The 5 Worst Diet Mistakes For Losing Fat & Building Muscle (Avoid These)
video description
Date: 2020-01-12
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 9
sv650Sftw
7: 00 Maybe in a perfect world, but scientific data as a whole is tainted by the publishing process which is also affected by bias. It's also important to make clear the difference between a diet for weight loss and a diet for health: They are VERY different concepts. Personally, the only data I trust is data backed by millions of years of evidence, and that evidence unequivocally states that humans did not eat grains until around 10-20k years ago. The technology literally did not exist to process such foods until that time. Irrefutable chemical analysis of human remains has also yet to find a single human who lived on a fully plant-based diet until modern times. You can argue that humans have evolved sufficiently in the last thousands of years to accommodate for a dramatic shift in diet since the advent of agriculture, but I personally don't think it's worth it to take the chance. Not to mention that grains don't really contain nutrients to any significant degree. Explain to me this: 1. How is 500 calories of rice better for you than 500 more calories of cauliflower? 2. How is a potato better for you than a sweet potato? (the potassium is basically the same, btw)3. What is the possible benefit of not eating wild caught salmon or sardines on a vegan diet? Basically, why would anyone who is looking to eat healthily consume empty carbs like pasta or bread when you could just eat more meat and vegetables? This, in a nutshell, is the Paleo diet.
reply
7: 00 Maybe in a perfect world, but scientific data as a whole is tainted by the publishing process which is also affected by bias. It's also important to make clear the difference between a diet for weight loss and a diet for health: They are VERY different concepts. Personally, the only data I trust is data backed by millions of years of evidence, and that evidence unequivocally states that humans did not eat grains until around 10-20k years ago. The technology literally did not exist to process such foods until that time. Irrefutable chemical analysis of human remains has also yet to find a single human who lived on a fully plant-based diet until modern times. You can argue that humans have evolved sufficiently in the last thousands of years to accommodate for a dramatic shift in diet since the advent of agriculture, but I personally don't think it's worth it to take the chance. Not to mention that grains don't really contain nutrients to any significant degree. Explain to me this: 1. How is 500 calories of rice better for you than 500 more calories of cauliflower? 2. How is a potato better for you than a sweet potato? (the potassium is basically the same, btw)3. What is the possible benefit of not eating wild caught salmon or sardines on a vegan diet? Basically, why would anyone who is looking to eat healthily consume empty carbs like pasta or bread when you could just eat more meat and vegetables? This, in a nutshell, is the Paleo diet.
reply
Sebastian Cardoso
I generally like Jeff, but the first three or four minutes of this video are questionable at best. 1) On organic: it's not about nutrition, it's about avoiding pesticides (e. g.: glyphosate, atrazine, chlorpryfos, etc. This is a thorough misread of the purpose of buying organic2) On GI: choosing low GI foods is, after shooting for a sensible caloric intake, quite possibly the most important move most people can make to improve their health, followed by exercise. See Dr. David Unwin3) On intermittent fasting: yes, the primary benefit is the caloric reduction, but there are undeniable benefits, such significant reductions in insulin, improvements to inflammatory markers and even autophagy if the fasting is extended. See Dr. Jason Fung4) On sugar: no, when it comes to sugar, there are no shades of gray. I do appreciate Jeff's sensible and non-dogmatic approach to things, but some things are binary. And sugar is downright bad for you, even in a vacuum. Carbs that, naturally, convert into glucose, is another story. But consuming sucrose and fructose is unequivocally bad for your body. See Dr. Robert Lustig, Dr. Tim Noakes or Gary Taubes
reply
I generally like Jeff, but the first three or four minutes of this video are questionable at best. 1) On organic: it's not about nutrition, it's about avoiding pesticides (e. g.: glyphosate, atrazine, chlorpryfos, etc. This is a thorough misread of the purpose of buying organic2) On GI: choosing low GI foods is, after shooting for a sensible caloric intake, quite possibly the most important move most people can make to improve their health, followed by exercise. See Dr. David Unwin3) On intermittent fasting: yes, the primary benefit is the caloric reduction, but there are undeniable benefits, such significant reductions in insulin, improvements to inflammatory markers and even autophagy if the fasting is extended. See Dr. Jason Fung4) On sugar: no, when it comes to sugar, there are no shades of gray. I do appreciate Jeff's sensible and non-dogmatic approach to things, but some things are binary. And sugar is downright bad for you, even in a vacuum. Carbs that, naturally, convert into glucose, is another story. But consuming sucrose and fructose is unequivocally bad for your body. See Dr. Robert Lustig, Dr. Tim Noakes or Gary Taubes
reply
TiberiuS
Problem with science and especially research reviews is, that they are also pretty biased usually. It often depends heavily on who funded the research (no research money if it doesn't fit the agenda of the one who funds it. Sometimes the results of a study or trial doesn't even seem to match with the data if you really look into it. Most often what is written isn't technically false, but other aspects are left out, which would more point towards a different result or far too much weight is given to a certain aspect, which is statistically insignificant. I think the idea is that most people don't have the time to really look into the data (or have no idea how to) and thus only read the abstract. This way a certain point can be made in the abstract and result chapter to match a certain agenda.
