This stuff is filling as fuck and it destroys hunger. Tell me why I shouldn't just eat a bowl of vegetables, a few eggs, and a few tablespoons of coconut oil throughout the day. I'd never feel hungry ever and I'd be getting my nutrition in the first meal. This is for weight loss by the way.
Studies linked in this article
authoritynutrition.com
Other urls found in this thread:
npr.org
foodpolitics.com
webmd.com
hsph.harvard.edu
youtube.com
sciencemag.org
twitter.com
Enjoy your heart disease.
Oh look, it's the cholesterol meme
You need your protons.
All right, well if I add a shake in there as well as the eggs.
>cholesterol
>meme
Believe what you want, but don't say I didn't warn you
Nah man, it's not like I'm not planning to do cardio or something. Coconut oil is full of good cholesterol.
Coconut oil isn't high in LDL
>Coconut oil isn't high in LDL
Please be memeing
...
>Coconut oil is full of good cholesterol
Holy shit, you are retarded. Read the fucking nutrition and you'll see zero cholesterol. Why are you here if you can't even macros or micros?
bump
>This stuff is filling as fuck
It's saturated fat, of course it's filling
It's not bad for you, and neither are sugar or vegetable oil, but cleaning your teeth and skin with it and claiming it's a magic weight loss tool is 100% retarded.
But your blood may be if you eat so much of it
(clarified) Butter is superior and doesn't have the Paleos and hipsters to tank its brand. Coconut oil is better for cosmetic uses than in the diet.
added sugar is terrible.
Also works great as lube for girls who have trouble with artificial stuff.
I once had a cup of coffee with a tablespoon of coconut oil
I spent the next 6 hours shitting nothing but pure stomach acid
My asshole burned for a week
Its just keto diet is what you're doing
There are lots of endurance athletes that will do stuff like eat only whipped cream (no sugar, just home made) for two weeks while doing low intensity aerobic training and then back to normal eating/training. This makes your body produce a fuck ton of mitochondria and aerobic metabolism enzymes so your body gets very good at utilizing fat for energy which is important for both cutting body fat and endurance racing.
People that tend to do moderate activity throughout their lives with high fat and low carbohydrate diets have much healthier cardiovascular systems than people that eat a lot of carbohydrates.
>People that tend to do moderate activity throughout their lives with high fat and low carbohydrate diets have much healthier cardiovascular systems than people that eat a lot of carbohydrates.
Where's that study?
>people who eat lots of cheese and pork and avoid fruits and fiber-rich foods have a healthier cardiovascular system
[citation needed]
Simple carbs and the insulin response is not good for the heart. That is what the public at large substitutes for.
neither are the fatty foods that most people eat
Insulin and sugar has a more salient link that was covered up by Harvard and instead scapegoated fat by big sugar.
Lipid theory is an unbacked meme.
Forgot my link. Other outlets have covered this if NPR is now "fake news"
npr.org
when you have to resort to conspiracy theories, you know you're wrong.
>"lipid theory"
Obesity was an inside job.
marian nestle made the most rational point to this news story
foodpolitics.com
>My interpretation: We would all be healthier eating less of sugary foods and fatty meats.
any sane person agrees that refined sugars and saturated/trans fats are things to avoid
vegetable consumption is encouraged on keto.
vegetables consumption is encouraged on all diets. why not eat a diet where the rest of it is also good for you?
>>>>>>>>
that's exactly what keto is
>anything but sugar and transfat
if only
>anything but sugar and transfat
automatically meant a healthy diet. many diets fit that definition that aren't keto, and include healthy foods that aren't allowed on keto. the mediterranean diet for example. trans fats, as far as I know, also aren't non-keto.
this, its refined oil like any other just kill yourself with butter4 for all it matters
No reason. Go for it man. Make sure to report back with results.
I instantly lose respect for a person if I learn that they still think in 2016 that saturated fat and dietary cholesterol are unhealthy.
Why don't you respect educated people?
>2016
>Not eating based zero-carb inuit diet of muktuk and seal meat
>educated = clinging to outdated science
>"outdated science"
What the fuck does that mean? You think because you fall for every pop science news article with a clickbait headline that comes out, that you're "up to date" on things and understand the science better than the actual scientists involved in the research?
