Added: 6 months ago
From: debbiedoesraw
Views: 11,351
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (86)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • i like to "oooohoooo..." at the end. indeed, lol.

  • Go GT!

  • Taubes shouldn't have wasted his breath.

  • Hahah, this clown was taught a lesson. You better be prepared and precise. Taubes has a rare mix of superb critical thought mixed with impenetrable confidence.

  • Good point by Taubes, good video. My only suggestion: I would take 'tries to' out of the title of the video.

  • palatability is relative...

  • just eat less, thats the ticket... or if adjust the sugar/fat dynamic you might be able to eat more... by volume and weight u can eat the most as a raw fooder... more calories as well...

    protein hardly needs to be worried about, eat enough calories with some even minimal variety and u will have enough COMPLETE protein...

    u can eat more calories and lose weight, its all a matter of what u were doing compared to the change... i've lost weight eating more fat and less sugar...

  • @glorp896 "just eat less"

    How do you explain -- and why are you ignoring -- the evidence that contradicts your theory? BTW, Gary Taubes has started a multi-part response to Guyenet on the former's blog: garytaubes. com/blog

    .

    "protein hardly needs to be worried about, eat enough calories with some even minimal variety and u will have enough COMPLETE protein."

    You will also have an excess of some amino acids -- which your body will convert to sugar and then to body fat.

  • @hitssquad yes, that can happen also, thats part of the whole dynamic of organic chem - from one thing to another - its not all linear like an easy flow chart of cause and effect... u can OD on anything... balance is quite hard to figure out... maybe some day we can have monitors, be like THE BORG of star trek and know JUST what we need from moment to moment... reminds me of those camelbaks with that sucking tube u can have next to you mouth... best hydration is bit by bit, not all at once...

  • @glorp896 "yes, that can happen also"

    No. If and when one is consuming low-quality protein diet at a volume sufficient to prevent protein-deficiency, it by definition *will* happen.

  • @hitssquad oh man, i just don't want to be drawn into the diet thing again... it can happen and WILL happen when one is consuming... blah blah... i believe u - sugar plus protein WILL yield more protein yielded as sugar then fat... sounds like a plan, the dynamic interchange of our BIG THREE - aminos, fat and sugar - its good this can happen, it has helped humans survive with a variety of diets seasonally and around the world throughout history - its a great adaptive marker of understanding...

  • @glorp896 We were talking about the reasons to be concerned about protein quality. It's true, but irrelevant, that one can survive on a diet that includes low-quality protein. The important point is that when that is done, inevitably there will be an excessive amount of some amino acids. If we want maximum health we need not only minimum carb intake, but also minimum amino intake -- and the latter requires maximum protein quality -- so there is no excess of aminos.

  • @hitssquad sounds like u just summed up the gosh darned Inuit diet again, oh golly...

  • Seriously, the speaker here is acting like a child. He should WELCOME a dissenting opinion. This is what science is all about. I also agree that his "theory" seems to be unfalsifiable, making it quite unscientific. At least Taube's is easy to falsify (now if only someone would fund a study to directly test his claims). Guyenet's theory is dependent on calories in/out, which is becoming a tired theory that does not explain weight loss or gain very well at all. Look at the actual research, people.

  • @lesmisperson like how biologists should welcome the dissent of creationists. lol

  • @payasoinfeliz spoken like someone who doesn't understand what science is or isn't. Creationism isn't a scientific theory, so no, their dissent makes no sense whatsoever. However, these two theories are scientific (although I'd argue Taubes is far moreso), so it makes sense for them to go head to head.

  • @trixy776655 ironic--theyre not theories; theyre hypotheses. dissent should not be welcomed just for the sake of welcoming dissent. creationists offer dissent.

