Low Calorie Diet

Question:

told me about it.     I have no clue as to whether this works or not. My Dad says it does, and swears by it. There are some sites on the net about liver, or gall bladder flushing, but it’s something that regular Doctors don’t seem to be recommending. They seem to be wanting to remove the gall bladder. If it does work it’s probably more likely with one or several small stones than with one large one.  DH had one really huge one.  They took out his gallbladder and he has 4 tiny scars.

   I really can’t say one way or the other whether it is a good idea. I’ve never been one for believing such things as; soft laser therapy, magnetism, colon flushing, etc. It seems plausible to me though, that if the bile is dried out temporarily, then a flush could fix that. If the blockages are due to calcium deposits or disease, then this wouldn’t be a cure. It would be a shame if some gall bladders are being removed for no good reason. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — No Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes

Response:

There is a definite correlation between losing weight on a low-fat diet and gallstones.  I couldn’t find anything specific to low-carb, but here are a couple of sites that talk about very low calorie dieting and gallbladder problems.  Very low calorie diets are by definition low-fat. http://my.webmd.com/content/article/46/2731_1665 http://www.annecollins.com/diet-news/gallstones-low-cal-diet.htm    My Dad developed gallstones after eating low fat for 6 months. After dropping 20 lbs, he tried to resume "normal" eating. He found he couldn’t eat anything fatty without getting stomach cramps. His Doctor also recommended staying away from the fats.

—– Bev

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? there is more then one kind of gallstone – i had a single large one and had to avoid all fat (but thankfully not sesame oil which I could use in small quantities daily) I ate a lot (LOT) of turkey, white fish and vegetable & took my supplements  - my problem went away.  I was lucky  Dragon Mom been lurking for years; lost most of the weight I needed to lose but mainly low carb to control my blood sugar

Thanks. I am waiting to ge tthe resultf from the sono this morning.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks From all my readings, low carb diets do not lead to gallstones or gall bladder diseases. Each human body is a unique design.  Foods and lifestyles can have trends, but overall much of what happens to us is not because of these, but because of our own personal blueprint.  It’s natural for us to assume that anything that happens has a cause that can be changed, but this sometimes is not the case.  I have to watch carbs to shed each unwanted pound while friends of mine gorge themselves on high carb foods and stay skinny as can be.  Their bodies are obviously different from mine.  On the other hand, I’m as healthy as I can be, while people who live a cleaner lifestyle than me suffer medical ailments. Get yourself taken care of, and continue with the low-carb lifestyle.  If you are overweight, you are very likely to find benefits from it.

The dr said it is very common in women in thier 40s who are overweight an dpregnant. That was me 2 years ago – only younger (2 out of 3 I guess) So – she said while I was overweight my  gallbladder was big (enlarged? dunno ) and the stones could move about freely and didn’t bother me. Then I lost the weight quickly and when my gallbladder shrunk the stones became a problem. I do still want to lose weight but I guess I will just maintain for awhile. I am about 140lbs now and in a sz 6. Can’t complain too much about that but I wanted to have less body fat and more muscle by the swimsuit season ) I had a sono yesterday, I am going to get the results this morning – hopefully.

Response:

Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now.

    My Dad developed gallstones after eating low fat for 6 months. After dropping 20 lbs, he tried to resume "normal" eating. He found he couldn’t eat anything fatty without getting stomach cramps. His Doctor also recommended staying away from the fats. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked)

    I have read that cutting out all the fat can cause gallstone formation. Apparently the bile dries up and forms plugs. The article said that the best way to prevent gallstone formation was to eat some amount of fats regularly. I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC?

    My Dad said that he was scheduled to get his gall bladder removed, when a friend suggested he try a liver/gall bladder flush. It involves drinking juices for a day, and then some epsom salts, and then I believe a 1/2 cup of olive oil. You’ll have to look it up, because I’m just telling you what I remember hearing. The epsom salts are suppose to relax the smooth muscles and then of course the large amount of oil stimulates the gall bladder. He’s feeling fine now and still has his gall bladder. This seems to be something that was done long ago as a cure, but I’ve never heard of it before my Dad told me about it.     I have no clue as to whether this works or not. My Dad says it does, and swears by it. There are some sites on the net about liver, or gall bladder flushing, but it’s something that regular Doctors don’t seem to be recommending. They seem to be wanting to remove the gall bladder. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks

Response:

The dr said it is very common in women in thier 40s who are overweight an dpregnant. That was me 2 years ago – only younger (2 out of 3 I guess) So – she said while I was overweight my  gallbladder was big (enlarged? dunno ) and the stones could move about freely and didn’t bother me. Then I lost the weight quickly and when my gallbladder shrunk the stones became a problem. I do still want to lose weight but I guess I will just maintain for awhile. I am about 140lbs now and in a sz 6. Can’t complain too much about that but I wanted to have less body fat and more muscle by the swimsuit season ) I had a sono yesterday, I am going to get the results this morning – hopefully.

I hope the news you get is good!  Swimsuit season is nearly upon us!

Response:

:: Dad told me about it. I have no clue as to whether this works or :: not. My Dad says it does, and swears by it. There are some sites on :: the net about liver, or gall bladder flushing, but it’s something :: that regular Doctors don’t seem to be recommending. They seem to be :: wanting to remove the gall bladder. They can’t make many recommending a flush, whereas a removal of the gall bladders keeps the paychecks coming… Doesn’t seem as if one has much to lose by trying the flush, those I tend to be distrustful of such things…

Response:

told me about it.     I have no clue as to whether this works or not. My Dad says it does, and swears by it. There are some sites on the net about liver, or gall bladder flushing, but it’s something that regular Doctors don’t seem to be recommending. They seem to be wanting to remove the gall bladder.

If it does work it’s probably more likely with one or several small stones than with one large one.  DH had one really huge one.  They took out his gallbladder and he has 4 tiny scars. — No Husband Has Ever Been Shot While Doing The Dishes

Response:

:: Dad told me about it. I have no clue as to whether this works or :: not. My Dad says it does, and swears by it. There are some sites on :: the net about liver, or gall bladder flushing, but it’s something :: that regular Doctors don’t seem to be recommending. They seem to be :: wanting to remove the gall bladder. They can’t make many recommending a flush, whereas a removal of the gall bladders keeps the paychecks coming…

    They may not recommend it for numerous (unknown to me) reasons. Perhaps there is a risk of doing damage that would require emergency surgery, like a total blockage of a large stone being dislodged, and then getting stuck at a constriction of the duct. Doesn’t seem as if one has much to lose by trying the flush, those I tend to be distrustful of such things…

   I haven’t tried it, and I tend to think as you do, that most "natural" cures are bogus. It’s more likely that it does flush out blockages, but doesn’t cure the cause. Most of the websites say that the flush should be done once to 3 times a year for maintenance. So maybe the blockages are caused by disease, and the flush is just curing the symptoms. Or maybe blockages are not all that uncommon as age progresses. I don’t really know.    My Dad was quite uncomfortable for a good many months. He had asked me if I knew anything about gall stones, as his Doctor told him he possibly had some. From what I read, low fat diets can often be a trigger. It seems that when the bile is not used, it dries up and can cause a blockage.    One of the things I read, was in a forum, such as this one, where a woman claimed that a group of her and her friends went on low fat diets and lost a lot of weight. A couple of them also had to get their gall bladders removed. I believe there is a link. My Dad was also doing low fat. Nanner said she was doing low fat recently too, to drop the last few lbs. This discussion came up several months ago as well. Low fat was also suspected then.    There are different types of stones as well. Some are calcified, like a kidney stone, and may not be caused by inactivity of bile. I don’t think a liver flush is recommended for this type. Surgery is probably the best method for that.    An x-ray didn’t show anything, but the symptoms of pain on his right side after eating fatty foods, kept pointing to gall bladder problems. The Doc told him that he may have to get it removed, and in fact had scheduled him for surgery. It’s been 3 months since doing the flush, and he says he feels great. He has no problems eating hamburgers anymore.     There doesn’t appear to be any straight answers out there. It is just as controversial as lo-carb diets being the best way to eat. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks

LOW FAT is alleged to be a driver for gallstones …. http://edietsuk.co.uk/news/article.cfm/article_id,1919   Myth 4 Low carbohydrate diets cause gallbladder disease. There is now overwhelming scientific evidence that gallstones (responsible for more than 90% of gallbladder disease) are formed when fat intake is low. In a study that examined the effects of a diet that provided 27 grams of fat per day, gallstones developed in 13% of the participants. The reason for this is that the gallbladder will not contract unless fat is taken in. If it doesn’t contract, a condition called biliary stasis develops – and causes the bile salts to crystallise into stones. Our gallbladders need to be kept active to prevent stone formation. Everyone is different. It will take some time and experimentation to find out what works for you! When following a low carbohydrate plan, you will control the number of grams of carbohydrate you eat and focus on certain food groups rather than others. Not all carbohydrate found in food is created equal. Most carbohydrate is digested by your body and turned into glucose. However, some carbohydrate can be digested by your body but not turned into glucose, and some carbohydrate is not digestible at all (such as fibre, which is eventually excreted by your body). These last two types of carbohydrate don’t have an impact on your blood-sugar levels. Understanding the different behaviours of carbohydrate in your body can help you make smart food choices. This will, in turn, make sticking to your low carbohydrate plan easier and more enjoyable. — Keepsake gift for young girls. Unique and personal one-of-a-kind. Builds strong minds 12 ways. Guaranteed satisfaction – courteous money back – keep bonus gifts   http://www.alicebook.com

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks LOW FAT is alleged to be a driver for gallstones …. http://edietsuk.co.uk/news/article.cfm/article_id,1919  Myth 4 Low carbohydrate diets cause gallbladder disease. There is now overwhelming scientific evidence that gallstones (responsible for more than 90% of gallbladder disease) are formed when fat intake is low. In a study that examined the effects of a diet that provided 27 grams of fat per day, gallstones developed in 13% of the participants. The reason for this is that the gallbladder will not contract unless fat is taken in. If it doesn’t contract, a condition called biliary stasis develops – and causes the bile salts to crystallise into stones. Our gallbladders need to be kept active to prevent stone formation. Everyone is different. It will take some time and experimentation to find out what works for you! When following a low carbohydrate plan, you will control the number of grams of carbohydrate you eat and focus on certain food groups rather than others. Not all carbohydrate found in food is created equal. Most carbohydrate is digested by your body and turned into glucose. However, some carbohydrate can be digested by your body but not turned into glucose, and some carbohydrate is not digestible at all (such as fibre, which is eventually excreted by your body). These last two types of carbohydrate don’t have an impact on your blood-sugar levels. Understanding the different behaviours of carbohydrate in your body can help you make smart food choices. This will, in turn, make sticking to your low carbohydrate plan easier and more enjoyable. — Keepsake gift for young girls. Unique and personal one-of-a-kind. Builds strong minds 12 ways. Guaranteed satisfaction – courteous money back – keep bonus gifts  http://www.alicebook.com

yes, I saw that but it was the only 1 thing about low-fat causing it. The other 99% of things I read were the opposite – did you see other stuff suppoting the lowfat=bad?

Response:

Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks

From all my readings, low carb diets do not lead to gallstones or gall bladder diseases. Each human body is a unique design.  Foods and lifestyles can have trends, but overall much of what happens to us is not because of these, but because of our own personal blueprint.  It’s natural for us to assume that anything that happens has a cause that can be changed, but this sometimes is not the case.  I have to watch carbs to shed each unwanted pound while friends of mine gorge themselves on high carb foods and stay skinny as can be.  Their bodies are obviously different from mine.  On the other hand, I’m as healthy as I can be, while people who live a cleaner lifestyle than me suffer medical ailments. Get yourself taken care of, and continue with the low-carb lifestyle.  If you are overweight, you are very likely to find benefits from it.

Response:

Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now.

I haven’t had any gallbladder problems since I had mine removed in 1983.  I do still have the stones – I keep them in my jewelry chest. Fat doesn’t cause the formation of stones, but the absence of it does. Mine were caused from being on Optifast (which also caused a kidney stone).  However, once you have stones, eating fat can set off an attack.  Actually, eating anything can do the trick if you have a blockage.  My last meal before the "fatal" attack was dry toast a bit of rice pudding.  Then, I keeled over at the Westwood Playhouse during "Little Shop of Horrors," and wound up spending the rest of the evening in the UCLA Medical Center’s emergency room. I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC?

