My doc doesn't know jack...

[JesusReagan]

Just got back from the doctor. I had blood tests done to find out all my numbers. In going over them, he and I began talking about nutrition. I told him that I was eating ~2600 cal/day, broken up 55% carbs, 30% protein and 15% fat. I told him the bulk of the carbs come in the form of fibrous greens, the fats from good oils and nuts. He told me that I would never lose weight eating 2600 cal/day. His quote, "Who ever heard of a 2600 cal/day diet"? I told him that I lost 21 lbs in 3 months on this eating plan; in fact, I have lost 3 lbs in the last month while not being able to do any cardio, squats or deadlifts till I get my right knee scoped. This actually pissed the guy off. He said that I can't be counting my calories correctly. Now, I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I am an electrical engineer, I can do basic math, and I told him so. He wouldn't move off his position that I was somehow in error. For chrissakes....

Oh, for the record, my TDCC figures out to 3106. So, I subtracted 500 cal/day to get the 2600 cal/day number. Gee, and I did it without a calculator.

[Swaggydoo]

Yeah well the majority of Doctors and Nutritionists etc don't think the same as us, for instance, they would put a fat guy on a 1500cal a day diet, sure the fat will fly off, but they will lose muscle also, which is what people here try to minimize.

Shame really because alot of people turn to these guys for help.

[siamesedream]

People that graduate at the lowest level of their medical school are still able to become doctors. Hence, the reason why there are so many retarded doctors that, really, shouldn't even be giving advice for free.

[midnight_maraud3r]

lots of doctors don't know jack ****. my doctor told me it was ok to drink alcohol while taking antibiotics. anyone that knows anything about bacteria levels and what not will know that is a TERRIBLE idea. i ended up with an itchy ******* and many other unfun symptoms for a really long time until i found an educated naturopathic (that the word?) doctor.

i visited 3 other doctors and each of them prescribed the same prescription anti-fungal or antibiotics. fact is, doctors know a lot but they also don't know **** about quite a few things and just because they are doctors their advice is automatically "correct".

[.ridiculous]

Originally Posted by JesusReagan

Just got back from the doctor. I had blood tests done to find out all my numbers. In going over them, he and I began talking about nutrition. I told him that I was eating ~2600 cal/day, broken up 55% carbs, 30% protein and 15% fat. I told him the bulk of the carbs come in the form of fibrous greens, the fats from good oils and nuts. He told me that I would never lose weight eating 2600 cal/day. His quote, "Who ever heard of a 2600 cal/day diet"? I told him that I lost 21 lbs in 3 months on this eating plan; in fact, I have lost 3 lbs in the last month while not being able to do any cardio, squats or deadlifts till I get my right knee scoped. This actually pissed the guy off. He said that I can't be counting my calories correctly. Now, I may not be the sharpest tool in the shed, but I am an electrical engineer, I can do basic math, and I told him so. He wouldn't move off his position that I was somehow in error. For chrissakes....

Oh, for the record, my TDCC figures out to 3106. So, I subtracted 500 cal/day to get the 2600 cal/day number. Gee, and I did it without a calculator.

3106-500=2606

[dfohio]

Sounds like your doctor is an arrogant man. I wouldn't bother taking any nutritional advice from doctors or dieticians who are not experienced with lifting/fitness themselves. We see this on T.V. like the Biggest Loser. They control contestents calories down to 1500 and below to get the weight off as fast as possible (to get out mobid obesity asap). At the end result they have lost extreme amounts of weight but in some individuals over half of the weight lost was muscle.
Keep up the great work and rely on some of the brilliant people lurking in these forums.

P.S. dont give up on nutritionists/dieticians/doctors entirely otherwise I won't have a job when I graduate. Haha

[JesusReagan]

I guess I forgot the ~tilde. Maybe the doc is right... ;-)

[quickrob]

I have found that many doctors arent very knowledgable about nutrition. Mine told me I would poison my kidneys by taking in 1g of protein per lb of body weight daily while working out.

[Atavis]

Doctors do not take more than a few hours of nutrition classes in all their years of schooling.

They usually make for very poor resources for that type of information.

