Gyroscopic Investing

Wonk wrote: Also, the Ray Cronise story is uber interesting.  His experiments with hypothermic environments are borderline crazy--just the kind of guy I like to read about.  I found the story of swimmers like Phelps burning an extra 5000-7000 calories/day just from being in cool water alone totally enlightening.

Does that mean that in warm water your metabolism slows down?

I always visualized cold encouraging the formation of more fat for insulation purposes.  How does that tendency play into this sitting in cold water idea as a weight loss method?

Also, why doesn't this cold water treatment just leave you ravenously hungry, which would seem to mitigate the weight loss benefits? 

moda0306 wrote: What is it about PP'ers that no matter what ridiculous subject crawls onto this board the input is extremely infromed and from experience, debates stay cool and are always productive, and there's more wealth of knowledge and good advice on one page than one could get out of reading an entire magazine on the subject (probably littered with skewed media just trying to get you to buy their advertisor's products).

Here is what I think:

1. The PP, in general, attracts people who tend to drill down deeply into a subject and seek to understand it from all angles.  If they didn't have this tendency they might be happy with more conventional portfolios.

2. People who are able to appreciate something as counterintuitive as the PP are often able to put aside their own preconceptions when presented with new ideas.  This makes them good listeners who are often much less judgmental than other people.

3. When you have a group of well-informed people from different backgrounds who aren't selling anything, you can often get amazingly useful and unbiased information.

one thing i discovered with low carbs was a noticeable decrease in the portion size it took to feel satisfied, eating steak and potatoes with a couple cokes i would eat a whole steak, after a few days on low carb i found eating steak and green beans with water or tea then half a steak was enough

MediumTex wrote:

Wonk wrote: Also, the Ray Cronise story is uber interesting.  His experiments with hypothermic environments are borderline crazy--just the kind of guy I like to read about.  I found the story of swimmers like Phelps burning an extra 5000-7000 calories/day just from being in cool water alone totally enlightening.

Does that mean that in warm water your metabolism slows down?

I always visualized cold encouraging the formation of more fat for insulation purposes.  How does that tendency play into this sitting in cold water idea as a weight loss method?

Also, why doesn't this cold water treatment just leave you ravenously hungry, which would seem to mitigate the weight loss benefits? 

I feel like I burn way more calories on winter hikes than summer hikes. I've felt this way for years. It takes energy to keep your body core temperature up so what this researcher is saying completely jives with my own experience.

craigr wrote:

MediumTex wrote:

Wonk wrote: Also, the Ray Cronise story is uber interesting.  His experiments with hypothermic environments are borderline crazy--just the kind of guy I like to read about.  I found the story of swimmers like Phelps burning an extra 5000-7000 calories/day just from being in cool water alone totally enlightening.

Does that mean that in warm water your metabolism slows down?

I always visualized cold encouraging the formation of more fat for insulation purposes.  How does that tendency play into this sitting in cold water idea as a weight loss method?

Also, why doesn't this cold water treatment just leave you ravenously hungry, which would seem to mitigate the weight loss benefits? 

I feel like I burn way more calories on winter hikes than summer hikes. I've felt this way for years. It takes energy to keep your body core temperature up so what this researcher is saying completely jives with my own experience.

Craig beat me to it, MT.  It's all about homeostasis and core temperature regulation.  Cold is more demanding on maintaining core body temperature than warm (or hot).  You'll still burn more calories in hot weather than perfectly controlled internal temps though.  Interestingly, people with more bodyfat need more exposure to cold--precisely because their organs are more insulated from the cold.

To add to Craigs story, ever read about Everest high-altitude eating?  The combination of low oxygen and extreme cold forces most hikers to add entire sticks of butter to each meal--and they still lose too much weight.

One other thing I thought of...

High-glycemic diets have been proven to be inflammatory.  Chronic inflammation leads to rapid aging of cells, oxidation and shortening of telomeres.  This, of course, leads to numerous chronic diseases that have become epidemic in western civilization.  Ever seen someone who's celebrating their 45th birthday and you think "Damn, they look 55!"  Well, it could be stress, but diet plays a large role.

This is such a great thread.  Wonk provided a lot of great info.  I have tried many diets, but what I've found is the most healthy is this:

Fats:

Fats are good for you.  Don't let anyone tell you fats are bad.  Good fats are:  Nuts, fatty fish (salmon, sardines, etc), olive oil, avocadoes, etc.  Fats do not cause you to gain weight.  Good fats will help you lose weight.  The myth that fats cause you to gain weight is probably the biggest falsehood in modern health information.