  • Taubes is a goofball. When the Spainish encountered the Pima in the 1500s,the Pima were lean & ate a High Carbohydrate diet.Taubes doesn^t address Asian populations other than to say that they eat Brown Rice rather than refined White Rice.Their diet involves (esp Japanese) regular White Rice use & their lean.Americans 40 years ago ate apple pies,drank cokes,had cereal & toast.Obesity was low. Portions were smaller & people at work or lesure generally moved more.

  • @sumbarine They ate a diet of farmed vegetables and hunted game. Nothing high carbohydrate about it.

    Asian populations ate diets low in sugar. It's not just the portions. He addresses this all in his book - did you even read it?

  • @sluu101 According to gyunet,the pima in 1539(when spainish discovered) ate mostly corn,beans,starchy squash w modest forms of animal product.Japanese have multiple servings of white rice dail(not the brown rice Taubes says) & love their sweets.Traditinal Jap sweets have lots of sugar & those that don^t like rice crackers or mochi have white rice.Also in 50s-60s USA,moms made apple pies,we drank coke,ate cereal,white bread-----but children moved/played more.Adults did more activity in leisure

  • @sumbarine when you add hfcs to the equation, irreparable harm is done to the body and sugar is processed differently from then on. this is why you see fairly skinny kids in the 60s drinking shakes and eating burgers.

  • @sumbarine its got nothin to do with portions. taubes is right, but only in a context with hfcs. without that component, sugar is not as conducive to obesity.

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @klawipet I get so sick of people using that example. Taubes addresses Asian diets in many of his talks and his book. Instead of ranting against Taubes why don't you actually read what he has written?

  • Taubes clearly more rational and logical.

  • @klawipet Taubes' full argument, having read his book and listened to his interviews/lectures, is a lot more nuanced than simply "Carbs are bad for all people". He states that refined flour and sugar, in high quantities as they appear in the west, cause metabolic derangement in SOME people, thus leading to obesity and its related diseases. The fact that Japanese/Chinese have had little sugar/refined flour in their diet, until recently, can explain the apparent paradox as to why they are thin.

  • @alphacause japan has had its highest rates of obesity and onset diabetes in recent years, thinking of okinawa specifically as they have been a recent stand out in terms of longevity in decades past and maybe still... but much of this is westernization, SAD, the Standard American Diet, SSAD? stupid standard american diet? - they should have considered McDonalds an invading force like we did of PEARL HARBOR bombing... thanks for your summation of Taubes, he has been used in more extreme ways...

  • Comment removed

  • @alphacause White polished rice is a carbohydrate food as refined as it can possibly get. And all Asians eat plenty of that. So why would flour and sugar be bad as opposed to white polished rice?

  • @karitonfood I suspect the reason that Asians, eating a traditional diet, rich in rice, don't suffer from metabolic issues, is because their diet is high in fiberous vegetables and in tropical based oils. The combination of a rich fiber content along with the fats of these oils blunt the insulin spiking effects of their refined carb intake. Secondly ,sugar has properties, which make it particularly bad for your metabolism. Just watch "Sugar The Bitter Truth" by Robert Lustig, on YouTube.

  • @karitonfood Interestingly we need to consider that as "People of wheat" in north American our diet had an important shift. Wheat today is not the plant it was in 1950. I am sure that gut permeability is part of the issue as is the change from saturated to omega 6 oil and low-quality carbs, extra sugar. Hell the 5% extra fructose in HFCS 55 probably hurt.

  • Comment removed

  • Robb Wolf has an apt analogy, explaining the problem with sugar/carbs, using sunburn (paraphrasing): You need the sun, but if you are overexposed you get sunburn, and the only way to alleviate it is to stay away from the sun until your sunburn goes away. Likewise high dosages of sugar damage some people to the point that even modest amounts of carbs can make them fat/diabetic. So just like the sun burn victim, the obese/diabetic, may need to reduce carbohydrate exposure

  • @alphacause However, unlike sunlight, sugar/sucrose (mainly its 50% component fructose) is not healthful in any dosage.

