[podcast flashvars=”titles: ‘Adam Kosloff'”]http://www.thelivinlowcarbshow.com/shownotes/wp-content/uploads/llvlc355-adam-kosloff.mp3[/podcast]
Hello and welcome back to The Livin’ La Vida Low-Carb Show with Jimmy Moore!
In today’s episode, Jimmy is happy to speak with Adam Kosloff, creator of an exciting brand new web site called Why-Low-Carb-Diets-Work.com. Adam is doing a yeoman’s job of bringing the message of Gary Taubes’ Good Calories, Bad Calories to the layman by organizing the information in such a way that it makes sense to the average Joe and Jane. Listen in as they discuss Taubes’ blockbuster book, low-carbing in general and much, MUCH more!
LINKS MENTIONED IN EPISODE 355
– Visit our sponsor: Rich Vos’ Results Typical
– Adam Kosloff bio
– Why-Low-Carb-Diets-Work.com
– The American Heart Association Diet: Is It Based on a Flawed Theory?
– RELATED PODCAST: Gary Taubes: Best Of 2008 ‘Encore Week’ (Episode 213)
Thanks for another great interview. Sign me up for that new reality show “Buffet House” with fridges full of steak, cheese and vegetables.
I discovered this great free program “Cron o meter” at spaz.ca/cronometer or you can Google it. You enter your daily gram targets for carbs, calories, protein and fats. During the day you add food eaten by typing it in the search box. (I bought a little food scale at Amazon for $11). It shows you percentages for all vitamins and minerals. Today I noticed I was low on E, so I ate 30g of sunflower seeds. Even though I take a multi and a C each day (with the gelatin or cellulose covered capsules which dissolve unlike some hard tablets), I still like getting the natural vitamins.
Thanks again for all the great shows,
Andy
Outstanding Andy!
Great episode! I ran right over to Adam’s website.
We’ve needed this for a while…glad Adam has done the footwork. What a great reference now, right? 🙂
Great interview, Jimmy. You always seem to find these great gems out there that nobody else seems to be able to find.
Good on ya!
Also have a suggestion. On the topic of how to fund definitive low-carb vs. low-fat studies, check out what grassrootshealth.net are doing. They ahve a signup program to pay $60 a month to join a study *and* build up a fund to fund the studies.
If the various communities (low-carb, paleo, primal, high-intensity strength training, raw food, etc.) banded togetehr, imagine what we could do from the ‘grass roots.’
Check it out!
THANKS so much, Keith! Actually, I had a representative from Grassroots Health on my podcast recently named Susan Siljander. However, the focus of their work isn’t so much on diet comparison studies as much as it is Vitamin D. If you want to see more studies done on carbohydrate-restriction, the better place to donate would be The Nutrition & Metabolism Society. I’ll be interviewing Laurie Cagnassola from that group VERY soon! THANKS for listening!
This guy’s outstanding, his web page is brilliant, as always Jimmy spot on interview, good site to direct medical sceptics to as 1st point of call.
I like the way he presents the information where it is all so easily accessible if you are more interested in a certain subject.
This guy sounds like Gary Taubes Mark 2. A name to follow and I wish him every success in his efforts to change the paradigm.
He and Gary got to meet last month for the first time which was a thrill for Adam. I agree he’s gonna be around for a long time.
I enjoyed this podcast and the sad fact is that the people in government make to much money on the food pyramid that they will never ok low carb not enough money in it. Also you mentioned the biggest looser show who would they get to sponsor the show!! So again sad to say but it comes down to profits. I watched a show on hulu the Dr. Oz show and he did a comparison with groups of identical twins in a endurance competition and it showed that the low carb couldn’t keep up with there twin that was fed a high carb diet. This made me so angry because of course they couldn’t keep up there body was not given the chance to get used to burning fat for fuel. And i don’t believe Dr. Oz is ignorant of that fact so what is the motivation for him to do the show? I think it was sponsorship.
I wouldn’t say never. Call me the eternal optimist, Jeanine, but I believe there will come a day in the United States of America where we’ll have a day of reckoning over the astronomical rate of obesity and modern diseases that they’ll be left with no other choice but to turn to what they have known all along–low-carb works and is making a whole lot of people get healthier than they could have ever imagined. Dr. Oz is a character all to his own because privately he tells people he loves the low-carb diet and uses it himself, but publicly he bashes it. I’d so love to get him on this podcast show, but I doubt he’d ever do it. I’ll keep trying!
How do you know he uses low-carb himself? I’d love to be able to provide that info to many people I know…
Great podcast indeed Jimmy. I am also glad that you make an effort to always bring in multiple points of view (e.g., Ornish, Peskin). It may be confusing sometimes, but the readers should make an effort to judge what is true and what is not.
By the way, low carb dieting (and other forms of blood glucose control, if necessary) may also be the key to living beyond age 90, particularly if you start well before 55 years of age:
http://healthcorrelator.blogspot.com/2010/04/blood-glucose-control-before-age-55-may.html
Thank you so much Jimmy. Great podcast! As usual.
Karen
Oh my word Jimmy, great interview. I hope you can get Adam on the next low carb cruise, just to talk and talk and talk and talk.. Love his ideas and way of thinking. I just loove people who think for themselves! One of my favorite interviews right next to Dr. James Carlson and the Gary taubes interviews. So glad he touched the calories thing.. that word does NOT belong in nutrition books – full stop. 5 Stars for this guy!