I did that when I went from fat to skinnyfat. Dropped from 270 to 200 and still don't look any better with my shirt off
webmd.com
>A recent review of 72 studies found no link between saturated fat andheart disease
If you'd like to see what these studies really look like that claim that saturated fat isn't associated with heart disease, here's a video that shows you the insides of these studies so you can see how they came to their conclusions. It's easy to give a false impression when using this type of study.
sciencemag.org
>When a paper published on 17 March questioned whether fats from fish or vegetable oils are healthier than those in meat or butter, it quickly made headlines around the world; after all, the study seemed to debunk a cornerstone of many dietary guidelines. But a new version of the publication had to be posted shortly after it appeared on the website of the Annals of Internal Medicine to correct several errors. And although the study's first author stands by the conclusions, a number of scientists are criticizing the paper and even calling on the authors to retract it.
>Willett says correcting the paper isn't enough. "It is good that they fixed it for the record, but it has caused massive confusion and the public hasn't heard about the correction." The paper should be withdrawn, he argues.
>The controversy should serve as a warning about meta-analyses, Willett adds. Such studies compile the data from many individual studies to get a clearer result. "It looks like a sweeping summary of all the data, so it gets a lot of attention," Willett says. "But these days meta-analyses are often done by people who are not familiar with a field, who don't have the primary data or don't make the effort to get it." And while drug trials are often very similar in design, making it easy to combine their results, nutritional studies vary widely in the way they are set up. "Often the strengths and weaknesses of individual studies get lost," Willett says. "It's dangerous."
>big sugar strikes again
That's right, retreat further into the bubble
Fuck that guys voice made me want to kill myself. He sounds like he's getting winded by just speaking. Anyways, as hominems aside, I see the point about the studies being poorly constructed, especially since most of them took a day's worth of diet log and used it to make a sweeping judgment about months or even years of these people's lives. OR that they only took into account their fat intakes and ignored the rest of the diet (was it all vegetables? All sugar?) But he redoubles his attack on SFs and cholesterol too quickly; if the studies are garbage, they can't be used as evidence for ANYONE'S point. More studies need to be conducted on the relative effects of high SF intake under high or low insulin conditions; more studies need to take into account the whole diet. Even the paleofags know that fat ratios matter and that introducing omega 3s skews the CVD risk in your favor, fats which are naturally present in wild animals alongside saturated, monounsaturated, and cholesterol.
>If the studies are garbage, they can't be used as evidence for ANYONE'S point.
Or at least, the studies that failed to show the relationship were mostly garbage. That's not all the studies. The biggest problem for people on the fringe is that the most well understood reason for why saturated fats aren't heart healthy is the fact that they have a negative effect on circulating cholesterol levels. That's the main thing linking saturated and trans fats to higher risk of heart disease, not statistics in epidemiological studies. In a controlled lab setting, you can feed these foods to people and directly see the rise in bad cholesterol, which thousands of animal experiments and many human studies have confirmed leads to higher risk of developing atherosclerosis. There's no hope that future studies will erase that knowledge, so the case against those fats is pretty well sealed.
>More studies need to be conducted on the relative effects of high SF intake under high or low insulin conditions
It's good to have more data about everything, but with what we already know, it's a bit dumb to think keto specifically has some magical property that takes you from what should be a high risk of heart disease, to a low risk. Having carbohydrate in your diet also doesn't mean having high levels of insulin. Healthy carbs improve insulin sensitivity, lowering your insulin levels by making insulin action more efficient.
>I refuse to think in anything other than black and white
Not keto specifically - I'm referring more to the inflammatory markers which increase on a highly insulinogenic diet. Chronic inflammation of the arterial wall provides the conditions for plaque buildup to occur. That plaque buildup is what causes atherosclerosis, not simply the base presence of cholesterol in the blood. This is why I still say the data isn't conclusive and the case is not sealed; context is everything. Insulin resistance and high intake of n6-PUFA's both increase markers of inflammation. is it not reasonable to at least consider that the presence of insulin may be a confounding factor in how the body handles these various fats and what effect they will have over a long period of time? it's also known that some amount of saturated fat is desireable for cell wall stability and hormone production. giving them the total no-go for people is a bad move imo if the goal is to optimize quality of life
>I'm referring more to the inflammatory markers which increase on a highly insulinogenic diet. Chronic inflammation of the arterial wall provides the conditions for plaque buildup to occur
Unfortunately, high levels of cholesterol in the blood is also inflammatory, as are many high-fat foods. I don't know how you intend to avoid all inflammation on a low-carb diet. And many animal models of atherosclerosis have used low-carb diets. Feed monkeys an egg yolk and butter diet and they develop atherosclerotic lesions.
