Even worse is the fact that I don't even know what they're arguing anymore. Seems like they're just arguing for the sake of arguing now, either that or they're angry that I called their magical weight loss solution a "fad diet".
It's not magical.
Here's the bottom line, in case you missed it: Yes, you can lose weight on a low-carb diet. You can also lose weight on any numerous other forms of dieting. Low-carb diet isn't anything special, stop acting like it is (And yes, you are, that's why you've derailed the thread trying to advocate to people about it).
It's not "strictly better" in Magic terms, but it is "special" in that it has advantages over other food intake strategies in certain situations.
As far as limiting (not eliminating carbs) goes, an easy strategy to keep the energy up is to plan your carbohydrate intake around your intense physical activity. Not only will eating carbs an hour or two before intense exercise get rid of the energy drawback of limiting carbs, but you will ensure that those carbs have a lower chance to be sent to long-term storage since you're using them for fuel.
I would also recommend refeeding on carbs the day before the test. There is nothing wrong with "carbing up" before a critical day of physical activity, and in fact many strategies advocate having a "carb up" day every week to restore leptin levels (a hormone that regulates fat storage) and muscle glycogen
Telekinesis, I could have gotten to those particular pieces of advice quicker if you would stop trying to shout me down without adding anything to the conversation.
First off, restricting carbohydrates is not a fad diet. I get that you think it is, but by repeating "fad diet" and "magical solution" over and over you are just trying to shout down our points instead of actually addressing them. No one here is saying restricting carbohydrates is magical, in fact, we have given you many reasons why it works the way it does.
Restricting carbohydrates is a valid strategy for the sedentary overweight and obese who can't just jump off their couch and turn into Michael Phelps. If this guy is having trouble passing the physical minimums to be a cop, he qualifies as someone who probably isn't very active. No offense OP.
...And as for totally sedentary people getting too many carbs... you really don't what the actual problem is? No, it's not getting too many carbs. It's that they're totally sedentary!
The problem is actually both. Even if an overweight/obese sedentary person starts becoming more active, they should be changing their food intake as well. Food intake is much more important to weight loss than exercise, in fact, many studies recently have shown that steady-state cardio is a neutral weight-loss activity in practice because people's bodies signal them to eat more to make up for the extra calories burned.
As I said, this is irrelevant, it's not difficult to educate people.
Are you serious?
Not sure what you're trying to argue here, I never said low-carb diets were bad. I even said it's great if it works for you. What I AM saying is just telling people to cut carbs isn't the answer - it's eating less than you burn and eating healthy.
Just repeating "calorie deficit is the only thing that matters", in addition to not even being true, is not helpful in practice. Human beings are not mechanical furnaces, our weight loss is shaped by a billion different processes within our body that regulate our food consumption as well as fat storage.
I'm well aware of this. First of all, low-fat diets are even worse than low-carb diets.
The studies I've seen controlled against typical macronutrient ratios as well, and low-carb diets outperformed them in the insulin resistant crowd as well.
Second, this again has to do with terrible eating habits (And terrible exercise habits), not necessarily with carbs. All you guys are doing is substituting the root of the problem (Diet and exercise) with a fad diet that may or may not work.
You do know that macronutrient ratios fall under the large tent of "Diet", right?
Go to the Cube Lists forum, find some pauper cubes, and digest the information there. The questions you are asking are really broad, so there's little way to answer concisely without saying "go see what other people have done and use that as a starting point".
No, it's better to tell people to just eat healthy food and keep their portion sizes in check.
I totally disagree. Nutrition education is awful in this country and a lot of people have a very incomplete view of both what is healthy and what is a reasonable portion size. Most people vastly underestimate how many calories they are taking in until they start tracking their intake exactly.
Carbs are not bad for you. Processed carbs are bad, but healthy carbs are not.
Agreed, but as magick said most people get way more carbs than they need. The more one is active and exercises, the more important carbohydrates become. It's not hard to figure out that most people who are asking for weight loss advice fall in the "less active" category.
In addition, simple carbohydrates are one of the easiest macronutrients to gorge on, since simple/sugary carbs have a very low satiety factor. Cutting them out makes it harder to overconsume, since fat and protein consumed without sugar are very satiating.