Enjoyed the interview, but I have to say the guy lost me at several points. Even the Eades say that calories ultimately DO matter, and you won’t continue to lose weight without a caloric deficit.
http://www.proteinpower.com/drmike/weight-loss/low-carb-and-calories-2/
So maybe that really isn’t the best line of attack to argue low-carb to the masses. Better to argue that lower carbs will reduce your appetite, which will in fact help to create the needed caloric deficit.
The part about someone else writing Shakespeare’s plays? A very old controversy, with very little evidence. Google away, but here is one good link:
http://shakespeareauthorship.com/
It’s possible to be a contrarian and incorrect at the same time.
Other than that, he seems like a amiable, thoughtful guy and clearly believes in Taubes’ message. It’s a nice website he’s created as well.
Hi Roger,
Thanks for your comments. I agree that being a contrarian can (and often does) mean being incorrect.
Regarding the calories-carbs debate… well, that is a discussion worth having. I believe the Drs. Eades are brilliant, and I’m not sure there’s much daylight between what they say and what Taubes says. I would certainly give heavy weight to anything they write.
re the Shakespeare vs. Edward de Vere debate… I freely admit that I lack any expertise to weigh in on it. Although when I read about it extensively years ago, I found the argument for de Vere authorship surprisingly compelling.
Untangling the legitimate contrarian ideas (e.g. carbs, not fat, make us fat) from the kooky ones (e.g. the moon landing was a hoax) can be tricky and annoying.
My conjecture is simply that much of the conventional wisdom — on practically any topic — must be corrupted by flawed theories, akin to the low fat diet. How else can you explain the massive failure of our obesity researchers to advise us even half-way correctly on what constitutes a healthy diet? A roulette wheel could have given us better guidance than the Food Pyramid!
If we accept the low carb diet argument, then we must explain how nutrition science got so FUBAR.
Either, this FUBAR-ness was a bizarre anomaly specific to nutrition science, which makes little sense to me. Or the FUBAR-ness is par for the course.
I believe the spectacular failure of the Food Pyramid diet indicates a much grander problem with how scientists (and other specialists) do business. These people as a rule do not go about challenging their theories to come closer to understanding nature. They say they do. But in reality, they fashion their theories specifically to appeal to the group of experts who dominate their fields. Publish or perish!
And this corrupting tendency, what jimmy eloquently described as groupthink, appears to me to be the fundamental villain in the play — the Iago, if you will, to our credulous Othello (to bring us back to the Bard, whomever he… or she… may have been!)
Hi Adam,
Thanks for your reply and sorry it took me so long to acknowledge it. Interestingly, regarding the Shakespeare question, the NY Times just did a review of a couple books on the subject:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/02/books/review/McCarter-t.html?scp=1&sq=SHAKESPEARE%20BOOK&st=cse
I’ve now had time to peruse your website in depth. I suppose my overall question regarding my previous concern is: does it have to be either/or regarding caloric balance vs. lipophilia? Can it not be both/and? Much is made by Taubes and others that governmental and scientific recommendations for low fat/high carb in the 1980s led to the obesity crisis. I guess I don’t fully buy it. No agency or authority told 7-11 to start selling 64 oz Big Gulps, as opposed to the 8 oz Cokes in the cool bottles our grandparents drank. As Rob Thompson pointed out in a recent Jimmy podcast, cheap corn syrup, cheap starches..cheap ubiquitous FOOD (if you can call it that) in general is probably just as much to blame for the obesity crisis. We’re eating more calories, period, and not particularly alarmed when we look in the mirror at what it is doing to us.
I lost 30 stubborn pounds a few years at age 51 by doing controlled low-to moderate-carb…but also by just paying attention to what and how much was going into my mouth. So I think we should keep the fight going on all fronts, metabolic and mathematical.
Thanks for your work and your reply.
Hi Roger,
First of all, thanks for the Shakespeare link. I look forward to checking that out.
Regarding whether it HAS to be caloric balance OR lipophilia… I am not sure. Maybe there is a way to square the circle. But my intuition from looking is that some version of lipophilia must be correct… ALTHOUGH for the theory to hold up, it must be able to explain things like why people can lose fat on low calorie diets. I believe the theory does this. But admittedly there is a high burden of proof on its defenders.
Re: the cause of the obesity epidemic. We can all agree that ∆unk food is a big culprit. We can also agree that the USDA did not tell 7-11 to sell ginormous Big Gulps. But imagine if the USDA had gotten it right 30+ yrs ago and told people that the REAL problem in our diets is refined carbohydrates and that eating fat in the context of a low carb diet was healthy. If so, this would have exerted tremendous pressure on manufacturers of sweets and sodas to go low sugar. The empty calories that surround and tempt us everywhere we go would be correctly labelled as dangerous carcinogens. And while, yes, some people would still indulge in sweet snacks, collectively we would eat a LOT less of the stuff. Does that rationale wash with you?
Thank you all very much for your generous comments! I am touched. It was a huge privilege for me to be on this podcast and to get a chance to connect directly with those in the low carb community.
Awesome interview! And the website with so much info readily available is fantastic!