  • @TerrorBlack maybe you should check out the fruitarians, the long distance running ones... "marnstein" and "freelea" are both great examples of quite fruity people... marnstein is more a fruity one than freelea... both utubers

    - i'd rather add more veggies to the mix if doing what they do... i highly recommend THE ULTIMATE MEAL, check that out... if u r not diabetic sugar is not so much a problem... u exaggerate your "any dosage" idea - like mercury is toxic in any amount?... no sugar=death...

  • @glorp896 hmm yes eat thirty bananas a day for perfect healthage

  • @Terror not sure i'd ever do that! but i did do the CLEANSE AND PURIFY THYSELF program, VERY powerful, and watch out so u don't detox too fast! i did!... so quite often raw food diets make people feel bad because they are detoxing too quick - u might get a system shock if u do it too quick... raw food diets undo alot of damage and clean u out, but u don't want to do that too quick... so i know what all fruit/veggie raw food can do, ALOT OF GOOD! the best diet i know of - i just like dead food

  • Another person spreading old flawed theories on obesity, and Taubes calls him on it. In these lectures there should be more Taubes challenging this absolute garbage.

  • all that hulabaloo over one comment? yeah, he was patronizing at the very end, but he's right on that point and scientists do it all the time... they ignore conflicting evidence that messes with their tidy theories. e.g. see much of the standard crap on cholesterol, salt, and fat in the diet.

    that being said, others have argued that taubes may is also guilty of ignoring conflicting evidence.

  • Taubes encounters someone smarter than him. Someone versed in biological processes, not just observational skill and he reacts like a total jackass. What a douche bag.

  • What an insecure prick!

  • WOW! Thanks everyone for watching this little video I shot! When I saw Taubes run up to question Dr. G. I had a feeling that it would be a historic moment. I had no idea it would be so popular. Thanks for all the great comments too.

    Friend me via facebook or read my blog at grassfedmomma DOT blogspot DOT com.

    Debbie Young

  • Taubes does talk about sugar being the worst carb, but he also explains how once you become insulin resistant then most carbs (not just sugar) cause us problems. This is one reason why Asians (who do not traditionally eat sweets) can eat rice and other carbs and not really struggle with obesity, it appears that fructose is what sets off insulin resistance. I think Taubes makes a good point. Researchers need to consider data from all sources, even if it doesn't fit their pre-conceived notions.

  • I think the more Taubes moves away from blaming carbs and towards blaming sugar, the closer he gets to the truth.

  • This entire argument is retarded. Show me a population that is consistently overweight with moderate exercise and a diet consisting of high quality natural whole foods and then there might be a point to these debates outside of intellectual masturbation.

  • Taubes is unfortunately not holding himself to the same standards he did others when he started out so well a few years ago on heart disease and cholesterol. Happens to all men it appears. Cant believe he is still using the Pima example when its been shown this is wrong.

  • Go Taubes!

  • Scientists do not yet understand the chemical regulation of fat cell receptors, and that is a massive understatement. We only know some things that can disregulate them.

    With obesity there is much uncertainty and there are vast unknowns, as any genuine scientist will admit.

  • Over 10 % of morbid obesity can be explained by a single defective gene, and Dr. Jeffrey Friedman thinks there is evidence that this number could be much higher.

    Dr. Jeffrey Friedman is perhaps the foremost expert on obesity in the world. His work , including identifying and naming the hormone leptin in May 1994, was one of the greatest milsestones in the history of obesity research.

    He is a world renowned ( nobel level ) scientist with the highest quality information we have so far .

  • Obesity is ungodly, hellishly complex. I like and respect both Gary Taubes and Stephan Guyenet personally. They are both very nice and polite individuals.

    I encourage everyone to check out the information that Dr. Jeffrey Friedman has . Obesity's genetic component is almost equal to that of height , and *possibly* equalling it . My blog has a lot of detail on this subject.

