Post: #276

I went back through this thread and I found SteveCR's diet..

Here is the diet:

(04-06-2014 09:18 AM)SteveCR Wrote:  My breakfast every single day is a vegetable juice & fruit smoothie

My lunch, just about every day, is either fish or chicken, mashed potatoes, corn, some cheese and a glass of milk.

Dinner varies, but I really like huevos rancheros with a bowl of rice and beans, some cheese and a glass of milk.

If all calories are the same, than, it doesn't matter what we eat..

So, if you replaced these calories with coke..

Do you really think your body would look the same???

(05-30-2014 07:25 AM)w00t Wrote:  But there are no "good" and "bad" calories. Thats complete nonsense. A calorie is a calorie.

So, by that thinking..

SteveCR could replace the above diet with coca-cola and his body would look the same???

Post: #277

*sigh*

This is getting absolutely nowhere. If you choose not to agree with science - that's your decision to make. If you think that your body can defy the laws of physics, then I sincerely hope that you do what's for the greater good, and have your body tested by the medical community.

Nobody's body is special. Nobody's body can defy the laws of physics. We would like to think that we're all individual little cupcakes and snowflakes - but we're not.

Post: #278

What about the question I asked..?

If you stopped eating all this..

(04-06-2014 09:18 AM)SteveCR Wrote:  My breakfast every single day is a vegetable juice & fruit smoothie

My lunch, just about every day, is either fish or chicken, mashed potatoes, corn, some cheese and a glass of milk.

Dinner varies, but I really like huevos rancheros with a bowl of rice and beans, some cheese and a glass of milk.

and, replaced all this food with coca-cola..

Would your body would look the same???

Post: #279

I think some of you guys are talking past each other.

As I said earlier, to lose fat you need to reduce the amount of calories you put into your mouth.

Some of the guy here, like Steve, is saying the same thing and they are correct as far as I am concerned. They are also talking about losing weight (that also includes fat), not about being healthy. Even if I was only eating protein I could lose muscle by lowering my calories too far so the idea you will maintain muscle strictly through food isn't something I buy either.

The types of calories you eat is important to be healthy (body composition) as far as my experience goes.

I can add muscle by eating a lot of protein and exercise but if I am still eating too many calories I won't lose any fat. I may look bigger and possibly look thinner because I have more muscle, that doesn't mean I lost fat. The bigger I get the more calories I will need to maintain.

Most of the guys who talked about switching eating patterns and losing weight never counted calories to begin with. They are dead set on it being the type of food but couldn't really say because they didn't count calories before the switch and they admitted they don't count calories after the switch.

Why do you think guys still put fat on even when doing a clean bulk?

Bad foods tend to be calorie dense and just switching to better foods will result in a calorie reduction.

Also, when you start being more active and eating the same amount you are still reducing calories through exercise.

As far as I'm concerned they are being disingenuous in their arguments.

At the end of the day, experiment and do what works for you.

Post: #280

(05-30-2014 01:51 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  What about the question I asked..?

If you stopped eating all this.. and, replaced all this food with coca-cola..

Would your body would look the same???

Nope, it wouldn't, because Coke doesn't have any protein. My body would start breaking down muscle issue to get the amino acids it needs. I would eventually die from malnutrition.

But my body wouldn't suddenly start depositing fat onto my belly (provided I wasn't eating a caloric surplus).

If you want to discuss health, by all means, I will have a completely different conversation. But if you strictly want to discuss getting rid of a belly, then what I've said many times is reality.

Post: #281

(05-30-2014 02:16 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 01:51 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  What about the question I asked..?

If you stopped eating all this.. and, replaced all this food with coca-cola..

Would your body would look the same???

Nope, it wouldn't, because Coke doesn't have any protein. My body would start breaking down muscle issue to get the amino acids it needs. I would eventually die from malnutrition.

But my body wouldn't suddenly start depositing fat onto my belly (provided I wasn't eating a caloric surplus).

If you want to discuss health, by all means, I will have a completely different conversation. But if you strictly want to discuss getting rid of a belly, then what I've said many times is reality.

So if you replaced all your fluids with coke..so instead of your milk..you replaced it with coke, then you had baked beans for protein, potato chips for your mashed potatos..your body would look the same..as long as the calories were the same?

Post: #282

(05-30-2014 02:16 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  Nope, it wouldn't, because Coke doesn't have any protein.

Some calories have protein and some don't! Another example of how not all calories are the same..

