Welcome


My name is Gina and I would like to welcome you to my blog!

On this blog, I not only share the dietary and lifestyle approach which reversed my metabolic disease and achieved my weight loss, but I also debunk many misconceptions surrounding obesity and its treatment.

I am 5'5" and was weighing 300 lbs., at my heaviest. I lost a total of 180 lbs. I went through several phases of low carbohydrate dieting, until I found what worked best and that is what I share on this blog. Once on a carbohydrate restricted diet, along with intermittent fasting, I dropped all of the weight in a little over two years time.

My weight loss was achieved without any kind of surgery, bariatric or cosmetic. I also did not take any weight loss medications or supplements. I did not use any weight loss program. This weight loss was solely the result of a very low carbohydrate, whole foods based diet, along with daily intermittent fasting and exercise.

There are years worth of content on this blog, so I suggest you use Labels to easily find the information you are looking for. If what you are looking for is not under Labels, enter it into the Search Bar.

Showing posts with label Dr. Fung. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr. Fung. Show all posts

Six common beliefs addressed, Part 162 - Online Quackery Edition

1. I know this is off topic and you might not answer it but I was just curious to know what made you decide to break away from Dr. Fung and the low carb community in general? No one else seems to have the same approach to obesity that you do and I was just wondering what made you go in your own direction.

I usually do not reply to this question because I have addressed it before. I haven't done so in detail though, so I understand the curiosity. For this reason, I am going to reply this time because I think my experience might help others. 


I had already lost my weight when I came across Fung. So you have to understand that I was looking at all of this from the stand point of having already reached my goals. I think that is what made me not as vigilant as I should have been over the information that was being given. After all, these were "doctors" and I'm not. I'm just thankful, that because I had already lost my weight, I didn't ended up like so many others who followed this nonsense to their own detriment.

I lost my weight by following a modified carbohydrate restricted diet which was lower in carbs than typical Atkins. I had removed all the sugar and grains from it. I stopped avoiding saturated fats and used them instead of vegetable oils. This was a protocol I had designed for myself after reading 'Good Calories, Bad Calories' by Gary Taubes. I ran across his book during a time I was researching how changes in my diet were affecting my blood glucose.

Later on, when I came across Fung, his protocol made sense as it matched closely to what I had already read. Interestingly enough, I found Fung not through fasting but through cholesterol. Fung had extensive information on cholesterol and saturated fat intake which I was interested in because I had stabilized my blood glucose, lost body fat but started having issues with cholesterol.

Before then, I had never heard of fasting as being "a thing" but I figured it was a new approach for treating diabetes. When I started fasting for 16 -18 hours a day and continued losing weight, it verified to me that everything was Kosher. I failed to realize that the fasting protocol was not what was causing my further weight loss. I had just continued being leptin sensitive and would have resumed losing weight even without the fasting protocol as I had been able to sustain proper blood glucose regulation.

You can see that at this point, I had not delved deeply into human metabolism and obesity research. I was going by basic general information on insulin resistance, provided by the low carb community. I never corroborated what was being said.

As time went on, I started noticing inconsistencies though. For instance, the more people fasted, the less results they seemed to have. This was always downplayed because they would have "lower" blood glucose or "lower" lipids while fasting, "proving" that it was working. They would also lose 5 or 10 pounds and consider that a victory even when they regained them after they ate again. I was baffled as to why these people were being given the same advice to continue with something that was obviously not working. No answers were ever provided to explain this. This bothered me because I figured that if they were clear as to why they believed their protocol worked, they should also be clear as to why it wouldn't. After all, they were the "professionals" but the advice remained to just fast longer. It was as if they couldn't reverse engineer their own theory.

I did not understand why these longer and longer fasts were being promoted when they obviously didn't work. It started to feel like a sporting competition, rather than a serious treatment. This is not how I lost my weight and I didn't see anyone else lose theirs this way either. In fact, the few who were able to succeed, never followed these fasting protocols at all. We were just people who had already lost a significant amount of weight, following a carbohydrate restricted diet, and were now trying to find further information for fine tuning our approach, receive advice for weight maintenance or address new issues that might have arisen during our journey.

Aside from this whole fasting quackery, I saw multiple errors with the dietary advice being given. It seemed like all the emphasis was being put on the ability to fast longer and longer while the diet remained mediocre at best. Many times, the diet would just worsen over time and people would try and "fix it" through longer fasts. Again, that is not how I lost my weight. I lost my weight following an extraordinarily strict diet and I ate every day. I knew that exercise was vitally important as well, as it had been a major part of my journey, but it was always glossed over or not mentioned at all.