    The unknowns about obesity are FAR greater than the knowns.

  • @2trey4five Carrots and steak are very low in carbohydrate. A sausage pizza is extremely high in carbohydrate. All "high reweard" foods are energy dense, carbohydrate rich foods. This is not a coincidence.

    PS: if you ate the sausage alone, you would rapidly become nauseated and ketotic as your insulin levels would bottom out and your fat cells would release lots of fat.

    If you ate the pizza alone, assuming you are predisposed to obesity, you will become ravenous and fat.

  • @ItsTheWooo

    No, not all high reward foods are high in carbohydrate. Salted nuts and bacon come to mind. Salt + fat is sufficient to drive overeating (sugary, salty, and fatty being three of the primary factors in reward, often in combination). If you need evidence for this, look at the legions of somewhat less obese but still obese keto dieters out there looking to reincarnate their favorite high rewards foods (pizza, pancakes, etc) with low carb, mystified why they can't lose any more fat.

  • @2trey4five

    I guess that depends. I gained weight eating a (to me) bland low fat diet. Pasta, bread, potatoes, rice, corn.. all low in fat and all of them make me feel like crap and gain weight. Perhaps because they're all easily digestible and send a big jolt of sugar into the blood stream?

  • So let me make sure I understand this right...

    Gary Taubes and the other low carb proponents are justified in criticizing nutrition researchers for over-relying on uncontrolled/epidemiological research, but in attempting to discern the cause/effect of nutritional factors relating to obesity, are justified in citing completely uncontrolled, often self-reported data on populations like "mexican americans in 1981?"

    The irony of over-demonizing carbohydrate on such flimsy data is hard to miss.

  • try to eat a plate of plain boiled potatoes and see how long it takes you to feel full. Its difficult to eat more than a few hundred calories of the dreaded starch.

    Make some observations next time you go out, you'll be amazed at how often people eat food for pleasure rather than hunger.

  • @livebreakingdown I guarantee you are neither insulin resistant, or obese.

    Plz stop assuming what you feel when eating a plate full of potatoes is remotely anything like someone such as myself feels, as I am genuinely glucose intolerant and have a history of obesity.

  • Taubes is plagued by false dichotomy in much of his thinking (either it's the carbs or it's the fat...either it's all about reward value, or reward value is irrelevant). Human nutrition is far more complex and the means of testing it are far too imprecise to support such simplistic binary thinking.

    The irony is that Taubes' "carbs are bad" hypothesis falls prey to exactly the same kind of confirmation bias, cherry picking and hasty generalisation that he diagnoses in the "fats are bad" camp.

  • Pot, meet kettle...

  • Rearding the Massas, you can see for yourself here: Am J Clin Nutr. 1994 Dec;60(6):861-3

    Regarding the young obesity researcher Taubes attacks at this conference, his theory is well researched and although under way, should not be dismissed and replaced by a unified flawed theory that insulin and carbs are the only driver of obesity. The Kitava population, the population of Okinawa and many other populations do not support that. Obesity is highly complex and not a merely excess insulin.

  • @miguelcmartinez Great post. My opinions have certainly changed over the past couple of years. I was a big proponent of the low-carb movement. I truly believed that excess insulin causes obesity and that carbohydrates are a result of it. But when you look at healthy populations around the world and what they ate, you'll see a few of them, many of them who eat tubers, white rice etc. which are all foods that Taubes claims will make you morbidly obese. LOL. The Key is to eat REAL FOOD.

  • @cdnp4p this is all addressed in GCBC; i know it's thick and science-y but you should really try to get through it.

  • @griffonstink So Taubes addresses the Okinawans, Kitava and other carb-heavy healthy populations? Thats good to know. I actually have the book but I havent got the chance to get through it yet. LOL.

  • @cdnp4p so you can maintain as low a weight with these real foods as you can with a low carb diet? what is your experiencE?