Finally, low-carb does not imply no-carb. You can go no-carb, but many "low carb" diets just mean "lower than what the average person consumes". The average person consumes around 60% carbs, many low-carb strategies aim for 20-25% carbs.
Low-carb may work for some people, but this is almost always because they are cutting calories, not because it's some magical diet.
Studies have shown that for people who have developed insulin resistance (common in the overweight and sedentary crowd), a low-carb diet has more effect on weight loss than a low-fat diet, and that's controlling for calorie intake. I can link studies if you are interested.
Gifts Ungiven vs. Fact or Fiction. I never understood why the cheaper priced Fact or Fiction is considered a better card. Both are usually played in cubes. I wondered why Fact or Fiction is considered better. Does it have to do with getting to choose 5 cards instead of 4? Do people like Fact or Fiction better because you are given the choice which pile you want. Gifts doesn't give you that option.
It has nothing to do with 5 cards vs. 4 cards. It has everything to do with the fact that the opponent chooses which cards you get from Gifts, and you choose on Fact or Fiction. If Gifts worked like FoF in that you choose the pile you take, it would be in the running for strongest blue card since Ancestral Recall. As it is, it's still very strong if you have graveyard interactions that work well with it, like Regrowth or Unburial Rites, or just a critical mass of things to tutor for that are similar enough that you don't care which one you get.
We got Deathrite Shaman and a few other good cards in the mass spoiling of RTR near the end of spoiler season. In addition, no one has really been able to play with the GTC cards and mechanics yet, it's possible there are some hidden gems in the cards already spoiled. People were certainly dismissing Jace4 when he was spoiled, but now he's considered very strong.
What GTC is missing that RTR had is slam-dunk obvious upgrades to existing cards like Dryad Militant, Rakdos Cackler, Supreme Verdict, etc.
----------------------------------
GTC also suffers from a lot of the mechanics and cards fitting normal limited well, but not Cube's hybrid limited/constructed environment.
Bloodrush is all about the combat step, which is not something Cube focuses on. A few of the cards could be strong enough for R/G aggro (the 4/4 for 4 with Bloodrush RG comes to mind) but we'll have to see.
Battalion is a parasitic mechanic that gets stronger the more you build around it, but the battalion cards are not strong enough on their own (to balance them for Constructed) which means cube isn't interested.
Simic is very "play more creatures" which is not Blue's domain in Cube, and in addition Cube has a lot of ways to punish players for overextending. If all the Simic cards had their blue mana symbols replaced with white mana symbols, I think a lot of the spoiled cards would be closer to playable, since white is all about "play more creatures".
Orzhov and Extort I think could be a source of hidden gems. Giving black and white aggro decks reach is potentially very awesome, and the mechanic is unlike anything we've seen before, so I feel our initial evaluations may be off.
Dimir and Cipher in theory fit Cube reasonably well, we just haven't seen many cards costed aggressively enough to make the cut.
----------------------------------
Compare to RtR's guilds and mechanics - you have:
Unleash/aggression which works on its own regardless of environment
Populate/creature generation which fits with W/G's strategy in Cube
Detain which isn't great for Cube but Azorious's control elements are Scavenge/graveyard interaction and meaty creatures which B/G is down with
Overload which works on its own regardless of environment
When you look at it from a wide lens it's not surprising GTC has been underwhelming for Cube.
If you are mostly sedentary(roughly speaking do not stand/walk for more than 4-5 hours and lack proper resistance or hard conditioning training a day) then you are best served with intentionally avoiding a dedicated carb source and instead eating a diet that is something like 70% protein source/20% fat/10% carb while hitting recommended fiber amount or higher( should be higher). It will be physically impossible for you to over eat and gain weight, because protein and fiber at that level is incredibly filling.
I agree with most of what you are saying, but 70% protein is extremely high and really overkill for pretty much anyone. There's little need to go beyond 30% protein, at a 2000 calorie diet 30% protein is 150g of protein, which is more than enough even for a beginning lifter.
It has a high variance, though. There will be the games where your deck is ripping one 4mana curve topper after the other while your ramp deck opponent reveals land after land. That is going to be annoying
Annoying for the opponent, you mean! I'd love to rip my best spells while my opponent is bricking (assuming a control or midrange matchup, we've already established this card is not what you want against aggro).