What if you made protein shakes with coca-cola?

Would your body still look the same?

Post: #283

(05-30-2014 02:23 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:16 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  Nope, it wouldn't, because Coke doesn't have any protein.

What if you made protein shakes with coca-cola?

Would your body still look the same?

Gio, you can do this at home. Start counting calories and add 1000 more calories in terms of the same food you are eating. Don't change the type of food, don't change your exercising or daily eating patterns. Try it for awhile and let us know if you have more fat stored.

BTW, a calorie is a unit of measurement. The same goes for a pound being a pound whether it is a pound of fat or a pound of muscle.

Post: #284

(05-30-2014 02:29 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Gio, you can do this at home. Start counting calories

You can also do this at home.

Instead of eating food, replace all your calories with coke..

If a "calorie is a calorie".. Your body should not change..

Do you think your body would change or not?

Do you believe that.. Coke = vegetables, fruit, chicken, fish eggs, beans..?

Post: #285

(05-30-2014 02:37 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:29 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Gio, you can do this at home. Start counting calories

You can also do this at home.

Instead of eating food, replace all you calories with coke..

If a "calorie is a calorie".. Your body should not change..

Do you think your body would change or not?

Do you believe that.. Coke = vegetables, fruit, chicken, fish eggs, beans..?

I already said the types of food you eat is important. I never denied that.

A calorie is a unit of measurement. In that sense, a calorie is a calorie no matter what the genetic makeup is.

I do believe if I eat 3000 calories in chicken, eggs, fruit I would still have fat stores.

We are talking about losing fat, no?

Gio, I thought you were all about learning but you seem to be hesitant to putting your own beliefs to test. I already tested this stuff on myself. I was eating the same thing every day while keeping exercise the same. I lowered the amount I was eating and I lost fat.

Post: #286

Get rid of the milk. I did and it worked wonders.

Milk today is produced by cows that are drugged up with hormones to make them bigger and produce more.

The hormones enter the milk and you consume it - they cause weight gain.

no milk, no creme in coffee, etc., cheese sparingly.

Post: #287

(05-30-2014 03:31 PM)kdolo Wrote:  Get rid of the milk. I did and it worked wonders.

Milk today is produced by cows that are drugged up with hormones to make them bigger and produce more.

The hormones enter the milk and you consume it - they cause weight gain.

no milk, no creme in coffee, etc., cheese sparingly.

This is a great point.

Here is a link to the FDA guidance regarding bovine growth hormone:study link

Tox studies were done in rats (oral absorption of hormone). Generally animal data does not correlate with human data (if it did drugs would not fail so much in the clinic). Additionally, another possibility is an antibody response to the recombinant hormone rather than the hormone itself being a problem.

I don't think it's so conclusive that the hormone has no effect, and it may be sub-population dependent. Anyway, it is an easy thing to test, so why not? I don't think anyone has ever gotten fat from eating fruit. The fruitarian videos on YouTube show thin people.

Post: #288

(05-30-2014 02:19 PM)Moma Wrote:  So if you replaced all your fluids with coke..so instead of your milk..you replaced it with coke, then you had baked beans for protein, potato chips for your mashed potatos..your body would look the same..as long as the calories were the same?

You're not going to listen. There's no use in me trying. I've given evidence. You refuse to listen to it.

Post: #289

(05-30-2014 02:23 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Some calories have protein and some don't! Another example of how not all calories are the same..

What if you made protein shakes with coca-cola?

Would your body still look the same?

You're going to believe what you're going to believe. I have said many, many times (and quite frankly, I'm tired of saying it) that this thread is about losing belly fat, correct? It is not about health. And losing belly fat comes down to one thing - expending more energy than you consume.

Post: #290

(05-30-2014 03:31 PM)kdolo Wrote:  Get rid of the milk. I did and it worked wonders.

Milk today is produced by cows that are drugged up with hormones to make them bigger and produce more.

The hormones enter the milk and you consume it - they cause weight gain.

no milk, no creme in coffee, etc., cheese sparingly.

So did you also become vegetarian?

Post: #291

(05-30-2014 03:48 PM)Menace Wrote:  I don't think anyone has ever gotten fat from eating fruit. The fruitarian videos on YouTube show thin people.

I was going to bring up this point, but found it futile to even try discussing it on this forum. I don't believe that a fruitarian diet is ideal, but there is something to be said about a high carb diet. After all, all of the Blue Zone communities eat a high carb, high starch diet. And they live the longest, healthiest lives.