I started questioning the people who were giving all of this advice. They weren't nurses or medical professionals. They were just recruited from an online pool of followers and given a fake "fasting coach" title that didn't mean anything. Most of these "fasting coaches" were obese themselves and seriously struggling with the protocol they were advising on. These individuals didn't know anything about how to treat obesity. Many of them were displaying serious disordered eating practices which they were passing on to their "clients". Yet people were paying a program for these nobodies to provide them with "advice" about something they can do themselves.

Finally, I came to the conclusion that all of this was a blatant scam. I can't think of another word that would best describe it. This doesn't just pertain to Fung, by the way. I saw it everywhere in the low carb community. All of these people were basically selling snake oil. From bogus "fasting aids", to useless "one on one" sessions, to books, recipes, website accesses, supplements, event tickets and finally online schools so you can scam too. This is why a lot of these low carb advocates started expanding their scams into other areas like cancer, "longevity", fertility, the magical effects of salt, etc. They knew they couldn't put all their effort into one scam because the gig will eventually be up.

And the gig was up. People were complaining that they weren't getting results or reaching their goals. Many simply gave up and walked away years later, as obese as when they first arrived. I saw people become more obese over time. Some ended in the hospital. Some ended with full blown diabetes and/or other serious conditions. Some ended up dead because they thought they could treat their cancer through fasting and "starving it of sugar". Now the scam was not only simple theft of the naïve but it was actually harming people. And it's all legal because they can simply hide behind their disclaimers and say they had nothing to do with any of it. After all, it's up to you to discuss their "advice" with your doctor.

The followers weren't the only ones who noticed the gig was up. Researchers were coming forward and complaining that their studies were being misinterpreted and misapplied. Some doctors jumped ship as they realized this was a farce and didn't want to be associated with it anymore. More and more quacks and non professionals were being invited to speak at these "conferences" because legitimate people did not want to be caught dead there. A few scandals broke out behind the scenes. Even the goal post was being moved, inch by inch, until weight loss was no longer even being promoted. The entire house of cards was toppling over and low carb's 15 minutes of fame was up.

That's when I left. I didn't want to be associated with that circus. Not only did I leave, but now I was very curious about the naysayers I used to ignore. I became interested in what they had to say rather than just chalk them up to being "hating trolls". I started to do what I should have done from the beginning. I went deep into diabetes and obesity research. Not "low carb" interpreted propaganda but actual medical literature and real biology. I didn't have to go far to realize all of the misinformation being espoused by the low carb community. It only verified that I had done the right thing by leaving.

After I had left, I was finally vindicated in my decision and it occurred in an unexpected way. Dr. Peter Attia conducted an interview with Dr. Tom Dayspring, a board certified doctor of internal medicine and clinical lipidology. Now, Attia may have questionable beliefs but this interview was eye opening as they had a special guest on the show - software engineer Dave Feldman. What occurred during this interview, in my opinion, put the final nail on the coffin for the low carb community. Feldman was embarrassingly obliterated by Dayspring. Feldman knew nothing of what Dayspring was talking about and had to be corrected multiple times. Finally, Dayspring told him, in no uncertain terms, that his "experiments" were already known in the world of lipidology and basically ignored as being absolutely meaningless in the context of cardiovascular disease. Feldman discovered nothing new. He was just witnessing how lipids are supposed to work. The software engineer went back to hiding in his hole and plotting out a new way to make money without working.

Even Attia threw some dirt over Feldman's grave by challenging him to attend a real lipidology conference and present his research, if he was so confident in it, instead of always going to low carb conferences. Of course, Feldman was not up for that task and made multiple excuses as to why he couldn't, even though Attia gave solutions for all his obstacles. Feldman never did take Attia up on that advice, by the way. Instead, as of this post, Feldman now also has some bogus paywall site that teaches you all about cholesterol and helps you do his meaningless experiment at home. The experiment may not protect you from a heart attack but many have used it to help them acquire life insurance. In other words - insurance fraud. This is what made me wonder, what else do these people have wrong? Worse, how many more of them simply don't care they have it wrong?

I now relay what is really known about obesity and diabetes, to my readers, and how they can apply it safely to their lives to help with their treatment. I hope that what I experienced helps people to not take anyone's word for anything. Research it yourself. Cross reference everything. Be very careful because the internet is like the wild west when it comes to information.

Six common beliefs addressed, Part 133 - Diet Wars Edition

1. I recently came across an article on Facebook, "debunking" Dr. Fung and I wanted your take on it. People are raving about it! 

I usually don't get involved in this type of discussion because I rather focus on subject matter that would help people on their metabolic journey. I also hate ruffling feathers with critiques, but I will make an exception with this one, since it does touch on a few misconceptions that often come up. I also want to prove a very important point that will be crystal clear by the end of this post. 

