He really showed his true colors with this paleo/banting crap. He really is a kook. It casts a pall on his previous work in exercise phys.
Unless he is correct...
A leopard never changes his spots.
Oh sorry this one does.
a broda gotta make some $$$ ya know?
Noakes has always been a kook. No serious ex phys scientist takes his stuff seriously. Noakes has never given proof of his speculations about his "central governor" and whatnot. That's why the editor of the most prestigious ex phys journal told Noakes to either "put up or shut up". Not surprisingly he hasn't done either.
Central governor is a model. You don't have to prove it, it just has to explain what is observed. In that sense, it is a valid model as others also are.
snake oil governor wrote:
Noakes has always been a kook. No serious ex phys scientist takes his stuff seriously. Noakes has never given proof of his speculations about his "central governor" and whatnot. That's why the editor of the most prestigious ex phys journal told Noakes to either "put up or shut up". Not surprisingly he hasn't done either.
Let me know when your 700 page book on exercise physiology comes out so I can "rake you over the coals". Amazing how people are so easy to lash out with criticism, but never produce anything of value as an alternative.
Critics are wonderful, no accountability, just a lot of noise. In other words, what have you done lately??
Doing nothing is much better than doing something about being wrong in this case. I'd rather we have a thousand guys not writing exercise phys books than one guy writing a bad one.
He has changed his stance from "absolutely everyone should eat a diet high in glucose" to "people who have problems tolerating lots of glucose should not eat so much". This really is not a controversial stance except perhaps to the idiots in the human nutrition field who recommend high glucose diets to diabetics and similar. Even if you accept that a high fat diet diet causes heart disease (a stance with no supporting model) you need to balance the potential risks of that versus the harm filling diabetics and pre-diabetics full of glucose will do.
He makes it clear in every lecture and every article that I have seen that his nutrition guidance is not for everyone; it is for those who have reason to believe they cannot tolerate limitless glucose. Unfortunately as is often the case journalistic licence takes over and "Tim Noakes says no-one should eat carbs!" becomes the message plastered all over the web.
Let Us Ruin wrote:
Doing nothing is much better than doing something about being wrong in this case. I'd rather we have a thousand guys not writing exercise phys books than one guy writing a bad one.
Ha, Ha..
Right. Living on the dole, huh?
Where does it say that when a book is written, everything must be accepted. I have yet to find a book or article where I agree with everything 100%, yet I am able to find informative and interesting items all the time. If one were to just sit on their ass all the time and not work at producing anything, we would be living back in the dark ages.
Your comment is worthless and useless.
Actually I'll go further than that. If you pay attention to his lectures his core message is "eating habits that leave you with elevated blood glucose for extended periods are bad for your health". This is an utterly uncontroversial stance.
He is not about whether or not a given food is "good or bad" but whether the effect of that food on an individual is good or bad.
For a long time, Noakes has been a medical doctor masquerading as a scientist.
I'd agree fellow Limey, that there's no definitive link between a diet rich in healthy fats and heart disease, unless maybe you have an existing condition.
However I do believe in eating a balanced diet, around 30-40% carbs and the rest split between protein and fats but it doesn't need a faddy name.
Noakes is also spot on regarding the 8 pints off water a day crap, which has no scientific research behind it, and the myth that caffeine is any more diuretic than water.
SomeBloke wrote:
Central governor is a model. You don't have to prove it, it just has to explain what is observed. In that sense, it is a valid model as others also are.
Not quite. A good model should do the following:
1. Explain existing data
2. Make testable predictions that other models do not make
I think Central Governor could meet the second criterion, but I'm not familiar enough with it to know what they should be.
These posts sound like they're from the same person. Never seen so much negativity towards Noakes.
Randy Oldman wrote:
However I do believe in eating a balanced diet, around 30-40% carbs and the rest split between protein and fats but it doesn't need a faddy name.
Do you believe that this diet works for you, or would you recommend it to everyone? There is a big difference between the two.
luv2run wrote:
Unless he is correct...
But he's not (at least he isn't concerning most of the things I've read him state in absolutist terms about diet).
So I guess the answer is..."yes" ?
(he comes off as at least little crazy in this interview-
http://www.biznews.com/health/2014/07/28/tim-noakes-makes-real-meal-critics-say-diet-dangerous/)
snake oil governor wrote:
Noakes has always been a kook. No serious ex phys scientist takes his stuff seriously. Noakes has never given proof of his speculations about his "central governor" and whatnot. That's why the editor of the most prestigious ex phys journal told Noakes to either "put up or shut up". Not surprisingly he hasn't done either.
The thing about the central governor theory is that it's so obvious and commonsensical that most serious athletes and coaches have always just considered it a gloss on other theories. OF COURSE, you can get used to pain and thereby run faster.
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
Randy Oldman wrote:However I do believe in eating a balanced diet, around 30-40% carbs and the rest split between protein and fats but it doesn't need a faddy name.
Do you believe that this diet works for you, or would you recommend it to everyone? There is a big difference between the two.
A balanced diet? Sure, just tweak it to your particular needs. Trial and error.