reply
Problem with science and especially research reviews is, that they are also pretty biased usually. It often depends heavily on who funded the research (no research money if it doesn't fit the agenda of the one who funds it. Sometimes the results of a study or trial doesn't even seem to match with the data if you really look into it. Most often what is written isn't technically false, but other aspects are left out, which would more point towards a different result or far too much weight is given to a certain aspect, which is statistically insignificant. I think the idea is that most people don't have the time to really look into the data (or have no idea how to) and thus only read the abstract. This way a certain point can be made in the abstract and result chapter to match a certain agenda.
reply
wazzup105
By rotating vegetables they don't mean swapping red and yellow bell peppers for green ones (if any the green ones are inferior because of vitamin C, basically they're just unripe colored bell peppers. Anyways, my way of looking at scientific studies is that you should not look for the ones that support your position, but for the ones that oppose it. Those are the ones you should pay attention to. What makes a theory valid is the lack of studies that conflict with it. (IMO wit the caveat that if your position is way out there there are no studies done to even try to oppose it. Which is probably equally bad)
reply
By rotating vegetables they don't mean swapping red and yellow bell peppers for green ones (if any the green ones are inferior because of vitamin C, basically they're just unripe colored bell peppers. Anyways, my way of looking at scientific studies is that you should not look for the ones that support your position, but for the ones that oppose it. Those are the ones you should pay attention to. What makes a theory valid is the lack of studies that conflict with it. (IMO wit the caveat that if your position is way out there there are no studies done to even try to oppose it. Which is probably equally bad)
reply
Place From
New Year goals are off, first week of 5-2 ( 5 days training, 2 off. 5 days training FBW, when new week start's I'll try to do FBW but with one modification - every day I'll try to focus 'more' on one muscle, eg in mondays 2 exercises for legs, tuesday 2 ex for backs etc. My goal is to go on with training like that AT LEAST 3 months. Btw I'm beginner/intermediate - I know how to train but didn't put too much effort in diet - that's my second goal, to start focus more on diet while training.
reply
New Year goals are off, first week of 5-2 ( 5 days training, 2 off. 5 days training FBW, when new week start's I'll try to do FBW but with one modification - every day I'll try to focus 'more' on one muscle, eg in mondays 2 exercises for legs, tuesday 2 ex for backs etc. My goal is to go on with training like that AT LEAST 3 months. Btw I'm beginner/intermediate - I know how to train but didn't put too much effort in diet - that's my second goal, to start focus more on diet while training.
reply
Divine Dragoon
I started lifting back in mid August. I weighed 250 lbs. I could barely rep 155 on bench, and couldn't do a single pull up. From watching and learning everything about technique, form, diet, all while being entertained at the same time I have improved insanely. It's now Jan 2020, i weigh 230lbs, I have a 250lbs 1RM bench, a 365 deadlift, and working on squat repping 250ish. I'm sooo close to joining the 1000 lbs club Thank you Jeff
reply
I started lifting back in mid August. I weighed 250 lbs. I could barely rep 155 on bench, and couldn't do a single pull up. From watching and learning everything about technique, form, diet, all while being entertained at the same time I have improved insanely. It's now Jan 2020, i weigh 230lbs, I have a 250lbs 1RM bench, a 365 deadlift, and working on squat repping 250ish. I'm sooo close to joining the 1000 lbs club Thank you Jeff
reply
L Muller
I think starting gym is the worst mistake of my life you start up with the idea of Ill go gym lift weights gets absolutely jacked within a year. Then you learn about splits what foods to eat macros etc. Then that year turns into 4 thousands of pounds later spent on creatine and protein sups gym membership hours spent eating the blandest of foods all for the most minimal progress. And the cycle is addicting
reply
I think starting gym is the worst mistake of my life you start up with the idea of Ill go gym lift weights gets absolutely jacked within a year. Then you learn about splits what foods to eat macros etc. Then that year turns into 4 thousands of pounds later spent on creatine and protein sups gym membership hours spent eating the blandest of foods all for the most minimal progress. And the cycle is addicting
reply
Jeff Nippard
Hope everyone's New Year goals are off to a great start I just squat 365 lbs for 8 reps last night and I'm super stoked about that. With the new year comes a LOT of diet hype and with that comes a lot of misinformation, so I wanted to make this video to keep things on the straight and narrow. Full Body Science Applied videos on the way next weekend Peace
reply
Hope everyone's New Year goals are off to a great start I just squat 365 lbs for 8 reps last night and I'm super stoked about that. With the new year comes a LOT of diet hype and with that comes a lot of misinformation, so I wanted to make this video to keep things on the straight and narrow. Full Body Science Applied videos on the way next weekend Peace
reply
Screen Doctor
I'm trying body recomposotion for the first time. I'm confused about what numbers I should be looking for on the scale? I'm 6. 3 84kg eating 3. 4k, roughly 260g protein 330+ carbs, 60g fat (can't remember exact numbers) should I look to maintain weight or slightly increase? Is the 1 percent a month accurate for body recomposotion? Thanks for your time
reply
I'm trying body recomposotion for the first time. I'm confused about what numbers I should be looking for on the scale? I'm 6. 3 84kg eating 3. 4k, roughly 260g protein 330+ carbs, 60g fat (can't remember exact numbers) should I look to maintain weight or slightly increase? Is the 1 percent a month accurate for body recomposotion? Thanks for your time
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