Post: #292

(05-30-2014 01:31 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  *sigh*

This is getting absolutely nowhere. If you choose not to agree with science - that's your decision to make. If you think that your body can defy the laws of physics, then I sincerely hope that you do what's for the greater good, and have your body tested by the medical community.

Nobody's body is special. Nobody's body can defy the laws of physics. We would like to think that we're all individual little cupcakes and snowflakes - but we're not.

You are being very dogmatic and irritating to suggest that your point of view is backed by science, and the points of views of other guys participating in this thread(who do NOT agree with you) are NOT backed by science.

(05-30-2014 02:41 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:37 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:29 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  Gio, you can do this at home. Start counting calories

You can also do this at home.

Instead of eating food, replace all you calories with coke..

If a "calorie is a calorie".. Your body should not change..

Do you think your body would change or not?

Do you believe that.. Coke = vegetables, fruit, chicken, fish eggs, beans..?

I already said the types of food you eat is important. I never denied that.

A calorie is a unit of measurement. In that sense, a calorie is a calorie no matter what the genetic makeup is.

I do believe if I eat 3000 calories in chicken, eggs, fruit I would still have fat stores.

We are talking about losing fat, no?

Gio, I thought you were all about learning but you seem to be hesitant to putting your own beliefs to test. I already tested this stuff on myself. I was eating the same thing every day while keeping exercise the same. I lowered the amount I was eating and I lost fat.

WWT: This suggestion that Gio perform the test on himself is ridiculous b/c he has NOT been the one who has been proposing that eating/drinking the shitty foods, such as cocacola and sugar is going to cause the same effect - others have been the proponents of that - to suggest that the sugar in coke is the same as the sugar in vegetable, so long as you get proteins (and they are leaving dietary fat out of the discussion, but maybe some of these guys would concede that our bodies need to imbibe some kinds of dietary fat as well).

Post: #293

(05-30-2014 03:31 PM)kdolo Wrote:  Get rid of the milk. I did and it worked wonders.

Milk today is produced by cows that are drugged up with hormones to make them bigger and produce more.

The hormones enter the milk and you consume it - they cause weight gain.

no milk, no creme in coffee, etc., cheese sparingly.

Raw milk is o.k... and the higher the fat content with milk the better guys' bodies will be able to tolerate the milk. But I agree that there are problems with modern industrial milk.. but milk itself is NOT bad, if you can get grass raised, high fat and raw if possible. These kinds of products are expensive and in some places highly regulated or illegal in the USA (but apparently available in some european locations, and possibly some other parts of the world)... or they could be potentially more readily available in some rural areas and/or if you know a farmer/rancher who engages in good practices.

Post: #294

(05-30-2014 03:48 PM)Menace Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 03:31 PM)kdolo Wrote:  Get rid of the milk. I did and it worked wonders.

Milk today is produced by cows that are drugged up with hormones to make them bigger and produce more.

The hormones enter the milk and you consume it - they cause weight gain.

no milk, no creme in coffee, etc., cheese sparingly.

This is a great point.

Here is a link to the FDA guidance regarding bovine growth hormone:study link

Tox studies were done in rats (oral absorption of hormone). Generally animal data does not correlate with human data (if it did drugs would not fail so much in the clinic). Additionally, another possibility is an antibody response to the recombinant hormone rather than the hormone itself being a problem.

I don't think it's so conclusive that the hormone has no effect, and it may be sub-population dependent. Anyway, it is an easy thing to test, so why not? I don't think anyone has ever gotten fat from eating fruit. The fruitarian videos on YouTube show thin people.

The FDA is NOT a very good source for information regarding dairy, since they are heavily influenced by these misguided principles of homogenization and pasteurization being supposedly "good" for dairy product.

Better sources regarding the nutritional value of milk would be:

http://www.realmilk.com/

or westin price foundation concerning other nutritional matters - concerning the eating of whole and natural foods.

http://www.westonaprice.org/health-topics/

Post: #295

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  WWT: This suggestion that Gio perform the test on himself is ridiculous b/c he has NOT been the one who has been proposing that eating/drinking the shitty foods, such as cocacola and sugar is going to cause the same effect - others have been the proponents of that - to suggest that the sugar in coke is the same as the sugar in vegetable, so long as you get proteins (and they are leaving dietary fat out of the discussion, but maybe some of these guys would concede that our bodies need to imbibe some kinds of dietary fat as well).