[Ali_Z]

Originally Posted by reprisler

lots of doctors don't know jack ****. my doctor told me it was ok to drink alcohol while taking antibiotics. anyone that knows anything about bacteria levels and what not will know that is a TERRIBLE idea. i ended up with an itchy ******* and many other unfun symptoms for a really long time until i found an educated naturopathic (that the word?) doctor.

i visited 3 other doctors and each of them prescribed the same prescription anti-fungal or antibiotics. fact is, doctors know a lot but they also don't know **** about quite a few things and just because they are doctors their advice is automatically "correct".

Don't most bacteria thrive on alcohol? I keep fish and one way to raise the nitrosoma bacteria levels in the water is to inject the sandbed with Vodka. I can not even imagine how that must have felt inside of you.

[Random907]

Originally Posted by Ali_Z

Don't most bacteria thrive on alcohol? I keep fish and one way to raise the nitrosoma bacteria levels in the water is to inject the sandbed with Vodka. I can not even imagine how that must have felt inside of you.

http://www.wisegeek.com/why-is-alcoh...antiseptic.htm
Ethyl alcohol, more frequently known as grain alcohol, works as an antiseptic by coagulating protein, the primary material that makes up cells. Although alcohol cannot coagulate every single cell, it functions well to inhibit the growth and reproduction of many microorganisms, including bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and viruses.

Intriguingly, 70% alcohol is a more effective antiseptic than 100% alcohol. Because alcohol causes protein to coagulate on contact, a 100% solution coming into contact with a microorganism creates a hardened protein wall around the outside of the organism, rather than permeating into its interior. Because microorganisms can be very resilient, this protein shell only causes dormancy rather than death. This can lead to revival and a continuation the cycle of reproduction under the right circumstances. At a purity of 70%, however, the alcohol causes coagulation to occur more gradually, slowing down the microorganism from the inside out.

Human skin cells are more resistant to alcoholic coagulation than most microorganisms. This is why your skin doesn't coagulate if it comes into contact with alcohol. Alcohol is also a good solvent that dissolves and carries away non-organic impurities that are responsible for things like odor. Its antiseptic action does cause a burning sensation on open flesh, as anyone who has ever used alcohol to clean a wound can testify.

Alcohol is an ideal antiseptic because it achieves its goal subtly through coagulation, rather than through some active means like active poisoning or dissolving. Throwing acid on an open wound would only be successful at removing the contaminating microorganisms at the expense of a decent chunk of flesh. Ethyl alcohol should never be confused with methyl alcohol, also known as methanol or wood alcohol. Methyl alcohol is used in industry as a solvent, and should never be used

[Ali_Z]

Originally Posted by KingdomCome

http://www.wisegeek.com/why-is-alcoh...antiseptic.htm
Ethyl alcohol, more frequently known as grain alcohol, works as an antiseptic by coagulating protein, the primary material that makes up cells. Although alcohol cannot coagulate every single cell, it functions well to inhibit the growth and reproduction of many microorganisms, including bacteria, fungi, protozoa, and viruses.

Intriguingly, 70% alcohol is a more effective antiseptic than 100% alcohol. Because alcohol causes protein to coagulate on contact, a 100% solution coming into contact with a microorganism creates a hardened protein wall around the outside of the organism, rather than permeating into its interior. Because microorganisms can be very resilient, this protein shell only causes dormancy rather than death. This can lead to revival and a continuation the cycle of reproduction under the right circumstances. At a purity of 70%, however, the alcohol causes coagulation to occur more gradually, slowing down the microorganism from the inside out.

Human skin cells are more resistant to alcoholic coagulation than most microorganisms. This is why your skin doesn't coagulate if it comes into contact with alcohol. Alcohol is also a good solvent that dissolves and carries away non-organic impurities that are responsible for things like odor. Its antiseptic action does cause a burning sensation on open flesh, as anyone who has ever used alcohol to clean a wound can testify.

Alcohol is an ideal antiseptic because it achieves its goal subtly through coagulation, rather than through some active means like active poisoning or dissolving. Throwing acid on an open wound would only be successful at removing the contaminating microorganisms at the expense of a decent chunk of flesh. Ethyl alcohol should never be confused with methyl alcohol, also known as methanol or wood alcohol. Methyl alcohol is used in industry as a solvent, and should never be used

Ohh, well then I suppose that the bacteria in sand beds are somehow immune to the antiseptic quality of alcohol and somehow feed off of it???