Carbs:

Refined flours, sugars, especially High Fructose Corn Syrup, are bad.  Potatoes, flour, anything white, is generally bad for you as it will cause your blood sugar to spike, which turns into fat and makes you feel hungry a few hours later when your blood sugar crashes.  Good carbs are whole grains like brown rice, quinoa, sprouted wheat, sweet potatoes, legumes, and generally any grain that still has the husk on it.  When man figured out how to tear the husk off of rice and wheat and grind it into flour, the husk which contains the vitamins, protein, and fiber, and basically all good stuff was removed, and only the sugar was left.

Proteins:

Grass fed is good - corn fed is bad.  In fact, corn is pretty much what is causing our nation to be as fat and unhealthy as we are.  Look what drinking corn syrup in a can (soda) does to people?  Now imagine cows, chicken, and pigs eating it.  Would you want to eat them?  I try to buy grass fed beef, free range chickens, and cheese from grass fed cows.  If you haven't tried it, Trader Joes has an amazing sharp cheddar cheese from New Zealand, which is from grass fed cows.  You can seriously taste the difference in grass fed.  I also eat a lot of salmon for the good fats and omega-3s.

Basically, what I've discovered is that eating whole grains and natural foods helps me to keep a slim and natural weight.  Eating refined sugars and white carbs causes me to gain fat.

Also, I eat the following foods to help me out:  dark chocolate, red wine, ginger, garlic, and other phytonutrients.

Wonk wrote: What does that do to you?  Screws up your entire blood profile--and that's only the stuff we know of. 

Just keep in mind there's an awful lot we don't know about cholesterol, etc.  It's the whole causation vs. correlation thing.  Is your high cholesterol really what's killing you, or is it simply a marker of a more mysterious process?

http://www.amazon.com/Worried-Sick-Pres ... 0807831875

This is a great book about how potentially flawed some of our preventative health measures are in the US. 

Okay, here's a question for the group:

If I go on a high protein/fat/low carb diet (or, more specifically-- if my carb % gets too low) then I lose energy.  I get sluggish and depressed.  A friend suggested it was because I wasn't getting enough calories.  But I am.  I can eat all the time, in fact.

First two times I did Atikins, and really didn't pay too much attention to the quality of meats and fats.  Blood work/cholesterol was terrible after that one.  

In addition: Nuts give me digestive problems.  

I've tried doing the high protein/low carb with quality meats and fats.  Pretty much had the same experience although blood work was more normal. (I still need Lipitor).

Meanwhile: Quality carbs (whole wheats) give me energy and a sense of well being, in moderation, that lasts.  I'm  still try to limit the amount of carbs I eat... but if I listen to my body, it's definitely not saying, "Feed me more of that Atkins stuff."

My speculation is that a lot of how diet affects us (assuming you're not eating junk food) has more to do with our individual genetic background.  

When you lower your carb intake you will experience "carb flu":

http://www.marksdailyapple.com/low-carb-flu/

Basically you will have some loss of energy, etc. as your body's energy mechanisms adapt to the new reality. But after a little bit it will vanish.

Atkins did an extreme version of high fat/protein. Moderation in the saturated fat is probably better overall. I tried this on myself for a month where I binged on high saturated fats meats, etc. The doctor almost passed out when he saw my cholesterol numbers. In fact, I almost did too. There are arguments about it doesn't matter, but I feel better not seeing bad lipid scores that high. When I cut back on the saturated fats and went back to fish, nuts and mono/poly unsaturated fats my numbers collapsed almost back to the normal range in 10 days. The doctor is much happier now.

But I did prove to myself, conclusively, that high saturated fat intake will absolutely run your LDL cholesterol numbers up very high. So if you have high cholesterol you really should avoid the saturated fats except on rare occasions and this includes things like dairy.

If nuts give you problems then obviously don't eat them. But one small handful a day of almonds has significantly good effects on cardio health. There is pretty conclusive proof of this now. But then again so does a glass of red wine a day. So does a couple Omega3 fish oil tablets.

The carbs making you feel good is a response to the sugar. After being off of them for a while I find that they now make me feel tired after eating them in any great quantity (or even not that great). Sugary foods in particular are very bad.

There could be a genetic component though. But I think that a large part of America's obesity/Type II diabetes issue is definitely related to the large scale uptake in carbohydrates in the diet. The lower carb style of eating has been a big help for me and I'm happy with the results.

Thanks, Craig. 