If anyone is interested, you can read the entire article being discussed, for yourself here


This article was written by Dr. Layne Norton, a so-called "renowned prep/physique coach and pro natural bodybuilder/power lifter with a PhD in Nutritional Sciences". (So, the next time a quack tells you to ask your doctor why they only took two hours of "nutrition" in school, remember this article. Your doctor was working hard to get an actual MD.) Layne is just another Dr. Stephan Guyenet minion. You can tell who they are from their extraordinarily long articles, about mostly nothing, and super corny memes. By that criteria, Layne is definitely one of them. 

I personally don't care about these "diet wars" because I have no skin in the game. I don't sell anything, so I am not in competition with any of these fools. I just try to weed out the charlatans, so you can make better decisions on how to address your metabolic problems. I believe that both Fung and Layne are charlatans, desperately trying to convince you to buy their programs. This is why they endlessly go at each other. It's simply competition for your money. If you want a real debunking of Fung, you can read my article on him here

In the meantime, let's tackle this new found BS. Layne has a bone to pick with Fung and he painstakingly details each gripe in this article. There is a lot to break down here, and most of it is nonsense, so I will only address key points and ignore everything else because this article is longer than 'War and Peace'. You will also be surprised that it ends in nothing. I know it's hard to believe that, but you will see for yourself by the end of this post. Let's begin. 

Gripe 1 - Layne begins by introducing you to Dr. Fung and his obvious snake oil. Fung is the Canadian Nephrologist who self proclaims to be "a world-leading expert on intermittent fasting and low carb". Layne starts off by claiming that Fung "misinforms" his followers. Well, many would say that so does Layne. So, they basically both cancel each other out. After all, quack per quack still leaves you with a duck. 

Gripe 2 - Layne is salty that Fung has refused to debate him. But, can we really blame Fung for that? If the debate goes the same way this article went, there would be no reason to have one. It would be a total waste of time and if someone out there doesn't believe me, go read the entire article for yourself. Better yet, you can hear what this debate would be like by simply searching on YouTube "Rogan Taubes Guyenet". This should take you to clips of a debate that's already been had. We don't need to hear it again from Fung and Layne because it will end up in the same place Taubes and Guyenet's did - No where. After all, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

Gripe 3 - Layne tries discrediting Fung by saying that 'Red Pen Reviews' gave - "The Obesity Code a shocking score of 31% for ‘Scientific Accuracy’". Then he goes on to say that - "Red Pen Reviews was founded by Seth Yoder and Dr. Stephan Guyenet to provide systematic reviews of nutrition books and the veracity of their claims" and "They are the best source of unbiased reviews of nutrition books available today". Wait, what? Guyenet is not biased? Guyenet wrote a book called 'The Hungry Brain' and is now peddling his own weight loss program online! Guyenet is obsessed with Gary Taubes for Pete's sake. Do your Googles, everyone, and find out for yourself. 

Gripe 4 - Layne goes for the jugular by making the claim that - "There are several people who I have spoken with who Dr. Fung attempted to get fired from their jobs or get them kicked out of grad school, but these folks wish to remain anonymous". Well sir, if they wish to remain anonymous, it's as if they didn't exist. No point of mentioning them, since we can't corroborate this bit of info. Besides that, what the hell does that have to do with debunking Fung? After all, there's a difference between being "misinformed" and being an "a--hole". 

Gripe 5 - Layne now tries to pull at your heart strings and says that - "In 2016, Dr. Fung fat-shamed two obesity researchers for being fat themselves at a scientific conference". LOL That was hilarious and yeah, that's actually true. Good for Fung! How the hell are you going to have fat obesity researchers? Rather than "fat shamed", they should have been fired and kicked out of the conference. If we can "fat shame" Jimmy Moore for being a fat diet monger, then we can "fat shame" two obesity researchers for being the same. Especially when they say they have the "solution" to a problem that they can't even solve for themselves. At least, if I regain 500 lbs., you can all say "Gina told us this would happen..." 

Gripe 6 - Layne points out that Fung is promoting a - "Fasting tea that promises 2x the results with 50% the effort from your fast". Then he goes on to debunk the tea's ingredients. Well done, but what's surprising about this? I mean, what can you expect from a snake oil salesman? Fung is simply trying to sell the same snake oil every other diet monger is, including "pro natural body builders". 