[color=green][B][FONT=Trebuchet MS]
No diet that highlights focusing on one or two food groups and cutting out the rest is a reliable diet. Any diet that says you can't eat carbs/sugars/fats is a scam (unless you have a pre-existing medical condition [such as diabetes or glucose intolerance]), all one has to do is look to the right source for information. Of course these TV advertisements want you to listen to them, as long as you order their 'special' food package for just 3 easy payments of $69.99 per month, or maybe to buy their informational booklet, or video, or attend their seminar with a cover charge. The sad part is that people gravitate to these sources because these sources push themselves upon the consumer via media outlets.
Oh my god, are you serious? Why do you insist on saying that I get my information from late-night infomercials and mcdonalds.com? Are you really not aware of the benefits of a carb-restricted diet on lipids and blood sugar? Are you really not aware of the research that has shown restricting carbohydrates can be very effective in controlling weight in those with increased insulin resistance (which is certainly a ton of people in this sedentary society)?
If you weren't so condescending and dismissive with your replies, I might be nice enough to link you some studies, but as it is you'll have to live with the magic of your supposed expertise.
There is nothing healthy about dropping 50% of your recommended calorie intake. That's bad. Really bad. You won't lose any real weight that way.
If you insist on going on a severe calorie deficit, then the max reduction should be 500 or so, which is supposed to give you a roughly 1lb/week loss.
Really depends on how much he's exercising. With exercise a 500 calorie consumption deficit is solid, without exercise a 1000 calorie deficit is totally fine, that's ~2lbs/week over the long term. He's definitely eating too little as it is, though.
OP, keep in mind, the body is very complex and finicky when it comes to the regulation of body weight. Don't get discouraged if you step on the scale and you haven't lost any weight in a week, or even if you've put on a few pounds. Water weight, gaining muscle (from resistance exercise if you're doing it) and a billion other factors can mess with that number on the scale. The long-term trend of your fat loss is what's important.
Lemons do cause short term weight loss on thier own. Lemon is a natural diuretic, and causes weight loss through reducing the amount of fluid the body is retaining. It is not the healthiest way to lose weight and the weight loss will only be temporary. As soon as you drink or eat something, your body begins replacing lost fluids and you begin regaining your weight. But saying lemons do not cause weight loss is wrong.
When most people say weight loss they actually mean fat loss. If we were talking about cutting weight for a wrestling meet or bodybuilding competition, that's the only time water weight really should come into the discussion, but that's clearly not the case here.
Too bad that it doesn't evolve your biggest creature if it has Evolve. Still, a potentially huge token for 3 is nothing to scoff at, even if it's a bit "win more".
If your evolve creature is your largest creature, and has power greater than toughness, then it does trigger.
It's mostly the color combination it's in that makes it bad.
I'd tweak it to be a 2/2 flyer for 1UB with the same ability.
If it were 1RB it would be broken, but I dont think this is true for 1UB.
I guess it depends on your cube, but U/B tempo is definitely something that is supported and drafted in my cube. Not to mention that it's easily splashable in B/x aggro, blue is already a great support color for aggro/tempo decks.
In an agro deck the 2/2 flyer for 3 would be slowing down your tempo AND be giving your opponent a chance for answers.
I'm not sure what you mean - you said you'd tweak it to be a 2/2 for 3, but now you're saying a 2/2 for 3 is bad?
Maybe a 2/2 for 3 is more powerful than a 4/4 for 4, but it definitely feels less mythic which is something they have to keep in mind while designing.
My group does sideboards some of the time and no sideboards sometimes. It can take just as much skill building a diverse deck that can handle any deck that is thrown at it, as a single deck that can adapt with a sideboard. It makes it easier to keep track of all the cards, and easier to clean up afterwards. It also speeds up rounds as instead of a brief delay to sideboard, people instantly shuffle and are back in the game. I would definitely recommend no sideboards if you are traveling to cube.
Yeah, cubing at a PTQ or whatever definitely makes sense to have no sideboards. With 8 players you can trust in a safe environment like someone's apartment though, disallowing sideboarding seems like overkill.
The seer is bad.
It's anti-ramp sideboard tech at best.
I think you're focusing on the life loss too much. Pairing this with land destruction or tempo support means your opponent might not even be able to utilize the extra cards they are drawing, while in the meantime you are drawing cheap disruption to maintain your board advantage. I do agree that it's on the expensive side for a tempo play, and it is horrendous against aggro (certainly true for many other cards in cube) but I think it has potential.