Never read a study about that, but I’ve read a lot about extreme low fat eating and the formation of stones – not to mention having every internist I’ve ever seen saying the same thing. Best to get yours taken care of.  At least these days you don’t wind up with an 8-inch scar, like I have. Myra

Response:

Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC?

there is more then one kind of gallstone – i had a single large one and had to avoid all fat (but thankfully not sesame oil which I could use in small quantities daily) I ate a lot (LOT) of turkey, white fish and vegetable & took my supplements  - my problem went away.  I was lucky   Dragon Mom been lurking for years; lost most of the weight I needed to lose but mainly low carb to control my blood sugar

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I haven’t had any gallbladder problems since I had mine removed in 1983.  I do still have the stones – I keep them in my jewelry chest. Fat doesn’t cause the formation of stones, but the absence of it does. Mine were caused from being on Optifast (which also caused a kidney stone).  However, once you have stones, eating fat can set off an attack.  Actually, eating anything can do the trick if you have a blockage.  My last meal before the "fatal" attack was dry toast a bit of rice pudding.  Then, I keeled over at the Westwood Playhouse during "Little Shop of Horrors," and wound up spending the rest of the evening in the UCLA Medical Center’s emergency room. I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Never read a study about that, but I’ve read a lot about extreme low fat eating and the formation of stones – not to mention having every internist I’ve ever seen saying the same thing. Best to get yours taken care of.  At least these days you don’t wind up with an 8-inch scar, like I have. Myra

Well, I still have to wait about 20 minutes before i can call the dr and start bugging them for results. I can see why I am reading conflicting things about LF & LC. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Response:

Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks

Response:

You might as well kill yourself. — Most people are dumb as bricks; some people are dumber than that.  – MFW

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Howdy – I won’t know anything till tomorrow morning but I just had a sonogram to find out if I have gallstones. Anyone ever have gallbladder prolems? Everyone is telling me to stay away from eating fat and red meat now. I mainly eat lean meat like chicken breast but I do eat red meat for dinner about 1x a week sometimes 2. I also eat alot of fat in my diet (which I started to limit recently to help lose more weight – it worked) I read that gallstones are made of cholesterol, does anyone know of any studies, links or info about gallbladder problems & LC? Thanks

Response:

Question:

NWCR Fast Facts: Successful weight losers report making substantial changes in eating and exercise habits to lose weight and maintain their losses. The average registrant has lost approximately 60 pounds and has maintained that loss for roughly 5 years. Two-thirds of these successful weight losers were overweight as children and 60% report a family history of obesity. Approximately 50% of participants lost weight on their own without any type of formal program or help. Walking is the most frequently cited physical activity performed by NWCR members.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – NWCR Fast Facts: Successful weight losers report making substantial changes in eating and exercise habits to lose weight and maintain their losses. The average registrant has lost approximately 60 pounds and has maintained that loss for roughly 5 years. Two-thirds of these successful weight losers were overweight as children and 60% report a family history of obesity. Approximately 50% of participants lost weight on their own without any type of formal program or help. Walking is the most frequently cited physical activity performed by NWCR members.

FWIW, the NWCR has identified 4 behaviors that seem to be common to "successful losers": 1) They eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet 2) they monitor themselves by weighing in frequently 3) they are very physically active 4) they eat breakfast. See http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2002/102_fat.html for more. — GG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary

Response:

Successful weight losers report making substantial changes in eating and exercise habits to lose weight and maintain their losses. Heehee. That was all the information I need. Making "substantial changes" in order to lose weight.

The  co-morbities of morbid obesity can result in "substantial changes" too.  How’s your diabetes today? It’s really too bad for your wife that you enabled her gluttony.  Gastric bypass surgery is for those weak of will and character.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – NWCR Fast Facts: Successful weight losers report making substantial changes in eating and exercise habits to lose weight and maintain their losses. The average registrant has lost approximately 60 pounds and has maintained that loss for roughly 5 years. Two-thirds of these successful weight losers were overweight as children and 60% report a family history of obesity. Approximately 50% of participants lost weight on their own without any type of formal program or help. Walking is the most frequently cited physical activity performed by NWCR members. I’ve seen the results of walking on weight first hand.  Several years ago I had a break in employment in my chosen career type of work.  As a temporary measure I took a job as a mail carrier.  I was carrying mail in the older part of town where the houses still had their mailboxes on the front porch and as a slot in the front door.  Nearly all the houses had a set of steps to reach the front porch.  Obviously this was not a "ride by in your jeep"  type route. Extensive walking was required.   Within a few months my waist line went from 40in to 34in with an according weight loss.  No doubt some fat was also replaced by muscle In approx one year an opening in my regular career field came open and I left the post office and went back to my desk.  In due course my waist line went back to 40in.  But it left no doubts in my mind that an appreciative amount of exercise would reduce the waist line and weight along with it. Get ENOUGH exercise and the weight comes off.  I did not reduce the amount I was eating during this period. Burn enough calories and one can still eat the creme puffs. Karl Nolan

If Lady Veteran were to indulge in this level of physical activity she would soon weigh in at 135lbs.  Unfortunately, she would still be ugly and ill-tempered. Jason

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – NWCR Fast Facts: Successful weight losers report making substantial changes in eating and exercise habits to lose weight and maintain their losses. The average registrant has lost approximately 60 pounds and has maintained that loss for roughly 5 years. Two-thirds of these successful weight losers were overweight as children and 60% report a family history of obesity. Approximately 50% of participants lost weight on their own without any type of formal program or help. Walking is the most frequently cited physical activity performed by NWCR members. I’ve seen the results of walking on weight first hand.  Several years ago I had a break in employment in my chosen career type of work.  As a temporary measure I took a job as a mail carrier.  I was carrying mail in the older part of town where the houses still had their mailboxes on the front porch and as a slot in the front door.  Nearly all the houses had a set of steps to reach the front porch.  Obviously this was not a "ride by in your jeep"  type route. Extensive walking was required.   Within a few months my waist line went from 40in to 34in with an according weight loss.  No doubt some fat was also replaced by muscle In approx one year an opening in my regular career field came open and I left the post office and went back to my desk.  In due course my waist line went back to 40in.  But it left no doubts in my mind that an appreciative amount of exercise would reduce the waist line and weight along with it. Get ENOUGH exercise and the weight comes off.  I did not reduce the amount I was eating during this period. Burn enough calories and one can still eat the creme puffs. Karl Nolan If Lady Veteran were to indulge in this level of physical activity she would soon weigh in at 135lbs.  Unfortunately, she would still be ugly and ill-tempered. Jason

A statement of fact. Jan

Response:

Question:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight?

First try now. 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

None. 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

0-8 lb to finish current weightloss. 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

45 lb since 11/2003. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Yes. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

No grains, no sugars, unlimited veggies, reasonable amount of rest. Mirek

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your   weight?

None. 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

None. 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

3 lbs.  ;-) 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

132 lbs. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Maybe more so as you approach your goal weight.   Moderating fat intake is the easiest way to moderate calorie intake.  I don’t count calories by any means but I have a very good idea of how much I can eat every day. That said, I was definitely losing weight while in ketosis on a fairly high calorie diet for a couple of years.  I stayed on induction for quite a while.  I have also been losing relatively slowly, 3-4 lbs. a month, but that’s fine with me. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

LC is the ticket for me because of issues with wheat and sugar.   Since I never bought the ‘all you can eat’ thing with Atkins that a lot of people fall for if they haven’t read the book, I’ve never thought that the need for moderation (aka not overeating) was any big surprise. Besides, with my upbringing, the idea of eating a lot more calories than the body is actually going to use, and, you should pardon the expression, pissing them away, is wasteful of God’s bounty.  Wish I’d come to this clever insight before the pounds started piling on. Dan 325/193/190 Atkins since 1/1/02 (yeah, it was a New Year’s Resolution) Besetting sins: good beer, German bread, and Krispy Kremes

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your   weight?

Maybe once, but it would have been a long time ago. 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Low-cal, low-fat; Weight Watchers 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

None. I’m on maintenance 4. How much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

Probably close to 100 lbs. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Yes. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Calorie-counting moderate-carb.

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your   weight?

dieted – twice lost and regained all or most – zero lost and kept off – once 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

low-calorie and low-carb 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

zero 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

20 lbs. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

no. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for

you? the one that has actually succeeded in the real world – low-carb TC

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your  weight?

None. I gained a lot of weight as a result of an endocrine disorder and I was unable to lose any of it until I went on medication. Once I went on medication and started losing the weight, I also started low-carbing. 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Low-fat. VERY low-fat. 80% carb, 10% protein, 10% fat. Never lost any weight. 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

I could stand to lose 5 pounds, but I am at an acceptable BF% (22%) 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

Don’t know. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Not sure. I maintain on 2,000+ calories a day so it really isn’t an issue. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Paleo low-carb seems to be the most healthful diet for ME. Robyn

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your  weight? 3x 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Atkin’s, sugar busters. 3. How much weight do you want to lose now? 45+ lbs. 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

70~ish lbs. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

yes 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Modified low carb — Lurker Miracle of medicine. http://www.jamesrobert.us

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your   weight?

Once 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Only one. 2PDiet 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

3 pounds tops 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

40 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

No 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

The Simple Two Pound Diet

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight? twice 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

low-fat, Jenny Craig 3. How much weight do you want to lose now? 100-110 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime? 41lbs 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count? I dont know.. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Atkins Glitter Girl

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight? 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie) 3. How much weight do you want to lose now? 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime? 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count? 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

(1) I have dieted twice.  First, back in the 80s, when I started gaining weight.  I went on a low-fat diet and exercized like crazy.  My staples were beans, rice, and spinach, and I rode a bicycle everwhere.  I kept gaining weight, and gave up. (2) The aforementioned low-fat, which definitely didn’t work.  Twenty years later I learned about the Atkins diet, and tried it. (3) I have lost about 40 pounds, and am at the weight now I was at when I first started dieting.  I would like to lose another fifteen pounds, and I know these will be the hardest.  It will put me back to my high-school weight. (4) I have lost 40 pounds in the last 8 months on Atkins.  I have never been able to lose weight before. (5) Calories count, although that’s a simple answer to a complex question. The best way I can think of to describe it, as I see it, is that although more calories mean more food energy to be either burned or stored, it does appear that people who have a diet lower in carbs spend more calories burning the food they eat.  That is under the Atkins "metabolic advantage". I don’t know why that is, but apparently it’s true. (6) Low carb dieting is the only one that has allowed me to reverse my weight gain.  I’m not trying to push it, but I will be honest.  Since I started low-carbing via Atkins last April, I have lost 40 pounds, have a lot more energy, and have been told I look ten years younger. Although I think the human body is more complex than any of us realize, I think there are some fundamentals.  The human body is a carb-burning machine.  If you eat more than your body needs, the excess is stored as fat. If you eat less, your body turns to that fat. (7) Okay, I know there was no (7).  You should have asked what role exercise plays in a diet.  The answer is, plenty.  It’s not just for weight control, it’s for energy, and that amounts to quality of life.  And that’s what we’re wanting to achieve, right?

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight?

Once 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

low carb, low fat 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

50 but I’d settle for 30 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

yes 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

low carb

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight?

Twice, at least. 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Low fat, low cal(1000 cals a day), portion control, WW. 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

Starting out, 60+ pounds.  I am 10-15 pounds to my goal now. 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

Oh, gawd, at least 200.  In my life I have been 145-256 and everywhere in between. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Yes.  If I were to get down to 145, I am sure if I would continually eat over 1600 cals a day, I would have a hard time maintaining, unless I implemented a serious exercise regime.  Now, without consciously counting calories, I average 1400 cals a day (I log everything in fitday, so that is how I know) 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

LC, because I don’t have that constant *need* to eat like I did doing LF or just not dieting at all. — Lisa 208/159.5/145-150 High weight in 2004: 228 Low-carb since June 2004

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your weight?

Once, when I was a stupid teenager 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Low everything! 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

7 Kg left 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

No idea. 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

I was a Physics major, I’m a firm believer in the laws of thermodynamics. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

No diet. It has to be a WOE that I can continue with for the rest of my life. I quite like the Polymeal idea currently on alt.support.diabetes (I think!), which does good things for cardiovascular risk, as well as being all my favourite foods. Today I tried to make my usual lunch, and knew that it’s a valid WOE when my teenage daughter nicked everything off my plate, because it tasted so good : ) Nicky. — HbA1c 10.5/6.4/<6  Weight 95/79/72 1g Metformin, 75ug Thyroxine T2 DX 05/2004

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your   weight? 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie) 3. How much weight do you want to lose now? 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime? 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count? 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Response:

1. How many times have you dieted, lost and regained all or most of your  weight?

At least 4 times. Once when I was a teenager, once when I started grad school, once about 20 years ago, once about 5 years ago… 2. Which diets have you tried before? (Atkins, other low-carb, Weight Watchers, low-fat, low-calorie)

Weight Watchers, Atkins, low-fat, low-calorie, low-glycemic-index… 3. How much weight do you want to lose now?

In my dreams: 113 lb. What I would settle for: 70 lb. 4. Do much total weight have you lost on diets in your lifetime?

Just counting my major diets, about 350 lb. If I added in all my diet false starts where I lost maybe 10 lb and then went off my diet – probably another 200 lb or more! 5. Do you believe that regardless of your diet that calories count?

Yes. 6. Which diet do you think has the best chances of succeeding for you?

Low calorie using low carb to help control appetite enough to make low calorie work… With exercise thrown in… doug

Response:

Question:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ||| In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing ||| number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets ||| contribute to the reduction in average daily energy ||| expenditure that favors the development of obesity. ||| ||| Although physical activity and exercise are factors in ||| successful weight reduction programs, the contribution ||| of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, ||| approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize ||| 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is ||| variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted ||| by researches themselves, only a small reduction ||| (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all. || || Dietary modifications are clearly a required component for || successful weight loss. But, so is physical activity for most || people.  The National Weight Control Registry ( || http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm ) has studied || successful "losers" – their database contains information on the || habits of more than 3000 Americans who have, on average, lost 60 lbs || and kept it off 6 years. || || Based on their studies, they have identified four behaviors common to || successful weight loss.  Specifically: || || 1) They eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet || That’s probably due to their bias, though.

