
Green Faces (or How to Hack Your Metabolism) - bengl
http://bryanenglish.com/2012/09/11/green-faces.html
======
filiwickers
The initial feeling of being tired, groggy, achy, etc. is called the "low carb
flu."[1] Usually it takes a week or three for the symptoms to pass before you
get over it. The more you relied on carbs as energy before, the longer it will
take. The first time I switched to a paleo diet it took about 2 weeks before I
felt normal. After that passed energy levels will skyrocket. I no longer rely
on coffee and have high energy throughout the day.

You need to incorporate more good fats into your diet if you are still feeling
low energy this far into it. There are two sources of energy for our body,
carbs and fat. The low carb flu happens as your body is adjusting from using
carbs as energy to using fat. It's likely you have lost so much weight because
you haven't eaten any fat so your body is eating itself (literally).

Examples of good fats to eat are: coconut (meat, oil, butter), avocados,
olives (oil, whole), and animal fats. You should definitely up your intake of
these. That should help with your low energy.

Reading about paleo, primal, eating real food, or whatever you want to call it
would be helpful. It is definitely a sustainable way to eat. It is essential
to eat fat though. Lots of people have done and researched variations of
these. Regardless of whether they are "fads" it is useful educate yourself a
bit before jumping into something.

[1] (<http://www.marksdailyapple.com/low-carb-flu/#axzz26B70TsmP>)

~~~
hunvreus
Me and 3 other friends went through the same phase when switching over to the
paleo diet; pretty regular thing, you just need to churn through and eat
plenty of good fats. Nuts are a helpful snack too.

I would also highly recommend that you work out on a fairly regular basis;
eating properly is one side of the equation. I've personally recommended Nerd
Fitness (<http://nerdfitness.com>) to quite a few persons. It's very easy to
start with and you can build it up to a fairly serious work out if you're
motivated.

------
riffraff
I feel stupid asking this, and I ask forgiveness if it's a dumb question, but
why are there so many people improvising diets?

What is wrong with dietologists[0] ?

I have been overweight and went to a dietologist, got back in shape (lost
about 16kg/35 pounds) in a few months and have stayed stable for years. And I
did not have headaches and was allowed some "free" meals, alcohol and sweets,
with "moderation" caveats.

I can't think of another health-related area where people think that it's
better to form your own expertise than to go to a doctor, at least not in the
same scale[2].

It seems strange to me, if you have persisting headaches you see a doctor, if
you have a bad posture you get foot support, but if you are overweight you
start reading books on nutrition and try to hack yourself.

What am I missing?

[1] medics with a specialization on diets, since chrome says this is not an
english word. Possibly "nutritionist".

[2] except possibly body building, where arguably there is not a "problematic
precondition"

~~~
jc4p
Like in everything we do, people always want to find the new cool thing and
easier thing to do than the routine every one else does. It's the same reason
why every new week a new diet featuring a cool name or acronym becomes popular
and then dies off.

~~~
georgemcbay
Also why there are 10 new JavaScript data binding frameworks released per day.

------
jc4p
First off: congratulations on the weight loss and actually sticking to a diet,
that's a really hard step.

Anyway, I recently started working at Fitocracy, a fitness website, and
decided to make a similar decision to yours. In fact, one of the main reasons
I took my job offer was because during my initial interview the CEO looked at
my workout history on the site and said "Whoa, nothing logged since March?
We'll change that", since starting just under 3 months ago I've done down 25lb
in weight and have gained a shit ton of strength. It's freaking awesome. Here
are some things I've learned along the way:

1\. I absolutely hate diets that consist of "eat this, not that", diets like
this set mental barriers that difference between "good food" and "bad food"
and can have lasting negative effects of "oh god why would you eat that that's
terrible for you" which, combined with the fact that most do this to carbs
makes you feel bad about yourself because you'll spend a lot of time on your
cut thinking about the delicious foods you can't have.

2\. You'll get much better results if you combine diet and exercise, you'll
get faster results, and you won't have to be on such a strict diet because the
exercise will make up for it.

I'm currently combining Leangains with a strength based workout program and
have lost around 2-3lb a week consistently for the last 2-3 months, and I feel
fucking awesome every day. I get to eat whatever I want as long as it fits in
my macros, and my macros have specific guides set up to include being able to
go out and get drunk semi-regularly.