Not at all ridiculous.

I find it more ridiculous that people think they can eat as much food as they want and not gain fat regardless of the quality of food.

That is why I challenged Gio, eating the same foods but eating more shouldn't put fat on according to some of you. I know differently and I suspect you guys would find out if you tried the experiment.

The main premise is you can't eat more than you burn and expect fat to disappear. You guys are nitpicking everything else when it comes to coke and vegetable juice.

Post: #296

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  You are being very dogmatic and irritating to suggest that your point of view is backed by science, and the points of views of other guys participating in this thread(who do NOT agree with you) are NOT backed by science.

My point of view is backed by the laws of thermodynamics. There's nothing for you (nor anybody else) to disagree with. I have the laws of physics on my side. What do you have on your side?

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  WWT: This suggestion that Gio perform the test on himself is ridiculous b/c he has NOT been the one who has been proposing that eating/drinking the shitty foods, such as cocacola and sugar is going to cause the same effect - others have been the proponents of that - to suggest that the sugar in coke is the same as the sugar in vegetable, so long as you get proteins (and they are leaving dietary fat out of the discussion, but maybe some of these guys would concede that our bodies need to imbibe some kinds of dietary fat as well).

Ahh, but when other people have done such similar things (and the results posted in this thread), those results were tossed aside. And why? Because you do not agree with them. If I posted results that side with you, you would accept them.

You (and everybody else in this thread) have been given evidence. You refuse to accept it. You ignore science. You ignore results. You accept dogma and disordered eating. Okay, that's your choice. Just don't try to convince others that eating disorders are acceptable.

Post: #297

(05-30-2014 03:58 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:19 PM)Moma Wrote:  So if you replaced all your fluids with coke..so instead of your milk..you replaced it with coke, then you had baked beans for protein, potato chips for your mashed potatos..your body would look the same..as long as the calories were the same?

You're not going to listen. There's no use in me trying. I've given evidence. You refuse to listen to it.

O.k. Goodbye. Maybe see you later. Just one point before you go. You have NOT really said anything. You made some dogmatic comments about eat less and exercise more, and you got into the weeds a little bit regarding some distracting examples, but in the end, you were NOT really saying anything revealing or anything much beyond those two general points, which have both been debunked throughout earlier parts of this thread and Gary taubes does a great job of debunking both of those points with lots of science, to the extent you may be interested in science.

http://www.amazon.com/Good-Calories-Bad-...0CBQJFA67Q

http://www.amazon.com/Why-We-Get-Fat-Abo...B003WUYOQ6

(05-30-2014 03:59 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 02:23 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  Some calories have protein and some don't! Another example of how not all calories are the same..

What if you made protein shakes with coca-cola?

Would your body still look the same?

You're going to believe what you're going to believe. I have said many, many times (and quite frankly, I'm tired of saying it) that this thread is about losing belly fat, correct? It is not about health. And losing belly fat comes down to one thing - expending more energy than you consume.

Posters here have different opinions about what this thread is about, exactly, so it really does NOT matter too much to make a fine point about general health in losing fat or losing belly fat. I believe that a lot of guys concede that guys tend to accumulate fat at the belly, so in that regard, improving your body composition overall will also likely assist with improving your belly fat.

Yet there may be some ways, as several other guys here have suggested, in which belly fat is reduced yet the remainder of the body weight is increased. Personally, I believe that the order of importance, concerning variables that we can control, is diet, rest and exercise, however, some guys have placed more emphasis on exercise, and there is NOTHING wrong to have some variance in opinion regarding some of these matters.

Post: #298

(05-30-2014 06:15 PM)worldwidetraveler Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  WWT: This suggestion that Gio perform the test on himself is ridiculous b/c he has NOT been the one who has been proposing that eating/drinking the shitty foods, such as cocacola and sugar is going to cause the same effect - others have been the proponents of that - to suggest that the sugar in coke is the same as the sugar in vegetable, so long as you get proteins (and they are leaving dietary fat out of the discussion, but maybe some of these guys would concede that our bodies need to imbibe some kinds of dietary fat as well).

Not at all ridiculous.

I find it more ridiculous that people think they can eat as much food as they want and not gain fat regardless of the quality of food.

That is why I challenged Gio, eating the same foods but eating more shouldn't put fat on according to some of you. I know differently and I suspect you guys would find out if you tried the experiment.