I signed up for the Registry. — Bob in CT

Response:

||| In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing ||| number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets ||| contribute to the reduction in average daily energy ||| expenditure that favors the development of obesity. ||| ||| Although physical activity and exercise are factors in ||| successful weight reduction programs, the contribution ||| of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, ||| approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize ||| 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is ||| variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted ||| by researches themselves, only a small reduction ||| (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all. || || Dietary modifications are clearly a required component for || successful weight loss. But, so is physical activity for most || people.  The National Weight Control Registry ( || http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm ) has studied || successful "losers" – their database contains information on the || habits of more than 3000 Americans who have, on average, lost 60 lbs || and kept it off 6 years. || || Based on their studies, they have identified four behaviors common to || successful weight loss.  Specifically: || || 1) They eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet || That’s probably due to their bias, though. || 2) they monitor themselves by weighing in frequently || || 3) they are very physically active || || 4) and they eat breakfast. || || See http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2002/102_fat.html || || So, while exercise may not be required for weight loss, it is || clearly an important behavior to adopt if one wishes to be || successful with weight loss and maintenance over longer time frames. || || — || GG || http://www.WeightWare.com || Your Weight and Health Diary || ||| Furthermore, most studies show that weight loss induced ||| by exercise alone is inferior to that achieved by diet ||| alone. However, exercise is probably independently ||| important to the well-being of overweight and ||| obese individuals because physical activity increases maximal ||| oxygen uptake and thus cardiorespiratory fitness. ||| ||| Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is ||| facilitated by regular exercise. Unfortunately, the unrealistic ||| expectations of weight loss from exercise regimens ||| that are promoted by many commercial enterprises ||| may lead to disappointment and discontinuation of exercise. ||| ||| Development of a consistently achievable exercise ||| program for each overweight patient is essential. Although ||| it is difficult, even the most obese patients may ||| be able to participate in some form of appropriately ||| designed physical activity. To point, exercise is always ||| preferential but due to the fact that regular exercise may be both ||| difficult, expensive and time consuming, most Americans achieve ||| weight loss/control without it. ||| ||| Let’s not forget that the greatest value of aerobic (O2 dependent) ||| exercise is for the health of the cardiorespiratory system. ||| Anaerobic strength training enhances functionality of movement (if ||| properly designed) especially as a person gets older and ||| creates/keeps certain abilities that will be useful in remaining ||| self-determining and maintaining.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets contribute to the reduction in average daily energy expenditure that favors the development of obesity. Although physical activity and exercise are factors in successful weight reduction programs, the contribution of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted by researches themselves, only a small reduction (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all. Dietary modifications are clearly a required component for successful   weight loss. But, so is physical activity for most people.  The National Weight Control Registry ( http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm   ) has studied successful "losers" – their database contains information on   the habits of more than 3000 Americans who have, on average, lost 60 lbs and kept it off 6 years. Based on their studies, they have identified four behaviors common to successful weight loss.  Specifically: 1) They eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet

Actually, the Registry is set up so that you can’t answer the questions   and be on low carb.  In otherwords, they assume you’re on a low fat diet. 2) they monitor themselves by weighing in frequently 3) they are very physically active 4) and they eat breakfast. See http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2002/102_fat.html So, while exercise may not be required for weight loss, it is clearly an important behavior to adopt if one wishes to be successful with weight   loss and maintenance over longer time frames.

– Bob in CT

Response:

I have known several people who have used walking 10 to 15 miles per day to reduce weight and improve health.

So do I. It’s not required. According to your numbers above, 40 mile of walking metabolizes 1 Kg of fat or 2.2 Lbs of fat. So 10 miles of walking would metabolize about 0.5   Lbs of fat and walking 15 miles per day would metabolize about o.75 ( 3/4 Lb ) lb per day of fat. Metabolizing half a pound PER DAY of fat seems like a grand thing, and it would take about 2 to 3 hours of walking exercise to accomplish. True, that much walking is not likely to be undertaken by every Tom, Dick or Harry or every Theresa, Diana or Heather. But, for the few who have done it, it works.

Works, yes, necessary, no, for Exercise And Weight Control/Maintenance Most people have trouble losing weight no matter how they try it, including your favorite diet program. I know several who cannot lose on "low carb", according to their own testimony.

They lose, they regain, the vast majority in just 6 months. Those who can’t walk 10 or 15 miles per day will have slower weight reduction progress than those who can.

How so? Depends on what they do instead of the walk. Like eat 2 pounds per day or less every day.

Response:

Those who can’t walk 10 or 15 miles per day will have slower weight reduction progress than those who can. JIm Probabaly most people would look at that adistance and think "no way!"…..but if you just get out there and push yourself a bit you can quite easily work up to something like that.

Yes, but you would need to have a lot of free time. Few do. Personally, I am not interested in spending this amount of time on this activity since it is paralleled with increased injury. YMMV. Literally.

Response:

I have known several people who have used walking 10 to 15 miles per day to reduce weight and improve health.

That’s a lot of time spent walking each day. At 4mph, it’d take appx. 2h:30m to 3h:45m. I could see that distance once a week, but not a whole lot more than that. According to your numbers above, 40 mile of walking metabolizes 1 Kg of fat or 2.2 Lbs of fat. So 10 miles of walking would metabolize about 0.5   Lbs of fat and walking 15 miles per day would metabolize about o.75 ( 3/4 Lb ) lb per day of fat.

Unless I’m misreading here or other sources in the past, I think MU’s figures are a little off – like double. The comments I’ve run across in the past all seem to quote walking at 4mph to burn about 100 cals/mile (depending on a person’s weight). So it’d take about 35 miles per pound. Ah, here’s a link to a calc for different exercises: <http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/Calories.html 10 miles would equal appx. 1000 cals 15 miles would equal appx. 1500 cals Also, keep in mind this is for a 4mph pace. Go slower and you’ll burn less. — "Sure we’ll have fascism in America, but it’ll come disguised as 100% Americanism."   —  Huey P. Long

Response:

|| ||| I have known several people who have used walking 10 to 15 miles ||| per day to reduce weight and improve health. || || That’s a lot of time spent walking each day. At 4mph, it’d take appx. || 2h:30m to 3h:45m. I could see that distance once a week, but not a || whole lot more than that. || ||| According to your numbers above, 40 mile of walking metabolizes 1 ||| Kg of fat or 2.2 Lbs of fat. So 10 miles of walking would |||   metabolize about 0.5 Lbs of fat and walking 15 miles per day ||| would metabolize about o.75 ( 3/4 Lb ) lb per day of fat. || || Unless I’m misreading here or other sources in the past, I think MU’s || figures are a little off – like double. The comments I’ve run across || in the past all seem to quote walking at 4mph to burn about 100 || cals/mile (depending on a person’s weight). So it’d take about 35 || miles per pound. || || Ah, here’s a link to a calc for different exercises: || <http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/Calories.html || || 10 miles would equal appx. 1000 cals || 15 miles would equal appx. 1500 cals || || Also, keep in mind this is for a 4mph pace. Go slower and you’ll burn || less. Weigh more and you’ll burn more.

Response:

Weigh more and you’ll burn more.

Right, but to expend the energy equivalent of 7700 cals (1kg or 2.2 lbs at appx. 3500 cals/lb of fat) over 40 miles at 4mph would require one to weigh a tad over 288 lbs. Last time I visited Luna’s website she didn’t appear to weigh anywhere near 288 lbs. Also consider that all of those calories are not going to originate from fat stores. — "Sure we’ll have fascism in America, but it’ll come disguised as 100% Americanism."   —  Huey P. Long

Response:

|| ||| Weigh more and you’ll burn more. || || Right, but to expend the energy equivalent of 7700 cals (1kg or 2.2 || lbs at appx. 3500 cals/lb of fat) over 40 miles at 4mph would || require one to weigh a tad over 288 lbs. Last time I visited Luna’s || website she didn’t appear to weigh anywhere near 288 lbs. Plenty of people here start out there or even higher! || || Also consider that all of those calories are not going to originate || from fat stores. || Yeah, but burned calories won’t end up on your butt.

Response:

||| Weigh more and you’ll burn more. || || Right, but to expend the energy equivalent of 7700 cals (1kg or 2.2 || lbs at appx. 3500 cals/lb of fat) over 40 miles at 4mph would || require one to weigh a tad over 288 lbs. Last time I visited Luna’s || website she didn’t appear to weigh anywhere near 288 lbs. Plenty of people here start out there or even higher! || || Also consider that all of those calories are not going to originate || from fat stores. || Yeah, but burned calories won’t end up on your butt.

Both very true. — "Sure we’ll have fascism in America, but it’ll come disguised as 100% Americanism."   —  Huey P. Long

Response:

Unless I’m misreading here or other sources in the past, I think MU’s figures are a little off – like double. The comments I’ve run across in the past all seem to quote walking at 4mph to burn about 100 cals/mile (depending on a person’s weight). So it’d take about 35 miles per pound.

Weight (mass actually) is a very significant factor since (average) force=ma and work can be computed as FxDistance. Work units are joules of energy expended hence the amount of joules expended is increased as mass increases. Not counting wind velocities, wind direction, surface tensions and rebound characteristics, ad infinitum. Ah, here’s a link to a calc for different exercises: <http://www.exrx.net/Calculators/Calories.html 10 miles would equal appx. 1000 cals 15 miles would equal appx. 1500 cals Also, keep in mind this is for a 4mph pace. Go slower and you’ll burn less.

Plagiarized below: Acceleration is one of those words for which we have a common meaning and a meaning that is specific to the field of physics.  Ask the average person on the street and they will define acceleration as "speeding up."  However, this is just a portion of the full meaning of acceleration as used in physics.  In physics, acceleration is defined as a change in velocity. Considering this definition closely, we remember that velocity is defined as speed in a given direction.  Therefore changing the velocity of an object means changing its speed (rate of motion), its direction of travel or both variables.  An object experiencing a change of speed or direction is said to be accelerating. Mathematically, we can express acceleration with the following formula: a = (vf – vo)/t a – acceleration vf – final velocity vo – original velocity t – time

Response:

In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets contribute to the reduction in average daily energy expenditure that favors the development of obesity. Although physical activity and exercise are factors in successful weight reduction programs, the contribution of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted by researches themselves, only a small reduction (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all.

Dietary modifications are clearly a required component for successful weight loss. But, so is physical activity for most people.  The National Weight Control Registry ( http://www.uchsc.edu/nutrition/WyattJortberg/nwcr.htm ) has studied successful "losers" – their database contains information on the habits of more than 3000 Americans who have, on average, lost 60 lbs and kept it off 6 years. Based on their studies, they have identified four behaviors common to successful weight loss.  Specifically: 1) They eat a low-calorie, low-fat diet 2) they monitor themselves by weighing in frequently 3) they are very physically active 4) and they eat breakfast. See http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2002/102_fat.html So, while exercise may not be required for weight loss, it is clearly an important behavior to adopt if one wishes to be successful with weight loss and maintenance over longer time frames. — GG http://www.WeightWare.com Your Weight and Health Diary – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Furthermore, most studies show that weight loss induced by exercise alone is inferior to that achieved by diet alone. However, exercise is probably independently important to the well-being of overweight and obese individuals because physical activity increases maximal oxygen uptake and thus cardiorespiratory fitness. Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is facilitated by regular exercise. Unfortunately, the unrealistic expectations of weight loss from exercise regimens that are promoted by many commercial enterprises may lead to disappointment and discontinuation of exercise. Development of a consistently achievable exercise program for each overweight patient is essential. Although it is difficult, even the most obese patients may be able to participate in some form of appropriately designed physical activity. To point, exercise is always preferential but due to the fact that regular exercise may be both difficult, expensive and time consuming, most Americans achieve weight loss/control without it. Let’s not forget that the greatest value of aerobic (O2 dependent) exercise is for the health of the cardiorespiratory system. Anaerobic strength training enhances functionality of movement (if properly designed) especially as a person gets older and creates/keeps certain abilities that will be useful in remaining self-determining and maintaining.

Response:

In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets contribute to the reduction in average daily energy expenditure that favors the development of obesity. Although physical activity and exercise are factors in successful weight reduction programs, the contribution of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted by researches themselves, only a small reduction (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all.