I think part of the reason it bothers me is because it's a FANTASTIC idea that could have been tweaked to be more competitive.
I don't think they can reduce the mana cost at all, even with a P/T reduction to 3/3. Even a 2/3 for 3 with this ability is dangerous to print alongside any type of tempo shell. The trigger is templated intelligently (on your upkeep instead of each upkeep). I'm interested to hear how you would tweak it.
It's not magical.
It's not "strictly better" in Magic terms, but it is "special" in that it has advantages over other food intake strategies in certain situations.
As far as limiting (not eliminating carbs) goes, an easy strategy to keep the energy up is to plan your carbohydrate intake around your intense physical activity. Not only will eating carbs an hour or two before intense exercise get rid of the energy drawback of limiting carbs, but you will ensure that those carbs have a lower chance to be sent to long-term storage since you're using them for fuel.
I would also recommend refeeding on carbs the day before the test. There is nothing wrong with "carbing up" before a critical day of physical activity, and in fact many strategies advocate having a "carb up" day every week to restore leptin levels (a hormone that regulates fat storage) and muscle glycogen
Telekinesis, I could have gotten to those particular pieces of advice quicker if you would stop trying to shout me down without adding anything to the conversation.
Restricting carbohydrates is a valid strategy for the sedentary overweight and obese who can't just jump off their couch and turn into Michael Phelps. If this guy is having trouble passing the physical minimums to be a cop, he qualifies as someone who probably isn't very active. No offense OP.
The problem is actually both. Even if an overweight/obese sedentary person starts becoming more active, they should be changing their food intake as well. Food intake is much more important to weight loss than exercise, in fact, many studies recently have shown that steady-state cardio is a neutral weight-loss activity in practice because people's bodies signal them to eat more to make up for the extra calories burned.
Are you serious?
Just repeating "calorie deficit is the only thing that matters", in addition to not even being true, is not helpful in practice. Human beings are not mechanical furnaces, our weight loss is shaped by a billion different processes within our body that regulate our food consumption as well as fat storage.
The studies I've seen controlled against typical macronutrient ratios as well, and low-carb diets outperformed them in the insulin resistant crowd as well.
You do know that macronutrient ratios fall under the large tent of "Diet", right?
I totally disagree. Nutrition education is awful in this country and a lot of people have a very incomplete view of both what is healthy and what is a reasonable portion size. Most people vastly underestimate how many calories they are taking in until they start tracking their intake exactly.
Agreed, but as magick said most people get way more carbs than they need. The more one is active and exercises, the more important carbohydrates become. It's not hard to figure out that most people who are asking for weight loss advice fall in the "less active" category.
In addition, simple carbohydrates are one of the easiest macronutrients to gorge on, since simple/sugary carbs have a very low satiety factor. Cutting them out makes it harder to overconsume, since fat and protein consumed without sugar are very satiating.
Finally, low-carb does not imply no-carb. You can go no-carb, but many "low carb" diets just mean "lower than what the average person consumes". The average person consumes around 60% carbs, many low-carb strategies aim for 20-25% carbs.
Studies have shown that for people who have developed insulin resistance (common in the overweight and sedentary crowd), a low-carb diet has more effect on weight loss than a low-fat diet, and that's controlling for calorie intake. I can link studies if you are interested.
It has nothing to do with 5 cards vs. 4 cards. It has everything to do with the fact that the opponent chooses which cards you get from Gifts, and you choose on Fact or Fiction. If Gifts worked like FoF in that you choose the pile you take, it would be in the running for strongest blue card since Ancestral Recall. As it is, it's still very strong if you have graveyard interactions that work well with it, like Regrowth or Unburial Rites, or just a critical mass of things to tutor for that are similar enough that you don't care which one you get.
What GTC is missing that RTR had is slam-dunk obvious upgrades to existing cards like Dryad Militant, Rakdos Cackler, Supreme Verdict, etc.
----------------------------------
GTC also suffers from a lot of the mechanics and cards fitting normal limited well, but not Cube's hybrid limited/constructed environment.
Bloodrush is all about the combat step, which is not something Cube focuses on. A few of the cards could be strong enough for R/G aggro (the 4/4 for 4 with Bloodrush RG comes to mind) but we'll have to see.