The main premise is you can't eat more than you burn and expect fat to disappear. You guys are nitpicking everything else when it comes to coke and vegetable juice.

There may be some ways in which various guys are nitpicking, including myself, and there may be various ways in which we are talking past one another or possibly misunderstanding the points that other guys are making.

Probably each of us has a different opinion, but there are areas in which we agree, but those areas agreement will vary from guy to guy.

I have already pretty much done the more specific experiment that you are now describing b/c in the last three years, I have NEVER engaged in calorie restrictions or quantity of food restrictions. I pretty much eat like a pig, but I lost 30 lbs in the last 3 years to go from 205lbs to 175lbs.

I do NOT claim to be any specimen of a person, but I pretty much cut out processed foods and many added sugars. I am NOT 100% strict b/c I will eat various foods that are NOT within my preferred diet from time to time. Yet, on a weekly basis, I eat as much as I want - definitely a lot of meats with fat. The fats fill me up, so I am NOT hungry - whether that counts or NOT within your definition, who knows, but I will eat a pound of bacon and/or 6 eggs or various kinds of greens.. but I eat as much as I want of those items until I am full. I know certain items convert to sugar (glucose) in my body, so I moderate those including breads, pastas, rice, sugars, wheat, corn, soy, beans, grains, potatoes. I will still eat some of these items, maybe 1-4 times a week - depending on the week. Whenever I eat meat, I try to get fatty cuts of meat, and frequently when I eat vegetables, I will add fat to it, such as butter or lard or coconut oil.

Anyhow, I eat as much as I want of a certain kind of food, and as an example, a few days ago, I went to this all you can eat Korean barbeque place with a few relatives, and I out ate every person at the table (including several teenage boys), and several of them were eating rice (which I skipped the rice b/c I had had some rice the day before, which I thought was plenty of rice in recent days).

Post: #299

(05-30-2014 06:31 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  There may be some ways in which various guys are nitpicking, including myself, and there may be various ways in which we are talking past one another or possibly misunderstanding the points that other guys are making.

Probably each of us has a different opinion, but there are areas in which we agree, but those areas agreement will vary from guy to guy.

I have already pretty much done the more specific experiment that you are now describing b/c in the last three years, I have NEVER engaged in calorie restrictions or quantity of food restrictions. I pretty much eat like a pig, but I lost 30 lbs in the last 3 years to go from 205lbs to 175lbs.

I do NOT claim to be any specimen of a person, but I pretty much cut out processed foods and many added sugars. I am NOT 100% strict b/c I will eat various foods that are NOT within my preferred diet from time to time. Yet, on a weekly basis, I eat as much as I want - definitely a lot of meats with fat. The fats fill me up, so I am NOT hungry - whether that counts or NOT within your definition, who knows, but I will eat a pound of bacon and/or 6 eggs or various kinds of greens.. but I eat as much as I want of those items until I am full. I know certain items convert to sugar (glucose) in my body, so I moderate those including breads, pastas, rice, sugars, wheat, corn, soy, beans, grains, potatoes. I will still eat some of these items, maybe 1-4 times a week - depending on the week. Whenever I eat meat, I try to get fatty cuts of meat, and frequently when I eat vegetables, I will add fat to it, such as butter or lard or coconut oil.

Anyhow, I eat as much as I want of a certain kind of food, and as an example, a few days ago, I went to this all you can eat Korean barbeque place with a few relatives, and I out ate every person at the table (including several teenage boys), and several of them were eating rice (which I skipped the rice b/c I had had some rice the day before, which I thought was plenty of rice in recent days).

Of course eating more protein and fats count, man.

You said it yourself, it filled you up for longer periods compared to the processed poisons they call foods. That is cutting your calories and if you tracked you would probably have seen it.

I don't blame you on not wanting to track everything. I don't either.

It isn't a great way to live always worrying about how many calories you're eating. After some time you know how much you can eat without having to track.

That is why I think eating patterns help as well as the types of food. Some people tend to snack more at night so not eating after 6 or 8 would be a good thing for them.

That still equates to eating less.

Some people enjoy that full feeling which is why many love eating all of their calories during a time period and not eating the rest of the day.

There is still a set amount of calories to be eaten.

Moma snacking on handfuls of chips and nuts during the day/night can blow up that calorie count without him realizing.

The problem with this discussion is it got blew up with all of the bad calories versus good calories.

I eat the way I eat because I feel food. I am healthier and I suspect if you reread what Steve said you will see he even agrees that the type of food for overall health is important.