I have known several people who have used walking 10 to 15 miles per day to reduce weight and improve health. According to your numbers above, 40 mile of walking metabolizes 1 Kg of fat or 2.2 Lbs of fat. So 10 miles of walking would metabolize about 0.5   Lbs of fat and walking 15 miles per day would metabolize about o.75 ( 3/4 Lb ) lb per day of fat. Metabolizing half a pound PER DAY of fat seems like a grand thing, and it would take about 2 to 3 hours of walking exercise to accomplish. True, that much walking is not likely to be undertaken by every Tom, Dick or Harry or every Theresa, Diana or Heather. But, for the few who have done it, it works. Most people have trouble losing weight no matter how they try it, including your favorite diet program. I know several who cannot lose on "low carb", according to their own testimony. Those who can’t walk 10 or 15 miles per day will have slower weight reduction progress than those who can. JIm – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Furthermore, most studies show that weight loss induced by exercise alone is inferior to that achieved by diet alone. However, exercise is probably independently important to the well-being of overweight and obese individuals because physical activity increases maximal oxygen uptake and thus cardiorespiratory fitness. Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is facilitated by regular exercise. Unfortunately, the unrealistic expectations of weight loss from exercise regimens that are promoted by many commercial enterprises may lead to disappointment and discontinuation of exercise. Development of a consistently achievable exercise program for each overweight patient is essential. Although it is difficult, even the most obese patients may be able to participate in some form of appropriately designed physical activity. To point, exercise is always preferential but due to the fact that regular exercise may be both difficult, expensive and time consuming, most Americans achieve weight loss/control without it. Let’s not forget that the greatest value of aerobic (O2 dependent) exercise is for the health of the cardiorespiratory system. Anaerobic strength training enhances functionality of movement (if properly designed) especially as a person gets older and creates/keeps certain abilities that will be useful in remaining self-determining and maintaining.

– Keepsake gift for young girls. Unique and personal one-of-a-kind. Builds strong minds 12 ways. Guaranteed satisfaction – courteous money back – keep bonus gifts   http://www.alicebook.com

Response:

Those who can’t walk 10 or 15 miles per day will have slower weight reduction progress than those who can. JIm

Probabaly most people would look at that adistance and think "no way!"…..but if you just get out there and push yourself a bit you can quite easily work up to something like that.

Response:

I’m sure people _can_ lose weight and maintain it without exercise.  I just question your statement that _most_ sucessful people do it that way.  I believe that most sucessful losers/maintainers do it with a combination of diet and exercise.

Mu: Just not the case.

Luna: You keep saying this.  Is this your opinion, or a fact?  

Fact backed by my opinion and experience and observations and conversations with hundreds of trainers all over the world who have seen the same thing. Believe it, don’t believe it. It’s up to you.  Doing it with exercise alone, if the diet is that of a typical fat American (huge portions, convenience foods, lots of carbs and fat) would mean hours upon hours of vigorous exercise which most people don’t have the time or inclination for.  On the other hand, doing it with diet alone may require more willpower than the average person has, especially when it comes to maintenance.   If you reach equilibrium on a strict diet, and you get down to a healthy weight, it becomes even harder to pass up the occasional treat.  After all, a person may reason, I’m not fat anymore so I can eat this piece of cake or whatever.  Thus begins a slippery slope to regaining.  But, if they exercise regularly, it could easily be enough to offset the occasional treat without regaining.

Mu: No one exercises every day.

Luna: That may be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read.  I know plenty of people who do in fact exercise every day.  Oh, but not when they’re sick and running a fever.  Maybe that’s what you meant.

I meant what I said. No one exercises every day. Add injury, car broke down, out of town and a myriad of other things. No one exercises every day.  Yeah, a couple of days off a year is really going to put the weight back on.  

Not the point. And why do you keep crossposting this to the cardiology group?  Just to be a P.I.T.A.?

And why do you keep uncrossposting this to the cardiology group?  Just to be a P.I.T.A.?

Response:

In our modern, technology-driven age, an ever increasing number of labor-saving conveniences and gadgets contribute to the reduction in average daily energy expenditure that favors the development of obesity. Although physical activity and exercise are factors in successful weight reduction programs, the contribution of exercise to weight loss is modest at best. For example, approximately 40 miles of walking is required to metabolize 1 kg of fat. The effect of exercise on weight loss is variable, but most studies I have been shown, interpreted by researches themselves, only a small reduction (;2 kg)and some show no benefit at all. Furthermore, most studies show that weight loss induced by exercise alone is inferior to that achieved by diet alone. However, exercise is probably independently important to the well-being of overweight and obese individuals because physical activity increases maximal oxygen uptake and thus cardiorespiratory fitness. Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is facilitated by regular exercise. Unfortunately, the unrealistic expectations of weight loss from exercise regimens that are promoted by many commercial enterprises may lead to disappointment and discontinuation of exercise. Development of a consistently achievable exercise program for each overweight patient is essential. Although it is difficult, even the most obese patients may be able to participate in some form of appropriately designed physical activity. To point, exercise is always preferential but due to the fact that regular exercise may be both difficult, expensive and time consuming, most Americans achieve weight loss/control without it. Let’s not forget that the greatest value of aerobic (O2 dependent) exercise is for the health of the cardiorespiratory system. Anaerobic strength training enhances functionality of movement (if properly designed) especially as a person gets older and creates/keeps certain abilities that will be useful in remaining self-determining and maintaining.

Response:

Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is facilitated by regular exercise.

Which doesn’t really support your position that most people who sucessfully maintain weight loss do so without exercise. Unfortunately, the unrealistic expectations of weight loss from exercise regimens that are promoted by many commercial enterprises may lead to disappointment and discontinuation of exercise.

That is unfortunate, and true.  Penn and Teller had this great show on the Showtime cable network called "Bullshit."  Each episode dealt with a different aspect of society, and they did one about exercise. They spent a lot of time on home gyms and "devices" sold on infomercials.   Most of those before and after shots are bull.  It’s typical, for example, for companies to use a shot of a pregnant woman as a "before" and a shot of her after losing the pregnancy weight as her "after."   Just twenty minutes a day on our miracle machine and you will look like this guy!  Yeah, right.  They point out on the show that how "buff" you can get is only partly from how much exercise you do, and a whole lot based on genetics.   It’s a shame that these bullshit companies get people’s expectations so high, when the truth is that regular exercise has many benefits to the body, mind, and spirit, even if you don’t end up looking like the professional body builders in the commercials. I guess they wouldn’t sell as many machines if they said "Work your ass off and you will see slight improvements over time." — Michelle Levin http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Response:

Moreover, maintenance of weight loss is facilitated by regular exercise. Which doesn’t really support your position that most people who sucessfully maintain weight loss do so without exercise.

"facilitated" = make easy, assist forward, promote, expedite NOT required

Response:

 Penn and Teller had this great show on the Showtime cable network called "Bullshit."  Each episode dealt with a different aspect of society, and they did one about exercise. They spent a lot of time on home gyms and "devices" sold on infomercials.  

Saw it. Spot on. Most of those before and after shots are bull.  It’s typical, for example, for companies to use a shot of a pregnant woman as a "before" and a shot of her after losing the pregnancy weight as her "after."  

Lies? No, don’t say it. Just twenty minutes a day on our miracle machine and you will look like this guy!  Yeah, right.  They point out on the show that how "buff" you can get is only partly from how much exercise you do, and a whole lot based on genetics.  

Everyone improves; you did. It’s a shame that these bullshit companies get people’s expectations so high, when the truth is that regular exercise has many benefits to the body, mind, and spirit, even if you don’t end up looking like the professional body builders in the commercials. I guess they wouldn’t sell as many machines if they said "Work your ass off and you will see slight improvements over time."

Correct. A shame and a fraud.

Response:

Bone structures, yes. But this post to you is pointed to the rationale of exercise and weight loss/control as a "necessary" combination. I’m sure people _can_ lose weight and maintain it without exercise.  I just question your statement that _most_ sucessful people do it that way.  I believe that most sucessful losers/maintainers do it with a combination of diet and exercise. Just not the case.

You keep saying this.  Is this your opinion, or a fact?   – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  Doing it with exercise alone, if the diet is that of a typical fat American (huge portions, convenience foods, lots of carbs and fat) would mean hours upon hours of vigorous exercise which most people don’t have the time or inclination for.  On the other hand, doing it with diet alone may require more willpower than the average person has, especially when it comes to maintenance.   If you reach equilibrium on a strict diet, and you get down to a healthy weight, it becomes even harder to pass up the occasional treat.  After all, a person may reason, I’m not fat anymore so I can eat this piece of cake or whatever.  Thus begins a slippery slope to regaining.  But, if they exercise regularly, it could easily be enough to offset the occasional treat without regaining. Sit on the sofa for 30 minutes= 50 cals. Walk on the treadmill for 30 minutes at 4 mph = 200 cals. Do the math. How many treats are only 150 cals?

Um.  Plenty.  And did I ever say the hypothetical person had to eat a treat every day?  How about: a 300 calorie treat one day a week, and the treadmill three days a week?  And weightlifting 2 or 3 days a week? And yardwork once a week?  And housecleaning every day?  You can have a balance of exercising for a reasonable period of time instead of as a full-time job, and be able to enjoy some "fattening" foods in moderation, without regaining weight.  My hypothesis is that this strategy works because it is a more enjoyable way to live than either "exercise only" or "diet only." <sigh Ok I give up. It’s the same old problem. Eat too much, exercise it off. Doesn’t work.

If you can exercise it off, i.e. not regain weight, then it’s not eating too much.  Obviously. Pretty soon that "treat" = love of food gets eaten everyday.

Plenty of people eat every day without gaining weight. No one exercises every day.

That may be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read.  I know plenty of people who do in fact exercise every day.  Oh, but not when they’re sick and running a fever.  Maybe that’s what you meant.  Yeah, a couple of days off a year is really going to put the weight back on.   And why do you keep crossposting this to the cardiology group?  Just to be a P.I.T.A.? — Michelle Levin http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Response:

But, if they exercise regularly, it could easily be enough to offset the occasional treat without regaining.  You can have a balance of exercising for a reasonable period of time instead of as a full-time job, and be able to enjoy some "fattening" foods in moderation, without regaining weight.  My hypothesis is that this strategy works because it is a more enjoyable way to live than either "exercise only" or "diet only."

My hypothesis is that you want to have your cake and eat it too.

Response:

Bone structures, yes. But this post to you is pointed to the rationale of exercise and weight loss/control as a "necessary" combination. I’m sure people _can_ lose weight and maintain it without exercise.  I just question your statement that _most_ sucessful people do it that way.  I believe that most sucessful losers/maintainers do it with a combination of diet and exercise.

Just not the case.  Doing it with exercise alone, if the diet is that of a typical fat American (huge portions, convenience foods, lots of carbs and fat) would mean hours upon hours of vigorous exercise which most people don’t have the time or inclination for.  On the other hand, doing it with diet alone may require more willpower than the average person has, especially when it comes to maintenance.   If you reach equilibrium on a strict diet, and you get down to a healthy weight, it becomes even harder to pass up the occasional treat.  After all, a person may reason, I’m not fat anymore so I can eat this piece of cake or whatever.  Thus begins a slippery slope to regaining.  But, if they exercise regularly, it could easily be enough to offset the occasional treat without regaining.

Sit on the sofa for 30 minutes= 50 cals. Walk on the treadmill for 30 minutes at 4 mph = 200 cals. Do the math. How many treats are only 150 cals?  You can have a balance of exercising for a reasonable period of time instead of as a full-time job, and be able to enjoy some "fattening" foods in moderation, without regaining weight.  My hypothesis is that this strategy works because it is a more enjoyable way to live than either "exercise only" or "diet only."

<sigh Ok I give up. It’s the same old problem. Eat too much, exercise it off. Doesn’t work.  Pretty soon that "treat" = love of food gets eaten everyday. No one exercises every day.

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  Penn and Teller had this great show on the Showtime cable network called "Bullshit."  Each episode dealt with a different aspect of society, and they did one about exercise. They spent a lot of time on home gyms and "devices" sold on infomercials.   Saw it. Spot on. Most of those before and after shots are bull.  It’s typical, for example, for companies to use a shot of a pregnant woman as a "before" and a shot of her after losing the pregnancy weight as her "after."   Lies? No, don’t say it. Just twenty minutes a day on our miracle machine and you will look like this guy!  Yeah, right.  They point out on the show that how "buff" you can get is only partly from how much exercise you do, and a whole lot based on genetics.   Everyone improves; you did.

Sure.  I’m not going to look like a professional athelete from 20 minutes a day with a thighmaster though.  The thing about genetics is that it places a limit on what your body can look like, but you can’t find that limit without effort.  When I look at the women in my family, some are fat and some are thin, but we all have the same overall _shape_ of big hips, thighs, and butts compared to our waists.  So, I assume that even when I get to my ideal weight and body fat percentage, I still will be a pear shape.  I will never be a triangle.   It’s a shame that these bullshit companies get people’s expectations so high, when the truth is that regular exercise has many benefits to the body, mind, and spirit, even if you don’t end up looking like the professional body builders in the commercials. I guess they wouldn’t sell as many machines if they said "Work your ass off and you will see slight improvements over time." Correct. A shame and a fraud.

– Michelle Levin http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Response:

Everyone improves; you did. Sure.  I’m not going to look like a professional athelete from 20 minutes a day with a thighmaster though.

Tell me your not using that thing. Please. I was referring to Curves. The thing about genetics is that it places a limit on what your body can look like, but you can’t find that limit without effort.  When I look at the women in my family, some are fat and some are thin, but we all have the same overall _shape_ of big hips, thighs, and butts compared to our waists.  So, I assume that even when I get to my ideal weight and body fat percentage, I still will be a pear shape.  I will never be a triangle.  

Bone structures, yes. But this post to you is pointed to the rationale of exercise and weight loss/control as a "necessary" combination.

Response:

Everyone improves; you did. Sure.  I’m not going to look like a professional athelete from 20 minutes a day with a thighmaster though. Tell me your not using that thing. Please. I was referring to Curves.