Intermission 1. Start elevator music here. In this section of the article, Layne goes into a very long winded and boring break down of calories in/calories out (CICO) theory. As usual, it's full of the same repetitive jargon and reeked with out of context information, that everyone before him has already hashed with no results, including the two fat obesity researchers at the conference. Here are just a few I addressed spiffily or I'll be here forever: 
  • The Law of Thermodynamics only applies to closed systems. The body is an open system. So, please stop mentioning it. 
  • Basal Metabolic Rate is the main focus of every diet because it makes up to 70% of your energy usage and it's all from body fat. So, please stop minimizing it. 
  • We already know that all calories are the same because they are just units of energy. So, please stop repeating it as if it's something profound. 
Before Layne allows us back to his regularly scheduled article, he flip flops and says - "It’s important to note that all caloric sources do not affect energy expenditure in the same way". Wait, what? That entire encyclopedia worth of CICO crap to basically end up agreeing with Fung? Surprisingly, the flip flops won't stop here.... 

Gripe 7 - After that long interlude, Layne now goes to hormones and says - "Dr. Fung has spent many articles and videos nebulously discussing ‘hormones’", only to flip and then say - "Some hormones indeed DO impact energy expenditure". Layne then points out one - thyroid hormone, which is affected by fasting. He just didn't mention that this effect can be negative or positive, depending on what your issues are. So, Layne didn't do a thing to clear up Fung's "nebulous" hormone discussion. 

Gripe 8 - Layne criticizes Fung for calling insulin - "The fat storage hormone", but then goes on to say -"Insulin does inhibit lipolysis, fat oxidation, and increases fat uptake into adipose". So, is it a fat storage hormone or not? Layne can't say for sure, so he just says that - "Its effects on body fat levels are more complicated". He's right about this getting ever so much more complicated.... 

Gripe 9 - Layne now pulls the rabbit out of a hat and says - "Before you blame insulin for the cause of obesity, understand that fat can be stored in adipose without increases in insulin via a protein called acylation stimulating protein (ASP)". Whoa! But, he fails to mention that ASP also stores glucose into adipose and it stimulates insulin release. Damn! Just when we were making headway..... back to square one. 

Gripe 10 - To make things ever more complicated, Layne says that - "Of the fat that winds up in adipose tissue, over 98% of it comes from dietary fat, and less than 2% comes from dietary carbohydrates". That's very interesting and who knows what context he's referring to, since he is as "nebulous" as Fung. Regardless, in practice, people can drop incredible amounts of weight on low carb diets and others can still remain fat, while getting fatter, on low to no fat diets. Of course, Layne continuously reminds us, it's much more complicated than that. Well then, that's why he shouldn't try to make it appear so simple. 

Intermission 2. Start elevator music here. In this section, Layne goes into a long winded rant about different studies, etc. which "prove" Fung wrong. Beat yourself up if you're interested. He provides links to all his sources, so have at it. 

Intermission 2 continues. If anyone is still awake, in this section, Layne goes into another tirade about metabolic adaptation and appears to not really believe in it, but then cites the 'Biggest Loser Study'. That of course makes him flip flop, yet again, and he points out that other studies have shown less metabolic adaptation. Then he flip flops again and says basically that metabolic adaptation occurs with all diets. Then he says it is - "Unlikely that simply eating 500 calories less will cause 500 calories per day attenuation in energy expenditure". He just fails to mention that it is also unlikely it will reverse your obesity.  

Then Layne ends up at The Law of Thermodynamics, once again, which I already explained is being misapplied to the human body. Layne finally returns to metabolic adaptation and debates how quickly it can occur or under what deficits, blah, blah, blah.... the song that appears to never end... but it does end. It ends in the weirdest of ways when Layne says - "The body does have elaborate compensatory mechanisms in place, and whole-body physiology is messy". So, what was his point? No one knows. 

The kicker to all of this is how this entire article ends. It literally does so with Layne stating - "I am not saying that hormones do not matter for weight loss. I am not saying that insulin plays no role in weight gain or weight loss. I am not saying low carb does not work. It certainly does. I am not saying that Intermittent Fasting/Time Restricted Eating does not work. It certainly does. I am NOT saying that energy expenditure isn’t modifiable based on energy intake." 

Basically, Layne is not saying any of the things that he just spent the entire article trying to say. So, WTF is he saying? No one knows. Not even himself. But, it seems like the article's point was - "The harm is that singling out foods, macronutrients, or hormones as ‘good’ or ‘bad’ can create disordered eating patterns in some people". But, then again - "I’m not saying that low-carb diets or Intermittent Fasting/Time Restricted Eating cause binge eating". Well, I'm not saying that calorie restriction can also cause disordered eating habits, even though it most certainly has.

And that's a good way to make the point I said I would make by the end of this post. Forget everything in that article or whether Fung or Layne are right or wrong. All that matters is the end result. The end result, ladies and gentlemen, is that as you listen to these two fools you get fatter, while they get richer and solve nothing.