Battalion is a parasitic mechanic that gets stronger the more you build around it, but the battalion cards are not strong enough on their own (to balance them for Constructed) which means cube isn't interested.
Simic is very "play more creatures" which is not Blue's domain in Cube, and in addition Cube has a lot of ways to punish players for overextending. If all the Simic cards had their blue mana symbols replaced with white mana symbols, I think a lot of the spoiled cards would be closer to playable, since white is all about "play more creatures".
Orzhov and Extort I think could be a source of hidden gems. Giving black and white aggro decks reach is potentially very awesome, and the mechanic is unlike anything we've seen before, so I feel our initial evaluations may be off.
Dimir and Cipher in theory fit Cube reasonably well, we just haven't seen many cards costed aggressively enough to make the cut.
----------------------------------
Compare to RtR's guilds and mechanics - you have:
Unleash/aggression which works on its own regardless of environment
Populate/creature generation which fits with W/G's strategy in Cube
Detain which isn't great for Cube but Azorious's control elements are Scavenge/graveyard interaction and meaty creatures which B/G is down with
Overload which works on its own regardless of environment
When you look at it from a wide lens it's not surprising GTC has been underwhelming for Cube.
Bingo.
I agree with most of what you are saying, but 70% protein is extremely high and really overkill for pretty much anyone. There's little need to go beyond 30% protein, at a 2000 calorie diet 30% protein is 150g of protein, which is more than enough even for a beginning lifter.
Annoying for the opponent, you mean! I'd love to rip my best spells while my opponent is bricking (assuming a control or midrange matchup, we've already established this card is not what you want against aggro).
Oh my god, are you serious? Why do you insist on saying that I get my information from late-night infomercials and mcdonalds.com? Are you really not aware of the benefits of a carb-restricted diet on lipids and blood sugar? Are you really not aware of the research that has shown restricting carbohydrates can be very effective in controlling weight in those with increased insulin resistance (which is certainly a ton of people in this sedentary society)?
If you weren't so condescending and dismissive with your replies, I might be nice enough to link you some studies, but as it is you'll have to live with the magic of your supposed expertise.
Really depends on how much he's exercising. With exercise a 500 calorie consumption deficit is solid, without exercise a 1000 calorie deficit is totally fine, that's ~2lbs/week over the long term. He's definitely eating too little as it is, though.
OP, keep in mind, the body is very complex and finicky when it comes to the regulation of body weight. Don't get discouraged if you step on the scale and you haven't lost any weight in a week, or even if you've put on a few pounds. Water weight, gaining muscle (from resistance exercise if you're doing it) and a billion other factors can mess with that number on the scale. The long-term trend of your fat loss is what's important.
When most people say weight loss they actually mean fat loss. If we were talking about cutting weight for a wrestling meet or bodybuilding competition, that's the only time water weight really should come into the discussion, but that's clearly not the case here.
If your evolve creature is your largest creature, and has power greater than toughness, then it does trigger.
I guess it depends on your cube, but U/B tempo is definitely something that is supported and drafted in my cube. Not to mention that it's easily splashable in B/x aggro, blue is already a great support color for aggro/tempo decks.
I'm not sure what you mean - you said you'd tweak it to be a 2/2 for 3, but now you're saying a 2/2 for 3 is bad?
Maybe a 2/2 for 3 is more powerful than a 4/4 for 4, but it definitely feels less mythic which is something they have to keep in mind while designing.
Yeah, cubing at a PTQ or whatever definitely makes sense to have no sideboards. With 8 players you can trust in a safe environment like someone's apartment though, disallowing sideboarding seems like overkill.
I think you're focusing on the life loss too much. Pairing this with land destruction or tempo support means your opponent might not even be able to utilize the extra cards they are drawing, while in the meantime you are drawing cheap disruption to maintain your board advantage. I do agree that it's on the expensive side for a tempo play, and it is horrendous against aggro (certainly true for many other cards in cube) but I think it has potential.
I don't think they can reduce the mana cost at all, even with a P/T reduction to 3/3. Even a 2/3 for 3 with this ability is dangerous to print alongside any type of tempo shell. The trigger is templated intelligently (on your upkeep instead of each upkeep). I'm interested to hear how you would tweak it.