I had a thighmaster when they first came out, lol.  Curves did contribute to my weight loss, I believe.  Going from doing no exercise to Curves 3 times a week was at least something.  And, they never promoted it as a way to look like a bodybuilder. The thing about genetics is that it places a limit on what your body can look like, but you can’t find that limit without effort.  When I look at the women in my family, some are fat and some are thin, but we all have the same overall _shape_ of big hips, thighs, and butts compared to our waists.  So, I assume that even when I get to my ideal weight and body fat percentage, I still will be a pear shape.  I will never be a triangle.   Bone structures, yes. But this post to you is pointed to the rationale of exercise and weight loss/control as a "necessary" combination.

I’m sure people _can_ lose weight and maintain it without exercise.  I just question your statement that _most_ sucessful people do it that way.  I believe that most sucessful losers/maintainers do it with a combination of diet and exercise.  Doing it with exercise alone, if the diet is that of a typical fat American (huge portions, convenience foods, lots of carbs and fat) would mean hours upon hours of vigorous exercise which most people don’t have the time or inclination for.  On the other hand, doing it with diet alone may require more willpower than the average person has, especially when it comes to maintenance.   If you reach equilibrium on a strict diet, and you get down to a healthy weight, it becomes even harder to pass up the occasional treat.  After all, a person may reason, I’m not fat anymore so I can eat this piece of cake or whatever.  Thus begins a slippery slope to regaining.  But, if they exercise regularly, it could easily be enough to offset the occasional treat without regaining.  You can have a balance of exercising for a reasonable period of time instead of as a full-time job, and be able to enjoy some "fattening" foods in moderation, without regaining weight.  My hypothesis is that this strategy works because it is a more enjoyable way to live than either "exercise only" or "diet only." — Michelle Levin http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick I have only 3 flaws.  My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.

Response:

Question:

Was Atkins Right After All? NEW YORK, Feb. 15, 2003 Is it just possible that Dr. Robert C. Atkins was right? That his high-fat, low-carb plan, ridiculed for 30 years as dangerous nonsense, actually is a good, safe way to lose weight? The dietary elite are not ready to change their collective mind, but a half-dozen or so new studies have taken an objective look at the presumed evils of Atkins, and the results have been little short of astonishing: During a few months on the Atkins diet, people lose about twice as much as on the standard low-fat, high-carbohydrate approach recommended by most health organizations. They do so without seeming to drive up their risk of heart disease. Rather than going kaflooey, their cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and ominous bloodstream inflammation generally improve, perhaps even more than on the standard diet. They appear to lose more weight even while actually consuming more calories than people on a so-called healthy diet. All of the experiments were short and small. None by itself would make a big stir. But taken together, they undermine much of what mainstream medicine has long assumed about the Atkins diet. "Some scientists are dismayed by the data and a little incredulous about it," says Gary Foster, who runs the weight-loss program at the University of Pennsylvania. "But the consistency of the results across studies is compelling in a way that makes us think we should investigate this further." Until now, the opinion of the medical world on this subject has been essentially unanimous: Any diet that emphasizes meat, eggs and cheese and discourages bread, rice and fruit is nutritional folly. The American Medical Association set that tone a year after the book, "Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution," came out in 1972. Its sarcastically worded critique dismissed the diet as "potentially dangerous." It called its scientific underpinning "naive" and "biochemically incorrect." And it scolded book publishers for promoting "bizarre concepts of nutrition and dieting." On the Atkins diet, up to two-thirds of calories may come from fat – more than double the usual recommendation – and that violates everything medical professionals believe about healthy eating. Carbohydrates are the foundation of a good diet, most say. Eating calorie-dense fat is what makes people fat, and eating saturated fat is what kills them. Despite this, Atkins’ books have sold 15 million copies, uncounted millions have tried the diet, and practically everybody has heard of someone who dropped a ton of weight on the Atkins plan. Finally, several research teams around the country have put Atkins to the test, driven largely by weariness at having nothing solid to tell patients and, in some cases, a desire to prove Atkins wrong. One study was even sponsored by the American Heart Association, long an Atkins skeptic. None has been published yet, but summaries have been given at medical conferences. "They all show pretty convincingly that people will lose more weight on an Atkins diet, and their cardiovascular risk factors, if anything, get better," says Dr. Kevin O’Brien, a University of Washington cardiologist involved with one of the studies. This is not the end of the story. The studies say nothing about how much people lose when they stay on Atkins more than a few months, whether they keep the weight off for good and whether their cholesterol rebounds when they stop losing weight. Nevertheless, three decades of dietary gospel are in doubt, and those questioning it include some of the most prominent names in obesity research. For instance, one of the new studies was conducted by Foster with Drs. Samuel Klein and James Hill, the current and past presidents of the North American Association for the Study of Obesity, the premier professional group. "I’m part of the obesity establishment," says Foster, who has published more than 50 scientific papers on the subject. "I’ve spent my life researching ways to treat obesity, and 100 percent of them have been low-fat and high-carb. Now I’m beginning to think, it isn’t as it has appeared." His Atkins study was intended to "show it doesn’t work," yet after three months, the overweight men and women had lost an average of 19 pounds, 10 more than people on the standard high-carb approach. The big surprise was cholesterol. The Atkins dieters’ overall profile changed for the better. Although their bad cholesterol went up seven points, their good cholesterol rose almost 12. (Changes in the high-carb dieters were less dramatic. Their bad cholesterol went down slightly while their good cholesterol remained unchanged.) The largest difference was in triglycerides. The Atkins dieters’ dropped 22 points. The low-carb dieters’ didn’t budge. "It was unexpected, to put it mildly," Foster said. "It made us think maybe there is something to this." Despite these data, the Atkins diet still gives many health professionals the willies. It encourages people to eat bacon, butter, prime rib and lots of other things loaded with saturated fat. And it lectures against such mainstay carbohydrates as grains, pasta and starchy vegetables, especially in the diet’s first cold-turkey stage; plenty of other healthy things, including many low-carb green vegetables and olive oil are allowed. "There are many principles in the Atkins diet that go against what we know," says Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, senior author of the heart association’s policy on high-protein diets. "It keeps people away from staples of the diet that we know are associated with less heart disease." Volumes of research suggest that people have the best chance of avoiding heart disease, high blood pressure and cancer if they eat a varied diet with plenty of fruits, vegetables and grains. "It’s scary if people leave out these very important food groups and just depend on high-fat, high-protein foods," says Wahida Karmally, nutrition director at Columbia University’s clinical research center. Furthermore, people on the Atkins plan may get a quarter of their daily calories from saturated fat, more than double the heart association’s recommendation. Animal experiments and studies of large groups of people long ago convinced many experts that too much saturated fat clogs the arteries and leads to heart attacks. Mainstream scientists wave off the Atkins camp’s answer to this that saturated fat is bad only if eaten with large amounts of carbohydrates. Otherwise, it’s harmlessly burned off. "When carbs are the primary fuel source, there are certain risks in excessive fat consumption," says Colette Heimowitz, the Atkins organization’s research director. "But in a controlled-carb setting, when fat is the primary fuel source, the rules change. Those risk factors do not show up." So how do the traditionalists explain the cholesterol improvement seen in the Atkins dieters? Weight loss. Slimming down reliably improves cholesterol levels, and they say its benefits probably overshadowed any damage done by all the unhealthy fat that people ate. Why people lose more weight on the diet is also not clear, although some researchers say they buy one of Atkins’ arguments: People stick with it because they are not constantly hungry. Fat and protein satisfy the appetite, the theory goes. But eating lots of carbohydrates raises insulin levels, lowers blood sugar, and eventually makes people ravenous. But another of Atkins’ ideas on the subject is far more contentious. He argues that people lose more weight on his plan even if they actually eat more calories. That’s a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, skeptics say. "A calorie is a calorie as far as weight reduction is concerned," says Dr. Michael Davidson, director of preventive cardiology at the Rush Heart Institute in Chicago. Or is it? Some of the new studies suggest otherwise. Dr. Stephen Sondike of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City put overweight teenagers on comparison diets for two months. The ones on Atkins lost twice as much as those on the low-fat diet. Yet they appeared to eat about 700 more calories a day than the others. Less dramatic but still startling results came from another study at the University of Cincinnati. Women on Atkins lost twice as much while eating the same number of calories as the lowfat dieters. "Surprised? Definitely," says Bonnie Brehm, a registered dietitian. "We really don’t know what the answer is." And the Atkins weight loss was not simply dehydration, as Atkins critics often contend, since the Cincinnati dieters also lost twice as much body fat. But even if the diet is reasonable for a few months of slimming down, what happens when people level off during the maintenance phase of the program? Does their cholesterol soar if they eat all that fat without losing weight? None of the research so far answers that. However, Atkins-sponsored studies by Jeff Volek, an exercise and nutrition specialist at the University of Connecticut, offers some hints. He put fit men on an Atkins regimen for six weeks with orders not to lose weight, and nothing bad seemed to happen. Their good and bad cholesterol went up proportionately, and their triglycerides fell. "I’d like to see more data," Volek said, "but ours provides evidence it doesn’t have a negative effect on your heart." But for now, even many of the researchers who did these studies are reluctant to recommend the Atkins diet. They know too little about its long-term effects. A large new study just under way could settle these doubts. This federally sponsored project will randomly put 360 overweight men and women on the Atkins plan or the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s standard high-carb, low-fat diet, then watch them in painstaking detail for at least two years. The study will try to answer three questions about Atkins, says Hill, who directs the University of Colorado’s Center for Human Nutrition. "Does it produce weight loss? Is it a safe weight loss? … read more »

Response:

The truth is it’s all in their paradigm, it’s the way they’ve learned it, it’s a fundamental part of their belief system, it’s just how they see the world. And to us, they just don’t see it!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I have a friend who has been under a doctors care for high cholesterol. His doctor told him that with the medication his cholesterol is fine, but if he wants to lower it more that he should go on the atkins diet.  His doctor also said that he can’t officially endorse it, but off the record it works. Was Atkins Right After All? NEW YORK, Feb. 15, 2003 Is it just possible that Dr. Robert C. Atkins was right? That his high-fat, low-carb plan, ridiculed for 30 years as dangerous nonsense, actually is a good, safe way to lose weight? The dietary elite are not ready to change their collective mind, but a half-dozen or so new studies have taken an objective look at the presumed evils of Atkins, and the results have been little short of astonishing: During a few months on the Atkins diet, people lose about twice as much as on the standard low-fat, high-carbohydrate approach recommended by most health organizations. They do so without seeming to drive up their risk of heart disease. Rather than going kaflooey, their cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and ominous bloodstream inflammation generally improve, perhaps even more than on the standard diet. They appear to lose more weight even while actually consuming more calories than people on a so-called healthy diet. All of the experiments were short and small. None by itself would make a big stir. But taken together, they undermine much of what mainstream medicine has long assumed about the Atkins diet. "Some scientists are dismayed by the data and a little incredulous about it," says Gary Foster, who runs the weight-loss program at the University of Pennsylvania. "But the consistency of the results across studies is compelling in a way that makes us think we should investigate this further." Until now, the opinion of the medical world on this subject has been essentially unanimous: Any diet that emphasizes meat, eggs and cheese and discourages bread, rice and fruit is nutritional folly. The American Medical Association set that tone a year after the book, "Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution," came out in 1972. Its sarcastically worded critique dismissed the diet as "potentially dangerous." It called its scientific underpinning "naive" and "biochemically incorrect." And it scolded book publishers for promoting "bizarre concepts of nutrition and dieting." On the Atkins diet, up to two-thirds of calories may come from fat – more than double the usual recommendation – and that violates everything medical professionals believe about healthy eating. Carbohydrates are the foundation of a good diet, most say. Eating calorie-dense fat is what makes people fat, and eating saturated fat is what kills them. Despite this, Atkins’ books have sold 15 million copies, uncounted millions have tried the diet, and practically everybody has heard of someone who dropped a ton of weight on the Atkins plan. Finally, several research teams around the country have put Atkins to the test, driven largely by weariness at having nothing solid to tell patients and, in some cases, a desire to prove Atkins wrong. One study was even sponsored by the American Heart Association, long an Atkins skeptic. None has been published yet, but summaries have been given at medical conferences. "They all show pretty convincingly that people will lose more weight on an Atkins diet, and their cardiovascular risk factors, if anything, get better," says Dr. Kevin O’Brien, a University of Washington cardiologist involved with one of the studies. This is not the end of the story. The studies say nothing about how much people lose when they stay on Atkins more than a few months, whether they keep the weight off for good and whether their cholesterol rebounds when they stop losing weight. Nevertheless, three decades of dietary gospel are in doubt, and those questioning it include some of the most prominent names in obesity research. For instance, one of the new studies was conducted by Foster with Drs. Samuel Klein and James Hill, the current and past presidents of the North American Association for the Study of Obesity, the premier professional group. "I’m part of the obesity establishment," says Foster, who has published more than 50 scientific papers on the subject. "I’ve spent my life researching ways to treat obesity, and 100 percent of them have been low-fat and high-carb. Now I’m beginning to think, it isn’t as it has appeared." His Atkins study was intended to "show it doesn’t work," yet after three months, the overweight men and women had lost an average of 19 pounds, 10 more than people on the standard high-carb approach. The big surprise was cholesterol. The Atkins dieters’ overall profile changed for the better. Although their bad cholesterol went up seven points, their good cholesterol rose almost 12. (Changes in the high-carb dieters were less dramatic. Their bad cholesterol went down slightly while their good cholesterol remained unchanged.) The largest difference was in triglycerides. The Atkins dieters’ dropped 22 points. The low-carb dieters’ didn’t budge. "It was unexpected, to put it mildly," Foster said. "It made us think maybe there is something to this." Despite these data, the Atkins diet still gives many health professionals the willies. It encourages people to eat bacon, butter, prime rib and lots of other things loaded with saturated fat. And it lectures against such mainstay carbohydrates as grains, pasta and starchy vegetables, especially in the diet’s first cold-turkey stage; plenty of other healthy things, including many low-carb green vegetables and olive oil are allowed. "There are many principles in the Atkins diet that go against what we know," says Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, senior author of the heart association’s policy on high-protein diets. "It keeps people away from staples of the diet that we know are associated with less heart disease." Volumes of research suggest that people have the best chance of avoiding heart disease, high blood pressure and cancer if they eat a varied diet with plenty of fruits, vegetables and grains. "It’s scary if people leave out these very important food groups and just depend on high-fat, high-protein foods," says Wahida Karmally, nutrition director at Columbia University’s clinical research center. Furthermore, people on the Atkins plan may get a quarter of their daily calories from saturated fat, more than double the heart association’s recommendation. Animal experiments and studies of large groups of people long ago convinced many experts that too much saturated fat clogs the arteries and leads to heart attacks. Mainstream scientists wave off the Atkins camp’s answer to this that saturated fat is bad only if eaten with large amounts of carbohydrates. Otherwise, it’s harmlessly burned off. "When carbs are the primary fuel source, there are certain risks in excessive fat consumption," says Colette Heimowitz, the Atkins organization’s research director. "But in a controlled-carb setting, when fat is the primary fuel source, the rules change. Those risk factors do not show up." So how do the traditionalists explain the cholesterol improvement seen in the Atkins dieters? Weight loss. Slimming down reliably improves cholesterol levels, and they say its benefits probably overshadowed any damage done by all the unhealthy fat that people ate. Why people lose more weight on the diet is also not clear, although some researchers say they buy one of Atkins’ arguments: People stick with it because they are not constantly hungry. Fat and protein satisfy the appetite, the theory goes. But eating lots of carbohydrates raises insulin levels, lowers blood sugar, and eventually makes people ravenous. But another of Atkins’ ideas on the subject is far more contentious. He argues that people lose more weight on his plan even if they actually eat more calories. That’s a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, skeptics say. "A calorie is a calorie as far as weight reduction is concerned," says Dr. Michael Davidson, director of preventive cardiology at the Rush Heart Institute in Chicago. Or is it? Some of the new studies suggest otherwise. Dr. Stephen Sondike of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City put overweight teenagers on comparison diets for two months. The ones on Atkins lost twice as much as those on the low-fat diet. Yet they appeared to eat about 700 more calories a day than the others. Less dramatic but still startling results came from another study at the University of Cincinnati. Women on Atkins lost twice as much while eating the same number of calories as the lowfat dieters. "Surprised? Definitely," says Bonnie Brehm, a registered dietitian. "We really don’t know what the answer is." And the Atkins weight loss was not simply dehydration, as Atkins critics often contend, since the Cincinnati dieters also lost twice as much body fat.