>it's also known that some amount of saturated fat is desireable for cell wall stability and hormone production. giving them the total no-go for people is a bad move imo if the goal is to optimize quality of life
Not that it would even be possible to have no saturated fat at all in your diet, but I have to hope you know that saturated fats are synthesized by your body where they're needed, which is better than having them go through your digestive system.
weeelllll looks like i got served today, good shit m8
i got some more reading to do, guess its time to hop back on the whole grain train
Find some legumes you enjoy as well. Black beans and lentils are awesome.
No thx man shit gives me the worst farts. Ill stick to rice
Basing your nutrition on whether or not hipsters eat it actually makes you a hipster.
Just eat a coconut by slightly breaking it open so it's harder to get the insides out.
Really helps
WILLPOWER destroys hunger you weak piece of shit.
Looks like the Jews are trying "to shut it down" as always.
Would that be the jew authors of the study who recognized and agreed to correct over a dozen errors in their paper, or the jew everyone-else-in-the-world who understood that the study was misleading and badly designed?
It's always the Jews man, they are trying to sabotage the physical health and mental health of all westerners and eliminate the white race. It's called white genocide. Geez, take the red pill already.
>another XXX diet thread
aren't you 25 days too early to be here? get the fuck back to /v/ or /a/
listen here amerifatfucktards.
processed vegetable oils, and fats from animals fed GMO and injected hormones, antibiotics are bad for you.
Olive oil, oil from nuts and coconut are good for you.
Fat from avocado is also good for you.
fat from grass fed cows are also good for you.
u know nothing fat american stupidianos.
u and ur meme FDA and ur corrupt sick scientists and healthcare dont know shit, and only advise u to get fatter and more stupid by eating more stupid dumb shit.
fats in coconut are medium chain tryglycerides, and arent the same as other satured fats.
>fat from grass fed cows are also good for you.
Stop
>u and ur meme FDA and ur corrupt sick scientists and healthcare dont know shit, and only advise u to get fatter and more stupid by eating more stupid dumb shit.
Fucking this.
Agreeing with an idiot makes you an idiot too.
>this is what I believe based on nothing but my feelings
>if you disagree then u no nothing jon snow xD
>believing the FDA Jew
You're pretty irredeemable friendo.
So is a tablespoon of coconut oil a day actually beneficial or should I get my fat elsewhere?
Eat a handful of walnuts
It's the best fat you can possible get.
So what expert group is reliable? There's no mainstream authority in the world that disagrees on this. If you think some paleo blogs you've read are a good source of knowledge, best of luck to you.
>mainstream authority
This is exactly the problem. I bet you think ((( mainstream news ))) tells the truth too.
Also, appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.
best thing u can get for long lasting energi and metabolic uplift. not to mention does wonders with ur brain and mood.
also makes u less fat
nah no. many countries dont agree with the FDA.
some tribes in asia has like 70% of their calories from coconut oil, and they have NO heartdisease whatsoever.
America, however, has diabetes cardiovascular disease, and cancer and shit and whatnot more then any other nation.
srsly who do u want to belive?!
What you're suggesting is that everyone who has had proper education about the topic that would give their opinion value, and everyone that is intimately involved with the science itself, can't be trusted, and you should instead listen to non-experts who mostly write blogs and sell diet books. You're an idiot.
> appeal to authority is a logical fallacy.
"Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence."
I treat myself to coffee and coconut oil on occasion and haven't had this happen. Maybe you have a sensitivity to it?
Yeah, like, totally, dude! It's like, facts and stuff!
there are many experts on the subject, in fact. from many many countries.
and then u have some certain douche sellouts.
for example ppl who work for coca cola, were they have 100% scientifically proven that coke is healthier then water! you know, coz murica.
also pizza is legitimately a vegetable over there.
greed and corruption is major factor within the FDA, that doesnt mean all educated experts agree on the matter , for they do not.
and only stupid ppl would take the FDA serious, they advetised smoking as healthy in the sixties, and now they go on about outdated science about fat being bad and sugar good.
so naive and stupid.
enjoy ur disease ridden filthy shitty life u fat slob