~~~
llimllib
> 2\. You'll get much better results if you combine diet and exercise, you'll
> get faster results, and you won't have to be on such a strict diet because
> the exercise will make up for it.

For many people, this is not true. Exercise uses up surprisingly few calories,
and people justify all kinds of crappy foods for themselves based on this
reasoning.

The classic example is "oh, I've jogged for a half hour, so now I can have
this grande mocha frappa doppa lattechino". The sugary drink _crushes_ the
effects of the run.

So! Know yourself. Stick to your diet. And if you work out, you can eat _a
very little bit_ more. But crappy sugary stuff is always crappy sugary stuff.

Also, track what you exercise and eat so you know how you're doing.

~~~
jc4p
You'll note that I did not mention cardio at all but instead mentioned
strength training, but yes what you're saying is very correct for someone on a
low-cardio only exercise plan. It's very important for someone starting out to
always be keeping track of what they're doing so that they can re-evaluate
their diet and exercise plans at the end of every week or other time period.

~~~
llimllib
Strength training is a more difficult case because it really depends on goals.
If you're trying to bulk and build muscle, yeah, you can eat a whole bunch
more.

But other people strength train to look better while trying to lose weight;
those people can do a leangains-type program, or just generally eat at a
caloric deficit to cut weight. Thus, they have to watch what they eat too,
strength training or no.

------
mattlong
I don't think I would consider this hacking your metabolism. In fact, as the
author mentions, his metabolism actually seems to have "slowed down" since he
feels fatigued more often than before. For a completely no-carb diet, this
should be expected. Cutting out carbohydrates forces your body to primarily
convert stored fat for its fuel instead, which is a slower and less efficient
source of energy.

IMHO, practice moderation in all things, including moderation. Do I need to
cut out ALL carbs? Should I really consume NO fruit? I can NEVER enjoy a good
beer? Those rules would simply never be sustainable for me.

I generally stick to what I would call a healthy diet: mostly fruits and
vegetables, eggs, whole wheat bread/pasta, small portions of meat (usually
fish) with most dinners and some lunches. At the same time, I don't feel at
all guilty about grabbing a couple beers or ordering the wings if I'm out to
dinner or happy hour with friends. This system has been working for me because
I also exercise regularly: alternating between jogging and hitting the gym
most days of the week. Yes, it clearly took a bit of discipline to get into
these habits. But now it's just become a lifestyle I find easy and enjoyable
to maintain. What hacker doesn't appreciate a good challenge with such
immediate and important results as your good health?

~~~
Apocryphon
Not having any fruits is quite puzzling indeed.

~~~
sandGorgon
There are no fruits which dont have a nutritional equivalent vegetable, minus
the sugar and taste.

For e.g. 3/4 th cup of orange juice and half a cup of red peppers have the
same amount of vitamin c

~~~
stusmall
Aren't peppers still fruits?

~~~
overgard
I'm not sure, but the difference in sugar is the main thing (sugar raises
insulin which signals cells to store fat, very roughly speaking)

~~~
stusmall
I know there is a separate culinary definition of what a fruit is that I don't
really understand. Like under some definitions a tomato is a vegetable. Maybe
he is working off that but botanically a pepper is a fruit. His point would
probably stood better if he used spinach as an example of a vitamin C rich
green.

Either way, these fad diets always scare me. I wouldn't touch anything that
draws simple, arbitrary, counter-intuitive lines on what foods you can and
can't have. The body is good at knowing what it needs and what it doesn't.
Support it with a little bit of knowledge and self-discipline and it will
serve you well. I guess a well balanced diet is old fashioned and people just
want to try and cheat the system somehow.

~~~
sandGorgon
Well, i was going more for the "kitchen" definition of fruits which in general
is sweet and juicy.

Basically the difference is sugar - you dont need bananas and oranges and
mangoes for your vitamins.

In the context of the OP, I think that was meant by "green"

------
jakejake
I've been trying to get into shape myself and I've found that any kind of
novelty diet like this may get rid of some pounds but doesn't ultimately
stick. Because you can lose 19 pounds in 3 weeks and then gain it all right
back in the same amount of time.