I don't cut out carbs, I drink milk everyday and enjoy ice cream once in awhile but I do try and get my protein in and my vegetables while also making sure I don't overeat.

If I am going to eat pizza or something with a lot of calories I make sure I don't eat anything else the rest of the day besides some protein shakes.

With all that said, that still doesn't mean I can pig out on 3k calories of good, clean food and expect to lose fat. That is what I see as the real disagreement is in this thread.

Post: #300

(05-30-2014 06:17 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  You are being very dogmatic and irritating to suggest that your point of view is backed by science, and the points of views of other guys participating in this thread(who do NOT agree with you) are NOT backed by science.

My point of view is backed by the laws of thermodynamics. There's nothing for you (nor anybody else) to disagree with. I have the laws of physics on my side. What do you have on your side?

Law of thermo dynamics may work when talking about a car engine or talking about some similar furnace.

Our bodies are NOT mechanical items, but organisms, and thermodynamics, even though it sounds so appealing and simple, does NOT apply very well. The Taubes books do real good in rebutting this, and there are several other paleo and low carb advocates that make similar arguments about the inapplicability of thermodynamics to this situation.

By the way, for thermodynamics to work in the human body, there would have to be some kinds of steady nutrient absorption dynamic, which you seem to be assuming; however, when you get into the details, you will realize that the human body's ability to absorb nutrients depends on a variety of factors including genetics, insulin production, prior abuse, exercise, and whether foods are eaten in combination to make nutrients bio-available. For example, if you drink several cokes, or some other stupid-ass non-nutritious product, then the sugar or aspartame in that product will block the bodies ability to absorb certain nutrients from foods, such as vitamin C. The receptors become damaged and/or blocked by the shitty ass food.

Of course, if a guy is young or in good shape, his body may be able to tolerate more abuse or may be able to repair itself or may still be able to squeak out some nutrients from ingested food, in spite of eating the shitty, stupid ass food that has the anti-nutrients. The same is true regarding the ingestion of bad oils including vegetable oils and any partially hydrogenated oils. Those bad oils can cause inflammation and/or block the body's ability to absorb good oils, such as butter, lard, coconut oil.

(05-30-2014 06:17 PM)SteveCR Wrote:  

(05-30-2014 05:55 PM)JayJuanGee Wrote:  WWT: This suggestion that Gio perform the test on himself is ridiculous b/c he has NOT been the one who has been proposing that eating/drinking the shitty foods, such as cocacola and sugar is going to cause the same effect - others have been the proponents of that - to suggest that the sugar in coke is the same as the sugar in vegetable, so long as you get proteins (and they are leaving dietary fat out of the discussion, but maybe some of these guys would concede that our bodies need to imbibe some kinds of dietary fat as well).

Ahh, but when other people have done such similar things (and the results posted in this thread), those results were tossed aside. And why? Because you do not agree with them. If I posted results that side with you, you would accept them.

You (and everybody else in this thread) have been given evidence. You refuse to accept it. You ignore science. You ignore results. You accept dogma and disordered eating. Okay, that's your choice. Just don't try to convince others that eating disorders are acceptable.

Again, you are just being argumentative. You want to suggest that the twinkie diet and the mcD's diet and the KFC diet and the ice cream diet are all equally good, and that is a bunch of bullshit, and a bunch of us in this thread already recognize the bullshit nature of that. I used to eat all of those kinds of foods, and they may work for a short term, and there may be some nutrients, but overall, each of your examples are propagated by the food industries to try to convince us that they are healthy in order that they can make money. If you believe that they are healthy, then go ahead and eat that way and come back and tell us how it is going.

Guys, reading this thread, can chose what they want to do. I am attempting to assist in a healthy and informative dialogue about dietary choices, rather than spouting off any particular diet or world view. Additionally, largely I recognize your propaganda and some of the guys that seem to be agreeing with your points to be spouting off mainstream ideas without any real empirical support except for bogus studies and anecdotal evidence that is propagated by mainstream food and drug industry interests. Maybe you are such a shill, b/c you keep trying to spread disinformation, to distract and to derail (and you seem to get pleasure out of these derailments)...

Anyhow, sure seems like a possibility to me that you are purposefully failing and refusing to engage in any kind of meaningful discussion - promoting your own bullshit (aligned with mainstream industrial propaganda) and accusing other guys here, who are really trying to figure out the right thing, of doing what you are doing.