  • @payasoinfeliz Well in my experience, I lose weight under a low-carb diet. It is absolutely great for weight loss but how sustainable is it? I upped my carb intake and I feel much better as a result and im able to maintain my body weight more effectively. I felt better when I reintroduced more carbs into my diet. But, everybody is different. But Taubes theories dont hold much water. Hes been debunked by many and hundreds of populations who consume high % of carbs put an end to it. 

  • @cdnp4p it doesnt matter if you can manage to stay on it--i am less likely to get cancer if i stop smoking, but i love cigarettes, so how sustainable is that? the answer to the question is irrelevant. does it work better or does it not? you say its great for weightloss; i assume it works better than just eating "real" food in terms of weightloss. correct? so, knowing this yourself, why would you think taubes is incorrect when all hes saying is you hold onto less fat with fewer carbs? .......

  • @payasoinfeliz well there are plenty of diets out there where you lose considerable amount of weight. But the difference I found was that I was able to eat the same amount of calories as I did before if not more and yet still manage to lose weight. Eating a paleo/primal diet, essentially a low carb diet that Taubes endorses is a very nourishing diet as opposed to the other "diets" that focus on a reduction of calories and is not sustainable.

  • @cdnp4p so in your experience, low carb is the best way to lose weight, but its not the best way to fend off obesity? i dont see how you can reconcile these two opinions.

  • @payasoinfeliz No thats not really what im saying.

  • @cdnp4p Q: "so you can maintain as low a weight with these real foods as you can with a low carb diet?" A: "Well in my experience, I lose weight under a low-carb diet. It is absolutely great for weight loss but how sustainable is it?" you used low carb to lose weight, and then upped the carb dosage to "real" foods for maintenance--thats exactly what people do on the atkins diet, which taubes is a proponent of. so yeah, i think that really is what youre saying. cognitive dissonance...

  • Unfortunately, not only Taubes cherry picks the research, he may even twist it. Example: when he mentions the Massas from Northern Cameroon, he says that their staple diet is low in CHO and that when they engage in their typical ritual, which leads to an increase in body weight, he claims that it is because of the CHO.When they return to their baseline diet (which TAUBES says is low CHO), they loose weight.But THE MASSAS normal diet is high carb)

  • Taubes has done a good job in the first part of GCBC, but then when he decides to have found the solution, he starts to cherry pick the evidence that supports his hypothesis-example: he interviews the PI of the KItava Study about the high SAFA intake of this population, but when he becomes aware that their diet was also high in CHO (from tubers and fruits), he just decides not to mention it on his book.

  • Of course the simplest theories always seem to make the most sense. But then, nothing about the human body is simple or obvious.

  • I've read Gary's point of view and I've read Stephan's views on food reward, and I have to say that Gary's makes a lot of sense to me and Stephan's seem like they are out there just a little bit...

  • lol, the traditional pima diet is very high in carbs

  • @melissaunicorn

    In the form of beans and squash. There's a big difference between a diet high in resistant starches and fiber and a diet high in refined white flour and sugar.

  • Guyenet's articulation of a food reward hypothesis is unfalsifiable nonsense and unfalsifiable nonsense deserve mockery. Taubes was too polite.

  • @asdfgasdfasdful

    I agree, except for the part where you indicated it was unfalsifiable (all you'd have to do is establish that a comparatively low reward diet resulted in greater ad libitum calorie intake than a comparatively high reward diet). And that Taubes is something other than a nutritional incompetent.

  • @asdfgasdfasdful Taubes is becoming this era's Ancel Keys. While his books were interesting and thought provoking, most of it easily refutable and ironically Taubes is doing the same thing that hes accusing Stephan of.

  • @cdnp4p Unlike Ancel Keys, He's not choosing what data to share and what to ignore...Big difference. I think Taubes is correct in his challenging a hypothesis that doesnt have much science to back it up. He's being very responsible.

Loading...
Alert icon
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more