You have to make a change that you can live with for the rest of your life, as
depressing as that sounds. But what has been working for me is:

1) not eating late night (this is the hardest for me but also the thing that
makes the biggest difference)

2) eating smaller portions. once you get into the habit this actually becomes
rather easy. just eat 1/2 or 2/3 of the portion size you'd normally eat.
eating until I was totally stuffed was just a habit I didn't even realize I
was doing

one easy way to eat a little less is to skip the sides. like if i'm eating a
hamburger - skip the fries. Or skip the bag of chips to go with the sandwich.

3) kinda watch the snacks and desserts. i don't cut them out but just keep in
mind if i ate a bowl of ice cream yesterday, then skip dessert today.

Aside from that I pretty much eat exactly what I have always ate. I have lost
about 22 pounds. I'm currently stuck at that weight because I keep cheating on
my own system! But I think it's important not to be too hard on yourself
otherwise you tend to just give up.

~~~
xur17
I lost 40-50 pounds (and have kept it off for ~4 years) by:

1\. Cutting pop out of my diet. I used to drink it every day for lunch, and
now I drink it ~once a month max.

2\. Eating smaller portions of snacks - I used to sit down in front of the TV
or computer with a bag of snacks that I would devour. Now I either take a
handful from the bag, or I put some in a bowl for me to eat.

And overall I just try to eat until I am full, which I used to have trouble
with.

~~~
jakejake
nice work! i agree, it's more about small changes that make a difference in
the long haul rather than trying to drop weight fast.

------
Stronico
[No way of commenting on the blog post] I've been doing more or less the same
thing for the past five months - I lost 15 pounds so far, and I'm down to
between 11-14% bodyfat.

I do find paleo to be sustainable - I would make it a point to include nuts
and multivitamins into your diet - that will make a lot of the negative things
go away.

I would also recommend the book "Why we get fat" by Gary Taubes, he goes into
the science of all of this.

------
Jemaclus
My pet theory is that most diets aren't really that effective, but what _is_
effective is thinking about what you eat. It's not about how many carbs you
consume or whether this food item would have a face or not. What's important
is that you're consciously thinking about what you're eating. "Do I really
need to eat this snack, or can I wait another hour til meal time? Is this junk
food or is it healthy?"

I've found that simply tracking my calories (not with any specific goals in
mind) has helped me drop weight like nothing else. I don't think "Oh, I have
to get under 2000 calories today", but I think "Man... this little 2.5oz bag
of cheezits is 200 calories! Maybe I'll eat an apple instead." And you know
what? It works.

Bottom line is that what you eat matters less than what you think about what
you're eating. That's my two cents.

~~~
dguaraglia
You are absolutely right. That's what worked in my case: I started, about a
year ago, to count calories using the Lose It! app (I can't recommend it
enough, it's a free service and works for most food you can get in the US.)

Soon enough I could distinguish between a 600cal lunch and a 1000+ one. Or
between a 500cal snack and a ~200cal one. Just the realization that I could
cut about half my caloric intake by choosing A over B and not feel hunger made
a huge psychological difference: all of a sudden those huge Five Guys burgers
weren't as tempting as they used to, and I started using 'calorie free' stuff
(like tomatoes, celery, and even some cheese spreads) because it could fill me
up. I used to ignore veggies because 'why would I put them in my sandwich if I
have a tastier option like bacon/mayo'.

At the end of the day, paraphrasing Timothy Ferriss said in one of his TED
talks, I had to learn to "eat like an adult", instead of giving in to every
childish want.

------
ap22213
I'm wondering if it's just because those foods happen to also be foods with
low glycemic index [0].

Based on an NPR story I heard yesterday [1] (if correct), I'd guess that you'd
get similar results eating any of those types of foods [2].

[0] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycemic_index>

[1] [http://www.wbur.org/npr/160757730/low-and-slow-may-be-the-
wa...](http://www.wbur.org/npr/160757730/low-and-slow-may-be-the-way-to-go-
when-it-comes-to-dieting)

[2] <http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/76/1/5/T1.expansion.html>

~~~
jc4p
Some other reading on the factuality of the importance some people/diets are
putting on the glycemic index: <http://alanaragon.com/glycemic-index>

The conclusions part is pretty great.