… read more »

Response:

I have a friend who has been under a doctors care for high cholesterol.  His doctor told him that with the medication his cholesterol is fine, but if he wants to lower it more that he should go on the atkins diet.  His doctor also said that he can’t officially endorse it, but off the record it works.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Was Atkins Right After All? NEW YORK, Feb. 15, 2003 Is it just possible that Dr. Robert C. Atkins was right? That his high-fat, low-carb plan, ridiculed for 30 years as dangerous nonsense, actually is a good, safe way to lose weight? The dietary elite are not ready to change their collective mind, but a half-dozen or so new studies have taken an objective look at the presumed evils of Atkins, and the results have been little short of astonishing: During a few months on the Atkins diet, people lose about twice as much as on the standard low-fat, high-carbohydrate approach recommended by most health organizations. They do so without seeming to drive up their risk of heart disease. Rather than going kaflooey, their cholesterol, triglycerides, blood pressure and ominous bloodstream inflammation generally improve, perhaps even more than on the standard diet. They appear to lose more weight even while actually consuming more calories than people on a so-called healthy diet. All of the experiments were short and small. None by itself would make a big stir. But taken together, they undermine much of what mainstream medicine has long assumed about the Atkins diet. "Some scientists are dismayed by the data and a little incredulous about it," says Gary Foster, who runs the weight-loss program at the University of Pennsylvania. "But the consistency of the results across studies is compelling in a way that makes us think we should investigate this further." Until now, the opinion of the medical world on this subject has been essentially unanimous: Any diet that emphasizes meat, eggs and cheese and discourages bread, rice and fruit is nutritional folly. The American Medical Association set that tone a year after the book, "Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution," came out in 1972. Its sarcastically worded critique dismissed the diet as "potentially dangerous." It called its scientific underpinning "naive" and "biochemically incorrect." And it scolded book publishers for promoting "bizarre concepts of nutrition and dieting." On the Atkins diet, up to two-thirds of calories may come from fat – more than double the usual recommendation – and that violates everything medical professionals believe about healthy eating. Carbohydrates are the foundation of a good diet, most say. Eating calorie-dense fat is what makes people fat, and eating saturated fat is what kills them. Despite this, Atkins’ books have sold 15 million copies, uncounted millions have tried the diet, and practically everybody has heard of someone who dropped a ton of weight on the Atkins plan. Finally, several research teams around the country have put Atkins to the test, driven largely by weariness at having nothing solid to tell patients and, in some cases, a desire to prove Atkins wrong. One study was even sponsored by the American Heart Association, long an Atkins skeptic. None has been published yet, but summaries have been given at medical conferences. "They all show pretty convincingly that people will lose more weight on an Atkins diet, and their cardiovascular risk factors, if anything, get better," says Dr. Kevin O’Brien, a University of Washington cardiologist involved with one of the studies. This is not the end of the story. The studies say nothing about how much people lose when they stay on Atkins more than a few months, whether they keep the weight off for good and whether their cholesterol rebounds when they stop losing weight. Nevertheless, three decades of dietary gospel are in doubt, and those questioning it include some of the most prominent names in obesity research. For instance, one of the new studies was conducted by Foster with Drs. Samuel Klein and James Hill, the current and past presidents of the North American Association for the Study of Obesity, the premier professional group. "I’m part of the obesity establishment," says Foster, who has published more than 50 scientific papers on the subject. "I’ve spent my life researching ways to treat obesity, and 100 percent of them have been low-fat and high-carb. Now I’m beginning to think, it isn’t as it has appeared." His Atkins study was intended to "show it doesn’t work," yet after three months, the overweight men and women had lost an average of 19 pounds, 10 more than people on the standard high-carb approach. The big surprise was cholesterol. The Atkins dieters’ overall profile changed for the better. Although their bad cholesterol went up seven points, their good cholesterol rose almost 12. (Changes in the high-carb dieters were less dramatic. Their bad cholesterol went down slightly while their good cholesterol remained unchanged.) The largest difference was in triglycerides. The Atkins dieters’ dropped 22 points. The low-carb dieters’ didn’t budge. "It was unexpected, to put it mildly," Foster said. "It made us think maybe there is something to this." Despite these data, the Atkins diet still gives many health professionals the willies. It encourages people to eat bacon, butter, prime rib and lots of other things loaded with saturated fat. And it lectures against such mainstay carbohydrates as grains, pasta and starchy vegetables, especially in the diet’s first cold-turkey stage; plenty of other healthy things, including many low-carb green vegetables and olive oil are allowed. "There are many principles in the Atkins diet that go against what we know," says Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, senior author of the heart association’s policy on high-protein diets. "It keeps people away from staples of the diet that we know are associated with less heart disease." Volumes of research suggest that people have the best chance of avoiding heart disease, high blood pressure and cancer if they eat a varied diet with plenty of fruits, vegetables and grains. "It’s scary if people leave out these very important food groups and just depend on high-fat, high-protein foods," says Wahida Karmally, nutrition director at Columbia University’s clinical research center. Furthermore, people on the Atkins plan may get a quarter of their daily calories from saturated fat, more than double the heart association’s recommendation. Animal experiments and studies of large groups of people long ago convinced many experts that too much saturated fat clogs the arteries and leads to heart attacks. Mainstream scientists wave off the Atkins camp’s answer to this that saturated fat is bad only if eaten with large amounts of carbohydrates. Otherwise, it’s harmlessly burned off. "When carbs are the primary fuel source, there are certain risks in excessive fat consumption," says Colette Heimowitz, the Atkins organization’s research director. "But in a controlled-carb setting, when fat is the primary fuel source, the rules change. Those risk factors do not show up." So how do the traditionalists explain the cholesterol improvement seen in the Atkins dieters? Weight loss. Slimming down reliably improves cholesterol levels, and they say its benefits probably overshadowed any damage done by all the unhealthy fat that people ate. Why people lose more weight on the diet is also not clear, although some researchers say they buy one of Atkins’ arguments: People stick with it because they are not constantly hungry. Fat and protein satisfy the appetite, the theory goes. But eating lots of carbohydrates raises insulin levels, lowers blood sugar, and eventually makes people ravenous. But another of Atkins’ ideas on the subject is far more contentious. He argues that people lose more weight on his plan even if they actually eat more calories. That’s a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, skeptics say. "A calorie is a calorie as far as weight reduction is concerned," says Dr. Michael Davidson, director of preventive cardiology at the Rush Heart Institute in Chicago. Or is it? Some of the new studies suggest otherwise. Dr. Stephen Sondike of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City put overweight teenagers on comparison diets for two months. The ones on Atkins lost twice as much as those on the low-fat diet. Yet they appeared to eat about 700 more calories a day than the others. Less dramatic but still startling results came from another study at the University of Cincinnati. Women on Atkins lost twice as much while eating the same number of calories as the lowfat dieters. "Surprised? Definitely," says Bonnie Brehm, a registered dietitian. "We really don’t know what the answer is." And the Atkins weight loss was not simply dehydration, as Atkins critics often contend, since the Cincinnati dieters also lost twice as much body fat. But even if the diet is reasonable for a few months of slimming down, what happens when people level off during the maintenance phase of the program? Does their cholesterol soar if they eat all that fat without losing weight? None of the research so far answers that. However, Atkins-sponsored studies by Jeff Volek, an exercise and nutrition specialist at the University of Connecticut, offers some hints. He put fit men on an Atkins regimen for six weeks with orders not to lose weight, and nothing bad seemed to happen. Their good and bad cholesterol went up proportionately, and their triglycerides fell. "I’d like to see more data," Volek said, "but ours

… read more »

Response:

Ken, can you please cite the source for this article? Thanks for posting it. – Anne

Response:

You can link to the NYT article through the Atkins website at: http://atkins.com/Archive/2003/1/20-542932.html Also, highlights of the 10 key points by the Atkins.com people at: http://atkins.com/Archive/2002/7/26-388715.html Happy LC’ing!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ken, can you please cite the source for this article? Thanks for posting it. – Anne

Response:

Very comprehensive article.  Whoever wrote this is actually doing a decent job.  I wouldn’t say great though.  No hard hitting questions when the ‘experts’ spout off, no confrontation with actual facts.  Just a report about ‘what the other side says’. warning: several mini rants follow.  may be hazardous to your personal harmony. Was Atkins Right After All? NEW YORK, Feb. 15, 2003

<many snip, some gnashing tooth, few outburst "There are many principles in the Atkins diet that go against what we know," says Dr. Robert Eckel of the University of Colorado, senior author of the heart association’s policy on high-protein diets. "It keeps people away from staples of the diet that we know are associated with less heart

disease." Sigh.  Lowcarbers eat vegetables– high fiber ones that are good for the body.  We chose veggies with high nutrient content as opposed to high calorie content.  We get our (fewer) calories somewhere else.  Somewhere more satisfying and long lasting. Volumes of research suggest that people have the best chance of avoiding heart disease, high blood pressure and cancer if they eat a varied diet with plenty of fruits, vegetables and grains.

Those volumes of research don’t examine the impact high glycemic carbs and their lack have on the body. "It’s scary if people leave out these very important food groups and just depend on high-fat, high-protein foods," says Wahida Karmally, nutrition director at Columbia University’s clinical research center.

1) Scary to who?  The grain industry?  Boo.  Hoo. 2) You don’t read for comprehension if you think lowcarb means cutting vegetables or fruits out completely.  Oh that’s right, you don’t sully your mind with facts because you’re a nutritionist and know everything already. Furthermore, people on the Atkins plan may get a quarter of their daily calories from saturated fat, more than double the heart association’s recommendation. Animal experiments and studies of large groups of people long ago convinced many experts that too much saturated fat clogs the arteries and leads to heart attacks.

