I think it's probably a very bad idea to do something that makes you feel awful.
For the avoidance of doubt I feel way better on ex150ish than I do on a normal diet, and this fortnight I've been playing with high-carb low-fat low-protein, although not in any systematic way, and that makes me feel absolutely stellar most of the time (a little over-stellar, truth be told) and occasionally dreadful.
Hard to say what's what, though. As much as we shit on bad science, there's a reason we have science - hard to control for all the variables in a human life.
I quit potato after trying to also incorporate honey/fruit - - had to go low-carb to recover from that debacle. For all I know, I've felt bad ever since because of after-effects of the potato, or the runaway eating-too-much-sugar.
Vegans (and exfatloss himself in 10 years on the wrong keto) fall into this - - hard to tell which part of what is making you feel which way which time.
That's a Yudkowsky thing, I think. Basic idea is that an agent has as a goal to gain elevation, so it uses a heuristic "go uphill". This is great, until it gets stuck on top of a hill and can't go down it so as to be able to start climbing the mountain that's nextdoor. It's related to Goodhart's law in the sense that the agent is managing one measure: 'am I going uphill' until this suddenly fails.
In my case, I think i've optimized for glycogen production and storage and got trapped in the local optima "be able to function comfortably fasted for hours" in a way that makes it harder for me to break through to actual ketosis - which would obviously result in being able to function comfortably fasted for days [instead of hours].
Ah, in computer science this is called a "greedy" algorithm. One that cannot "plan ahead" to leave a local optimum.
Definitely lots of hill-climbing/greed going on in diet circles. I was stuck on my ketard hill for probably 5 years after it stopped "working" (except for the Non-24) lol.
I think most of the low-carb/keto/carnivore people at this point are stuck on a local optimum; it might work for some of them but clearly crabs are not the root cause of the obesity epidemic.
I think it's probably a very bad idea to do something that makes you feel awful.
For the avoidance of doubt I feel way better on ex150ish than I do on a normal diet, and this fortnight I've been playing with high-carb low-fat low-protein, although not in any systematic way, and that makes me feel absolutely stellar most of the time (a little over-stellar, truth be told) and occasionally dreadful.
Hard to say what's what, though. As much as we shit on bad science, there's a reason we have science - hard to control for all the variables in a human life.
I quit potato after trying to also incorporate honey/fruit - - had to go low-carb to recover from that debacle. For all I know, I've felt bad ever since because of after-effects of the potato, or the runaway eating-too-much-sugar.
Vegans (and exfatloss himself in 10 years on the wrong keto) fall into this - - hard to tell which part of what is making you feel which way which time.
Oh, yes, if the badness started before you did the new thing there's not much you can read into that.
I thought you were in good health and just curious about all this for intellectual reasons. What are you trying to achieve?
It's a lot more complex than that, and I am still trying to figure it out.
A teaser, however, is that I appear to have fallen prey simultaneously to hill-climbing and goodhart's law.
But yeah I'm healthy enough, just out here climbing local optima and getting stranded on them.
What's hill-climbing? I assume you don't mean it literally.
That's a Yudkowsky thing, I think. Basic idea is that an agent has as a goal to gain elevation, so it uses a heuristic "go uphill". This is great, until it gets stuck on top of a hill and can't go down it so as to be able to start climbing the mountain that's nextdoor. It's related to Goodhart's law in the sense that the agent is managing one measure: 'am I going uphill' until this suddenly fails.
In my case, I think i've optimized for glycogen production and storage and got trapped in the local optima "be able to function comfortably fasted for hours" in a way that makes it harder for me to break through to actual ketosis - which would obviously result in being able to function comfortably fasted for days [instead of hours].
Ah, in computer science this is called a "greedy" algorithm. One that cannot "plan ahead" to leave a local optimum.
Definitely lots of hill-climbing/greed going on in diet circles. I was stuck on my ketard hill for probably 5 years after it stopped "working" (except for the Non-24) lol.
I think most of the low-carb/keto/carnivore people at this point are stuck on a local optimum; it might work for some of them but clearly crabs are not the root cause of the obesity epidemic.
Good luck with whatever it is!