Coffee wrote: If I go on a high protein/fat/low carb diet (or, more specifically-- if my carb % gets too low) then I lose energy.  I get sluggish and depressed.  A friend suggested it was because I wasn't getting enough calories.  But I am.  I can eat all the time, in fact.
...
Meanwhile: Quality carbs (whole wheats) give me energy and a sense of well being, in moderation, that lasts.  I'm  still try to limit the amount of carbs I eat... but if I listen to my body, it's definitely not saying, "Feed me more of that Atkins stuff."
...
My speculation is that a lot of how diet affects us (assuming you're not eating junk food) has more to do with our individual genetic background.  

I'm not a low-carber (I'm a "calories in-calories out" guy), so let me also give you my "high protein \ moderate carb \ moderate fat" take on this.

Low carb diets make some people grumpy and miserable while others seem to just coast right through without any trouble.  I don't know whether that is down to genetics or some other form of voodoo magic, but at this point I can only say "it is what it is".  The people that do well on low carb seem to do really well.  It's not for me, though.

I think that the type of carbohydrate that you consume is a huge factor in whether or not you ultimately struggle with weight.  Primarily, I think, this is largely down to satiety.  High-fiber carbohydrates like bulky fruits and vegetables or low-calorie soups are extremely filling.  Think of a snickers bar vs. a hard apple, a bowl of oatmeal or a baked potato.  It's an immense difference.  The modern eater gets into trouble when they encounter snacks that are filled with things like high-fructose corn syrup (terrible satiety properties) combined with high levels of unneeded fats (meaning a high overall level of calories.)  Fats from fish oil, olive oil or almonds are of course awesome and I am not criticizing these excellent foods.

I know that Gary Taubes' thesis is that the increased consumption of carbohydrates is responsible for the obesity epidemic, but I believe that this is only an indirect effect.  I think that we simply move much less and eat much more than we used to and many of the foods that we eat don't make us feel full.  I think it's about these factors a lot more than it is about insulin.  We go through year after year in these calorie surpluses and the weight just slowly piles on.

To me, going with an approach where the great majority of carbohydrates come from whole foods like fruits and veggies is a great way to go, especially for those that don't like how they feel without carbohydrates.  I personally don't restrict myself from whatever kind of carbohydrates I want (up to and including Fried Nutter Butters), but fruits are the king for me.  They're versatile, they taste amazing, great fiber content, and they replenish liver glycogen (which combats hunger.)

This reminds me of another weird little convergence: John Hussman (of the often-discussed "Hussman Funds") runs a nice little fitness and weight loss information site.  While I don't agree with everything (for example, I don't think that meal frequency is an important factor), I was impressed by how good most of his information is.

I have heard mixed reviews on Hussman's work in investing but interestingly he's not bad on the fitness stuff. 

I enjoyed this documentary, watched it this evening. When science, government and money mix, it is a recipe for bias. I think the role of insulin and carbohydrate overconsumption is significant; the role of chronic, low-level stress is harder to quantify, but may be just as important in its effect on inflammatory pathways and ultimately atherosclerosis and other degenerative conditions. For many of us, this is a harder nut to crack as we try to forge a healthy lifestyle.

Great thread.

I'd say that it's important to realize that every individual is genetically different. One person's eating style may have completely different affects on another individual.

For instance, your body's production of HDL cholesterol is affected by specific genetic markers. Your BMI can greatly be affected by specific genetic mutations. Your response to fat, or saturated fat, your response to exercise, are all affected by specific genetic markers.

There's even a genotype where some people, will see increased waist circumference on a low fat diet, but not on a diet high in monounsaturated fat. The study also showed that an increased intake of monounsaturated fat was also associated with reduced BMI for those individuals with the specific genotype.

From 23andme.com:

Many researchers have investigated the interaction between a genetic variant in the PPARG gene (rs1801282, also known as Pro12Ala), dietary fat, and measures of obesity. In a large study of over 2,000 women, increasing saturated fat intake led to increased body mass index (BMI) regardless of rs1801282 status. Increasing intake of just monounsaturated fat (popularized as the "Mediterranean"-style diet), however, was actually associated with reductions in BMI in people carrying at least one copy of the G version of rs1801282. In another study of 774 individuals, people with at least one copy of the G version of this SNP tended to have a significant increase in waist circumference after two years on a low fat diet compared to individuals with two copies of the C version. But on a diet high in monounsaturated fat, the G version of rs1801282 no longer had a detrimental effect when it came to waist circumference. In a subset of individuals with diabetes, the protection against increased waist circumference conferred by the G version of rs1801282 in combination with the Mediterranean-style diet was even stronger.

Genetic profiling is still in the early stages of research, but researchers have already found compelling evidence about how each of us respond very differently to diet and exercise. So, it's very unlikely that one particular diet or exercise routine would yield the same results for everyone. And, as we see above, some genetic profiles can even result in completely opposite responses to specific diets.