------
caldwell
I don't understand why people diet without exercise. The two go hand and hand.
Don't have time? Make time. It's really a small commitment with an enormous
upside. It's like trying to become a billionaire without investing any of your
money. You need to invest your healthy diet into a good exercise program and
the rewards will be substantial. Then you can do carb loading (eating carbs on
days you exercise and avoiding carbs when you are not exercising) and avoid
all those no-carb side effects.

------
antidaily
Slow Carb argues that you need some legumes to sustain a diet like this. Add
some lentils or refried beans once in a while.

~~~
filiwickers
This is not true. Slow Carb includes legumes to ensure you are eating enough
and maintaining satiety throughout the day (so you don't snack). Coming from
the Standard American Diet (SAD) most people are used to eating high and fast
carb diets. Legumes are Slow Carb which helps the dieter adjust easier than
the diet the poster is doing.

Many many people sustain a diet of meat, vegetables, fruit, nuts, and seeds
without the need for legumes. The key is to get enough fat and protein. You do
not need to eat carbs.

------
cschep
The headaches are (probably) withdrawal symptoms from sugar. Also, make sure
you crank up that water intake.

~~~
hellosmithy
Yep - I've been following a similar diet (GAPS) to improve some health issues
and found that the first few weeks were tough because of sugar/carb withdrawal
symptoms but it improved a lot after that. I'd recommend the book Nourishing
Traditions for anyone wanting to keep eating some carbs. It's based on the
Specific Carbohydrate Diet which it's my aim to transition to eventually as
it's a bit more relaxed about grains/pulses/dairy when prepared correctly.

------
zooko
Hi Bryan: good job experimenting to improve your own health and happiness, and
thanks for posting so others can learn from your experiments. My wife and I
have started a blog about this sort of diet, which is sometimeas called a
"ketogenic diet": <http://www.ketotic.org/>

Our first blog entry was about the tiredness and headaches you've experienced
and some suggestions for how to get past them:
[http://www.ketotic.org/2012/05/keto-adaptation-what-it-is-
an...](http://www.ketotic.org/2012/05/keto-adaptation-what-it-is-and-how-
to.html)

For what it is worth, I think a keto diet is probably a very healthy way to
live long-term. I wouldn't want you to just take my word for it, though.
Eventually I hope to write enough on our blog to explain why I think that.

Regards,

Zooko

------
enraged_camel
While it would make me a nice person to congratulate you on your weight loss,
as a fitness enthusiast I feel compelled to point out that short term
fluctuations in weight - even if they are in the magnitude of 19lbs in 3 weeks
- are meaningless. What matters is whether that weight loss is sustainable in
the long run.

Becoming fit is actually similar to becoming rich. Both are about having good
habits that govern one's lifestyle. People who try to "hack" their way into
weight loss end up gaining back that weight relatively quickly. Similarly,
people who "hack" their way into richness end up either poor, or in jail, or
both.

Bottom line is that in order to undo the effects of eating badly for years,
you need to eat well and exercise for years. There are no shortcuts.

------
awj
His "side effects" sound like symptoms of low caloric intake, not "removing
dietary carbs". With more attention to his diet (yes, I mean counting
calories) he could keep up this plan without the
headaches/irritability/fatigue.

Also, without knowing other stats (height, age, etc), it's hard to judge if 19
pounds in three weeks is healthy. In general, no, but if he started at 5'5"
and 280lb the weight was likely more of a risk than the diet.

These cutesy "rule diets" are a very poor way to manage your health. They're
relatively easy to live by, but that's about the only good thing that can be
said. There's nothing wrong with eating a low/no-carb diet, but you should
educate yourself so you know you're being safe and how/when you'll see the
results you want.

------
Zimahl
_I’ve dropped 19 lbs in just under three weeks! This is a ridiculous loss of
weight. It might even be unhealthy, I’m not really sure._

Oh, it's very unhealthy. That 19 lbs was probably mostly muscle you burned
because you essentially went into starvation mode, Christopher McCandless
style. There aren't enough calories in meat and (most) vegetables to survive
on.