1)May does not equal will. 2) Studies done without removing high glycemic carbs.   Makes a difference. 3) Let me guess… those animal studies were with mice, right?  And what do mice eat if given the choice… yeah I thought so.  Feeding fat to a grain eating animal is designed to show what– that fat will make a grain eating animal sick?  We knew that already. So how do the traditionalists explain the cholesterol improvement seen in the Atkins dieters? Weight loss. Slimming down reliably improves cholesterol levels, and they say its benefits probably overshadowed any damage done by all the unhealthy fat that people ate.

Um, if its such a simple answer, why didn’t you predict it would happen before this?  Why were ya’ll so damn "surprised and dismayed" by those studies mentioned above that showed an improvement in cholesterol? Because you’re trying to keep your death grip on the minds of the public as the fount of all wisdom is why.  So sad to see such a ‘respected’ institution play king of the hill. But another of Atkins’ ideas on the subject is far more contentious. He argues that people lose more weight on his plan even if they actually eat more calories. That’s a violation of the laws of thermodynamics, skeptics say.

Thermodynamics only applies to closed systems.  Human bodies are not closed systems. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "A calorie is a calorie as far as weight reduction is concerned," says Dr. Michael Davidson, director of preventive cardiology at the Rush Heart Institute in Chicago. Or is it? Some of the new studies suggest otherwise. Dr. Stephen Sondike of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City put overweight teenagers on comparison diets for two months. The ones on Atkins lost twice as much as those on the low-fat diet. Yet they appeared to eat about 700 more calories a day than the others. Less dramatic but still startling results came from another study at the University of Cincinnati. Women on Atkins lost twice as much while eating the same number of calories as the lowfat dieters. "Surprised? Definitely," says Bonnie Brehm, a registered dietitian. "We really don’t know what the answer is."

Yes you do.  You just don’t want to admit that you have ever been wrong. And the Atkins weight loss was not simply dehydration, as Atkins critics often contend, since the Cincinnati dieters also lost twice as much body fat.

Thankyou (whoever) for pointing this one out.  I get so tired of the ‘it’s only water’ routine. But even if the diet is reasonable for a few months of slimming down, what happens when people level off during the maintenance phase of the program? Does their cholesterol soar if they eat all that fat without losing

weight? No. Only if they go off the diet do things start heading south.  All diet exhibit this little problem, so don’t pronounce this fact in a sad tone as if this doesn’t happen with low fat or low calorie, because it does. None of the research so far answers that. However, Atkins-sponsored studies by Jeff Volek, an exercise and nutrition specialist at the University of Connecticut, offers some hints. He put fit men on an Atkins regimen for six weeks with orders not to lose weight, and nothing bad seemed to happen. Their good and bad cholesterol went up proportionately, and their triglycerides fell. "I’d like to see more data," Volek said, "but ours provides evidence it doesn’t have a negative effect on your heart."

They’ll label it inconclusive, even if it was a 5 year study, and will poopoo the whole thing because it was sponsered by Atkins (as they have in the past, even as they called for Atkins to fund studies –hinting dark and nefarious reasons why he hadn’t yet).  It doesn’t matter what the answer is, mainstream has a dogma to defend. But for now, even many of the researchers who did these studies are reluctant to recommend the Atkins diet. They know too little about its long-term effects. A large new study just under way could settle these doubts.

But gee, ya’ll didn’t mind recommending a lowfat regeme WITHOUT studies to back you up.  Only ‘common sense’ and political pull,  and we see how well that’s worked for you haven’t we. So why so cautious now?  A little late to start worrying about how we’ll percieve your experiments on us now isn’t it? This federally sponsored project will randomly put 360 overweight men and women on the Atkins plan or the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s standard high-carb, low-fat diet, then watch them in painstaking detail for at least two years.

Oh gee, federally sponsored.  Where were you when Atkins was begging for funding all those years? The study will try to answer three questions about Atkins, says Hill, who directs the University of Colorado’s Center for Human Nutrition. "Does it produce weight loss? Is it a safe weight loss? And is it any better in the long run than anything else that has come along?" Scientists will analyze the volunteers’ blood and cholesterol in every way they can think of, as well as check their bone density, kidney function, body composition, exercise tolerance and more.

Is it a self reporting study, or are you going to have more control built in?  Are you actually going to give this an honest try or are you going to toss out any results you don’t like because they’re "only self-reporting", which-as-you-know-Bob, isn’t reliable unless it supports your position.  Anyone wanna take bets which way they go? "It’s difficult to swallow," says O’Brien, "but the data are the data, even if they go against 30 years of dogma."

Thirty years of dogma.  I’m glad somebody has admitted it in print. revek

Response:

Question:

ARE ALL CALORIES CREATED EQUAL? New Study Shows a Moderate-Fat Almond Diet May Result in Greater Weight Loss than a Low-Fat Diet Containing the Same Daily Calories November 1, 2003 – Adding fuel to the latest debate in the nutrition community, a study published today in the International Journal of Obesity shows that in two groups eating two different diets containing the same number of daily calories over six months, one group lost more weight than the other. In this study, 65 overweight and obese adults – 70 percent of whom had type 2 diabetes – were put on one of two diets designed for weight loss. The first group ate a liquid formula-based, low-calorie diet containing moderate fat from almonds (39 percent total fat, 25 percent monounsaturated fat, 35 percent carbohydrate as percent of energy).  The second group ate a liquid formula-based, low-fat, low-calorie diet including self-selected complex carbohydrates (18 percent total fat, 5 percent monounsaturated fat, 53 percent carbohydrates as percent of energy).  The two diets’ calorie count and protein levels were equivalent. After 24 weeks, patients on the moderate-fat diet containing almonds had achieved a greater reduction in weight/BMI (-18 percent vs. -11 percent), waist circumference (-14 percent vs. -9 percent), fat mass (-30 percent vs. -20 percent) and systolic blood pressure (-11 percent vs. 0 percent). Both groups experienced lower glucose and insulin levels.  But medication requirements for individuals with type 2 diabetes decreased more steadily in the low-calorie almond diet than the low-calorie complex carbohydrate diet. Potential Weight Loss Implications The study comes at a time when the nutrition community is beginning to wonder, based on other recent studies, whether all calories are really created equal.  One of the most hallowed nutrition beliefs has always been that losing weight hinges solely on the number of calories consumed versus the calories burned through resting energy expenditure and physical activity. "There may be qualities in almonds that helped the first group lose more weight," said Michelle Wien, Dr.P.H., R.D., C.D.E., the study’s lead researcher at City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, Calif. One possible explanation for the effects observed in Dr. Wien’s study is that the fat in almonds may not have been completely absorbed.  This is consistent with a study published in 2001 that concluded that the cell walls of almonds act as a physical barrier to the absorption of fat.  The fat is then excreted from the body, thereby failing to contribute calories (Ren et al., 2001).  This has led some to question whether all of the calories in almonds as determined by the bomb calorimeter are actually absorbed by the human body. And, Wien added, almonds are convenient and satiating.  "After hearing the results of this study, one of my patients has begun carrying a one-ounce handful of almonds in a little tin that previously contained  mints," she said.  "This is a satisfying on-the-go snack – and the tin helps her control the portion size." Potential Diabetes Implications This study’s findings regarding diabetes were consistent with previous research on almonds’ role in controlling glucose levels in people with type 2 diabetes.  For example, in a previous a two-phase study involving 20 healthy, free-living individuals, researchers first examined the effect of 100 grams of almonds a day on insulin levels and fasting glucose levels. Almonds did not cause an increase or decrease in insulin levels or glucose. In phase two, participants with type 2 diabetes enrolled in one of 4 diets, and after a two-week break, they switched to another diet.  The four diets were high-fat with almonds, low-fat with almonds, high-fat control and low-fat control. This phase of the study found that fat source or fat level had positive effects on total cholesterol, LDL and HDL cholesterol, and the LDL-to-HDL ratio with no effect on glucose control – indicating that almonds can be included in a heart healthy diet for people with type 2 diabetes without negatively affecting glucose level control (Lovejoy et al., 2002). For More Information For more information about almonds’ role in heart health as well as weight maintenance and implications for those with diabetes, visit www.AlmondsAreIn.com. ### — Diva ***** The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Response:

I use almond butter – avail at Trader Joe’s.  Not as tasty as peanut butter, but has omega 3 fatty acids and may be better for you. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – ARE ALL CALORIES CREATED EQUAL? New Study Shows a Moderate-Fat Almond Diet May Result in Greater Weight Loss than a Low-Fat Diet Containing the Same Daily Calories November 1, 2003 – Adding fuel to the latest debate in the nutrition community, a study published today in the International Journal of Obesity shows that in two groups eating two different diets containing the same number of daily calories over six months, one group lost more weight than the other. In this study, 65 overweight and obese adults – 70 percent of whom had type 2 diabetes – were put on one of two diets designed for weight loss. The first group ate a liquid formula-based, low-calorie diet containing moderate fat from almonds (39 percent total fat, 25 percent monounsaturated fat, 35 percent carbohydrate as percent of energy).  The second group ate a liquid formula-based, low-fat, low-calorie diet including self-selected complex carbohydrates (18 percent total fat, 5 percent monounsaturated fat, 53 percent carbohydrates as percent of energy).  The two diets’ calorie count and protein levels were equivalent. After 24 weeks, patients on the moderate-fat diet containing almonds had achieved a greater reduction in weight/BMI (-18 percent vs. -11 percent), waist circumference (-14 percent vs. -9 percent), fat mass (-30 percent vs. -20 percent) and systolic blood pressure (-11 percent vs. 0 percent). Both groups experienced lower glucose and insulin levels.  But medication requirements for individuals with type 2 diabetes decreased more steadily in the low-calorie almond diet than the low-calorie complex carbohydrate diet. Potential Weight Loss Implications The study comes at a time when the nutrition community is beginning to wonder, based on other recent studies, whether all calories are really created equal.  One of the most hallowed nutrition beliefs has always been that losing weight hinges solely on the number of calories consumed versus the calories burned through resting energy expenditure and physical activity. "There may be qualities in almonds that helped the first group lose more weight," said Michelle Wien, Dr.P.H., R.D., C.D.E., the study’s lead researcher at City of Hope National Medical Center in Duarte, Calif. One possible explanation for the effects observed in Dr. Wien’s study is that the fat in almonds may not have been completely absorbed.  This is consistent with a study published in 2001 that concluded that the cell walls of almonds act as a physical barrier to the absorption of fat.  The fat is then excreted from the body, thereby failing to contribute calories (Ren et al., 2001).  This has led some to question whether all of the calories in almonds as determined by the bomb calorimeter are actually absorbed by the human body. And, Wien added, almonds are convenient and satiating.  "After hearing the results of this study, one of my patients has begun carrying a one-ounce handful of almonds in a little tin that previously contained  mints," she said.  "This is a satisfying on-the-go snack – and the tin helps her control the portion size." Potential Diabetes Implications This study’s findings regarding diabetes were consistent with previous research on almonds’ role in controlling glucose levels in people with type 2 diabetes.  For example, in a previous a two-phase study involving 20 healthy, free-living individuals, researchers first examined the effect of 100 grams of almonds a day on insulin levels and fasting glucose levels. Almonds did not cause an increase or decrease in insulin levels or glucose. In phase two, participants with type 2 diabetes enrolled in one of 4 diets, and after a two-week break, they switched to another diet.  The four diets were high-fat with almonds, low-fat with almonds, high-fat control and low-fat control. This phase of the study found that fat source or fat level had positive effects on total cholesterol, LDL and HDL cholesterol, and the LDL-to-HDL ratio with no effect on glucose control – indicating that almonds can be included in a heart healthy diet for people with type 2 diabetes without negatively affecting glucose level control (Lovejoy et al., 2002). For More Information For more information about almonds’ role in heart health as well as weight maintenance and implications for those with diabetes, visit www.AlmondsAreIn.com. ###

Response:

I use almond butter – avail at Trader Joe’s.  Not as tasty as peanut butter, but has omega 3 fatty acids and may be better for you.

