscle to rebuild, repair, growth, recovery
which come to a thinking of my, if one hit the macro for fat and the calories took a huge chunk of the pool where now the remain left calories for protein to be added is much lesser or than the needed minimum amount for muscle maintenance thus that is why one end up with no muscle growth at all?
now if one hit their protein minimum but not hit the fat minimum would that also cause the effectiveness of the diet to lose it's effect?

That reasoning mistakes calorie math for metabolic outcome. Calories from fat, protein, and carbohydrate are not metabolically equivalent. The thermic effect of protein is far higher, meaning much of its energy is lost as heat rather than stored, while fat and carbohydrate differ in how they signal insulin, satiety, and fat storage. A low carb high fat diet does not depend on calorie balance alone but on hormonal balance, particularly insulin and glucagon, that governs whether energy is stored or mobilized.

People who fail to build or maintain muscle on LCHF are usually under consuming protein or not training properly, not because fat uses up their calorie allowance. Protein requirements are independent of fat intake, and fat should be added to satiety, not as a fixed macro goal. The primary purpose of fat in LCHF is to provide energy once carbohydrate is minimized, while protein remains the structural and functional priority.

As for fat minimums, there is no strict threshold for diet effectiveness. The key is staying within a low insulin state so the body uses stored fat efficiently. Oversimplifying to a calorie comparison between macros ignores how energy partitioning, hunger regulation, and insulin sensitivity determine body composition far more than raw calorie counts ever will.

 

[Raitei-Q]

That reasoning mistakes calorie math for metabolic outcome. Calories from fat, protein, and carbohydrate are not metabolically equivalent. The thermic effect of protein is far higher, meaning much of its energy is lost as heat rather than stored, while fat and carbohydrate differ in how they signal insulin, satiety, and fat storage. A low carb high fat diet does not depend on calorie balance alone but on hormonal balance, particularly insulin and glucagon, that governs whether energy is stored or mobilized.

People who fail to build or maintain muscle on LCHF are usually under consuming protein or not training properly, not because fat uses up their calorie allowance. Protein requirements are independent of fat intake, and fat should be added to satiety, not as a fixed macro goal. The primary purpose of fat in LCHF is to provide energy once carbohydrate is minimized, while protein remains the structural and functional priority.

As for fat minimums, there is no strict threshold for diet effectiveness. The key is staying within a low insulin state so the body uses stored fat efficiently. Oversimplifying to a calorie comparison between macros ignores how energy partitioning, hunger regulation, and insulin sensitivity determine body composition far more than raw calorie counts ever will.

so far all i know is the result of people who are using LCHF method end up getting more skinny than looking tone up but if they have higher in take of protein 150g to 200g which most did have a increase in muscle mass while lower & on the fat i mean you can use it for a Cutting phase but it will be much more tricky on the bulking phase.

most things are simple is not as complex as it seem like how you need to go in to science theory of level, i mean we are all human but we are so different lol, the human body is still far more complex but there are much for simple view at certain things,

a simple blood test will allow one to choose their next course of direction, which someone in the H&F's thread stated.