Safe weight loss is pretty simple and there's no other way around it. Cut out
500 calories per day, either by diet or exercise and you'll lose 1-2 pounds
per week. Any more and you aren't burning the fat you have you are burning
through your muscle.

~~~
jc4p
6lb a week can easily be a large loss of water weight for someone who's
overweight, it's not maintainable but if it happens for more than a few weeks
in a row is the time to be worried, not now. Also, cutting 500 calories per
day is a weight loss of 1 pound per week (a pound is 3500 calories) :)

Oh, and it's very possible for someone who's untrained to lose more than a
pound or two a week (by being on a bigger than 1000 calorie daily deficit) and
still not lose muscle but instead make new muscle and strength increases, it's
just harder.

~~~
awj
Even if this is 1/2 to 3/4 water weight loss, that still likely isn't healthy.

You're right though, without more information to supply context it's hard to
judge what is "too much".

------
seanhandley
Strange as it may sound - try to eat more fat? It's an extremely efficient
source of fuel. Try eating some nuts (almonds, brazils, hazels) to keep energy
up. Really helps!

------
gkelly
Nice work. Keep it up. As long as you're eating enough nutrients, your body
will adjust to a healthy weight. Like others have said, try adding more
healthy fats to your diet. They will help provide energy as well as satiety.
What you're doing is sustainable. Visit marksdailyapple.com to see how
thousands of others live like this.

------
Jedd
Congratulations - you've (re)invented another low carb diet. You're in good
company - Tim Ferris did much the same, a few years ago, in the Four Hour
Body. Doubtless others will follow.

------
tokenizer
This is also called Keto is you were maintaining a threshold of less than
20grams of carbs a day.

------
nacker
Yet another "I dismissed the Atkins diet until I tried it" article.

Poor old Atkins. Even the so-chic Paleo diet is pretty much what he
recommended back in 1965.

~~~
gkelly
Paleo is different from Atkins in the area of food quality. Paleo stresses the
importance of quality foods where Atkins originally ignored it.

------
nerdfiles
Diets that ignore lifestyle are greedy. How about a new term? "Ethnodiet," or
"technediet" rather than "logodiet" or "science-based diet." Regardless of the
authority of scientists, or nutritionists, you are probably not one. Whereas
appealing to the authority of astronomists may be an epistemtically defensible
practice, appealing to the authority of nutritionists may not be. The
discoveries of astrophysics arguably have direct influence on your life, but
if they do, we'd be hard-pressed to integrate those findings in our everyday
lives; the discoveries of nutrition, oddly researchers and laypeople alike,
seem to carry an inherent imperative as to what-comes-next after said
discovery is made. Whatever the content of the discovery, the "what-comes-
next" is a matter of decision, but at the same point, it is a decision of
whether the discovery is amenable to all of food science or not. In
astrophysics, for instance, we have a long-standing set of metarules for the
integration and change of the overall conceptual system. Where is this in food
science? And what is more, Does a scientist's finding in and of themselves say
anything about normative structure? (This idea is from Alain Badiou:
"Situations are nothing more in their being than pure multiplicity. Nothing
normative can be drawn from the simple realist's observation of the becoming
of things.")

1\. Eat Food (that could be readily identified by most traditional cultures;
no Food Disputes; don't eat foodlike substances)

2\. Mostly Plants (-- they have the most mature survival systems; eat them)

3\. Not Too Much (learn how to eat little; that is, learn austerity, not
asceticism; apply more traditional diets as this doubly expresses a political
note and expresses Occam's Razor which does not aim to lose weight, but return
one's body to an earlier state of humans within "civilization")

Try it. "Science-based diets" tend to lack consciousness of the ethnological
structures we must persist within. A diet that says {nothing} about the
contextualized features of Eating is blind. -- Something like what Einstein
said.

~~~
jakejake
I was trying to comprehend your post, but it was a little too conceptual for
me! Though point #3 I agree with - I think a lot of us need to re-adjust what
is a normal sized portion. Many of us are eating as if we burned 6,000
calories working in the fields all day. But most of us are not doing that type
of manual labor so we need to eat less.