I eat natural peanut butter nearly once a day: just now I had half of a 100% whole wheat Thomas’s Bagel toasted with a smear of peanut butter on it along with some steamed veggies (cauliflower & brussel sprouts.)  (I also had a small piece of leftover fish for some protein, but I’m not recommending the mixture of peanutbutter & lemon-pepper fish, blech, that didn’t work out great.) I really, really think that something high fiber combined with some nut or fish fats is a great way to feed my body.  My son is having the other half of the bagel with lox & cream cheese on it for lunch.  (I put peanut butter on his banana at snack-time.) — Wendy

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I use almond butter – avail at Trader Joe’s.  Not as tasty as peanut butter, but has omega 3 fatty acids and may be better for you. I eat natural peanut butter nearly once a day: just now I had half of a 100% whole wheat Thomas’s Bagel toasted with a smear of peanut butter on it along with some steamed veggies (cauliflower & brussel sprouts.)  (I also had a small piece of leftover fish for some protein, but I’m not recommending the mixture of peanutbutter & lemon-pepper fish, blech, that didn’t work out great.) I really, really think that something high fiber combined with some nut or fish fats is a great way to feed my body.  My son is having the other half of the bagel with lox & cream cheese on it for lunch.  (I put peanut butter on his banana at snack-time.) — Wendy

I agree, Wendy! I just finished my weight work and yoga and just had 22 almonds (smoked, unsalted) and 3 dates. Yumm… Martha

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I use almond butter – avail at Trader Joe’s.  Not as tasty as peanut butter, but has omega 3 fatty acids and may be better for you. I eat natural peanut butter nearly once a day: just now I had half of a 100% whole wheat Thomas’s Bagel toasted with a smear of peanut butter on it along with some steamed veggies (cauliflower & brussel sprouts.)  (I also had a small piece of leftover fish for some protein, but I’m not recommending the mixture of peanutbutter & lemon-pepper fish, blech, that didn’t work out great.) I really, really think that something high fiber combined with some nut or fish fats is a great way to feed my body.  My son is having the other half of the bagel with lox & cream cheese on it for lunch.  (I put peanut butter on his banana at snack-time.) — Wendy I agree, Wendy! I just finished my weight work and yoga and just had 22 almonds (smoked, unsalted) and 3 dates. Yumm… Martha

I ground up almonds to use in place of oil in broccoli pesto. Jenn

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I use almond butter – avail at Trader Joe’s.  Not as tasty as peanut butter, but has omega 3 fatty acids and may be better for you. I eat natural peanut butter nearly once a day: just now I had half of a 100% whole wheat Thomas’s Bagel toasted with a smear of peanut butter on it along with some steamed veggies (cauliflower & brussel sprouts.) (I also had a small piece of leftover fish for some protein, but I’m not recommending the mixture of peanutbutter & lemon-pepper fish, blech, that didn’t work out great.) I really, really think that something high fiber combined with some nut or fish fats is a great way to feed my body.  My son is having the other half of the bagel with lox & cream cheese on it for lunch.  (I put peanut butter on his banana at snack-time.) — Wendy I agree, Wendy! I just finished my weight work and yoga and just had 22 almonds (smoked, unsalted) and 3 dates. Yumm… Martha I ground up almonds to use in place of oil in broccoli pesto. Jenn

I just got Trader Joe’s newsletter and they have almond flour right now. : ) Martha – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I just got Trader Joe’s newsletter and they have almond flour right now. : ) Martha

Do they do mail order?  I’ll have to check. — Jenn 300/144 (HMR) in maintenance since 10/28/03 Living well is the best revenge

Response:

I just got Trader Joe’s newsletter and they have almond flour right now. : ) Martha Do they do mail order?  I’ll have to check.

Better quality online order: www.lucyskitchenshop.com (no $$ interest) i bake everything with almond flour. lots of recipes links at http://www.pecanbread.com/ http://breakingtheviciouscycle.info/ — Diva ***** The Best Man for the Job May Be A Woman

Response:

Question:

Seriously, congratulations!  It happens sometimes–we plateau despite our best efforts, and then for no apparent reason, the stall ends.  

That’s why I refuse to get bent out of shape over a "stall".  Even though losing weight is a *positive* change, it *is* nonetheless a change to which your body needs *time* to adjust. I "stalled" (I don’t even call it that, as I eat the way I do for other reasons than a number on a scale – and given that my WOE has not stopped making me FEEL good, it’s not a stall staying at the same weight for *months*.  Then I gained a few pounds, lost them again, and stayed again at the same weight for weeks.  Now, I am slowly starting to lose again. Whew Actually, for myself, I don’t even mind.  I mean, I used to be over 250 pounds.  So far I’ve lost greater than 70 pounds.  I have 35-40 pounds to go, and if that takes another 1-2 years, I am fine.  Given that I’ve no grandiose plans to celebrate my goal by eating an entire cake (LOL – in other words I am eating this way FOR LIFE), the numbers on the scale are not going to determine how I am going to eat, or feel. cm

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean?

It means that I have found, and am keeping safe for you, your extra pounds.  Please let me know when you’d like them back, or if you know anyone else who would like to claim them. Seriously, congratulations!  It happens sometimes–we plateau despite our best efforts, and then for no apparent reason, the stall ends.   Congratulations on not getting frustrated and giving up because the scale wouldn’t budge–this is your reward! -Alison, back from a week in Las Vegas and too afraid to set foot near the scale this week (how many buffets can one city have???!?)

Response:

It means you are very happy!  Congratulations.  Elise.

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? That’s kind of how it works for me too.  It’s like your body is sort of catching up with the way you’ve been eating.  Just enjoy . Chris (who’s kind of stuck at 176-177)

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean?

That’s kind of how it works for me too.  It’s like your body is sort of catching up with the way you’ve been eating.  Just enjoy . Chris (who’s kind of stuck at 176-177)

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean?

It means you rejoice and do a happy dance?  :o) Congrats! Seriously, if you haven’t drastically changed anything then don’t worry about it. Just like when you first started dieting you probably won’t continue to lose at that rate. — Jeri 265/189/120 Atkins since 11/5/01 "Whether you think you can or think you can’t, you’re right."

Response:

It means your stall is over???  :) — Email me at: perpleglow(AT)comcast.net

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

Response:

Interesting. I just caught your post on the quit smoking group re. 10,000 steps. Now I pop over to this group because I’m thinking, "Hey, that 10,000 steps things sounds good because I’m way the hell too fat!" And guess what — its YOU again! I hope that in six months, my weight loss sig line is as good as my quit smoking sig line! But where the hell do I start? Are there any lose weight meters out there like the smoking meters? Also, can I mix the Atkins diet with a low calorie diet and a low fat diet? Nine full meals a day is something I think I can live with. Mike

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean?

It means you’re losing weight. Congratulations! Barbara Hirsch, Publisher OBESITY MEDS AND RESEARCH NEWS The latest in obesity research and weight loss drug development http://www.obesity-news.com/

Response:

"Susan Jones-Anderson"  wrote Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

See?  We TOLD you it would all be ok!  Would we lie?? Keep it up Susan <s — Walking on . . . Laurie in Maine 207/110  60 inches of attitude! Start: 2/02  Maintained since 2/03

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

It means your body has adjusted to your new weight level and the plateau is over! Keep doing what you’re doing! Jenn 300/144

Response:

Also, can I mix the Atkins diet with a low calorie diet and a low fat diet?

I doubt that is possible because (as you know) we need the fat on Atkins.

Response:

Also, can I mix the Atkins diet with a low calorie diet and a low fat diet? I doubt that is possible because (as you know) we need the fat on Atkins.

Its an old joke. I was kidding around. You know, "He went to three different doctors and got three different diets and now he’s eating nine meals a day." (ba-bum Boom)

Response:

No on the Atkins question…. — Email me at: perpleglow(AT)comcast.net

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Interesting. I just caught your post on the quit smoking group re. 10,000 steps. Now I pop over to this group because I’m thinking, "Hey, that 10,000 steps things sounds good because I’m way the hell too fat!" And guess what — its YOU again! I hope that in six months, my weight loss sig line is as good as my quit smoking sig line! But where the hell do I start? Are there any lose weight meters out there like the smoking meters? Also, can I mix the Atkins diet with a low calorie diet and a low fat diet? Nine full meals a day is something I think I can live with. Mike Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160 — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

Response:

Stepped on the scales this morning and I am down another 2 lbs!!!!??? Not that I am complaining, but that is a little concerning to me as I was *so* stuck at 219 for 5 weeks and now I am 211. What does this mean? Susan 260/211/160

Congratulation Susan!  We knew if you just kept at it those stubborn pounds would go away.  Keep it up. Beverly – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — 1month 2weeks 4days 6:00hours of being smoke-free, 1,929 cigs not smoked, $356.87 saved, 6day 16:45hours of my life saved

Response:

Its an old joke. I was kidding around. You know, "He went to three different doctors and got three different diets and now he’s eating nine meals a day." (ba-bum Boom)

Ah!!  I get it now!! Funny…made me laugh.  :-)

Response:

Question:

I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Response:

I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated.

how many calories a day are you consuming?  why don’t you increase your carbs the way you’re supposed to?  not everyone continues to lose at 20g a day.  some people find that their loss resumes when they increase their carbs. in any case, i don’t think it’s realistic to expect to lose more than a pound or two a week.  give your body time to adjust.  and when all else fails: eat less & exercise more.  

Response:

I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

I so know that feeling! I have just had a breakthro, I am almost certain that for me it was the Aspartame in diet soft drinks that was causing the problem, I have had nothing but plain water for that last four days and I have lost six pounds. Try it it could work for you too! — Gemini 191/185/147 http://homepage.ntlworld.com/hisasylum/diet.htm

Response:

Most of us stall from time to time, and after the third week I did as well. Don’t get disheartened, it may take a couple of weeks to break the stall and you might get a "whoosh", large loss seemingly overnight. Some people experience stalls for months, and still stick to it. I am sure in a week or so you will be back on the loss train, as long as hidden carbs have not stowed away on your fork. I also think it is better for your body to adjust to the new weight for a bit before losing again. (I know that isn’t very scientific.) Good luck FF! Pam 295/253/160ish

Response:

Sixteen pounds in three weeks, sounds like it’s working to me!!! After a few weeks of being on, I have found that my body took a break from losing, to "catch up" so to speak. Your body is changing. Loss will slow down abit after the first few weeks, stay focused, and stay off the scale. The loss will come, it really will. Blessings, Tina

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Response:

in any case, i don’t think it’s realistic to expect to lose more than a pound or two a week.  give your body time to adjust.  and when all else fails: eat less & exercise more.

I am consuming around 1600 – 2000 calories a day.  I am going to move to OWL to see if that works any better for. FF

Response:

Pull out the measuring tape!  I lost 10 pounds in the first week, then two the second, then one the third…the scale really slowed down.  BUT – the measuring tape keeps showing results, so I’m not getting too frustrated. Also, I started supplementing fiber a few days ago, and I’m thinking that is going to help. S t a c i

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Response:

I can tell that I have lost weight or at least inches because my pants are loser.  I know have to tighten my belt more but it is still frustrating on the weight loss part. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Pull out the measuring tape!  I lost 10 pounds in the first week, then two the second, then one the third…the scale really slowed down.  BUT – the measuring tape keeps showing results, so I’m not getting too frustrated. Also, I started supplementing fiber a few days ago, and I’m thinking that is going to help. S t a c i I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Response:

knowledge: – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Sorry, but on low-fat would you have lost 16 lbs in 3 weeks?  Run the averages and you’ll be pleased to see that you have lost .5 lbs a day!  That is really quick weight loss. I think on LC everyone* stalls at 3 weeks.  Take measurements as everyone else said, and hang in there.  No need to make drastic changes to your diet, just keep at it and the weight loss will start again. — Robin in Michigan 252/208/150 Low-carb since January 7, 2003 http://photos.yahoo.com/robintheloser *everyone – I don’t ever remember seeing someone post that they didn’t stall within the first month.

Response:

Sixteen pounds in three weeks, sounds like it’s working to me!!! After a few weeks of being on, I have found that my body took a break from losing, to "catch up" so to speak. Your body is changing. Loss will slow down abit after the first few weeks, stay focused, and stay off the scale. The loss will come, it really will. Blessings, Tina

Exactly.  Losing 16 lbs in three weeks is fantastic.  What more could you ask for?  Weight loss is never consistent and linear.  Sounds like a case of unreasonable expectations to me. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day  12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some  free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not  going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to  continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – knowledge: I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF Sorry, but on low-fat would you have lost 16 lbs in 3 weeks?  Run the averages and you’ll be pleased to see that you have lost .5 lbs a day!  That is really quick weight loss. I think on LC everyone* stalls at 3 weeks.  Take measurements as everyone else said, and hang in there.  No need to make drastic changes to your diet, just keep at it and the weight loss will start again.

I didn’t stall, but then, I didn’t do induction.  I went to around 60 grams a day from the start, lost 8 pounds my first month, 8 my second.  Looks like it’ll be 5 or 6 this month. — -Michelle Levin (Luna) http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick http://www.mindspring.com/~designbyluna

Response:

I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated.

Start changing things.  If you’re drinking diet stuff, stop.  Caffiene also.  make sure you’re drinking enough water.  Take the vitamins. Try increasing carbs and/or calories.  Make sure you’re not in starvation mode.  Also, some people report reductions in measurements without changing pounds.  Also, if you’re a woman, that pound you gained could be monthly water weight gain. brian 290/269/210 july 8, 2003

Response:

Hang in there FF Before you go throwing it all away … think to the other changes besides weight that you have experienced thanks to Atkins.. perhaps less hunger?? looser clothes ?? etc etc. Now .. It’s often said here that the 3rd or 4th week often sets off a stall in some people on Atkins. Perhaps it’s your body’s way of making sure you’re not going to try to starve it.. Perhaps it’s your body’s way of catching up with an amazing jump start on weight loss.. Hard to say. I do know that it’s not permanent for most… depressing yes.. but Most people get thru it nicely by sticking to the plan. Re evaluating their choices.. perhaps the water has been less in the past few days.. Perhaps your eating too much cheese.. Perhaps the calories have been creeping higher.. Perhaps you’ve added more to an exercise routine.. etc. Stick to it.. Focus on the positives that have come along from following Atkins this far . Maybe take measurements also.. this got me thru my stall.. as I saw inches moving when the scale didnt. Good Luck and Hang in there !!! We’re here with ya ~Karen~ – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

~Karen~ 216/188/140ish start Jan17/03

Response:

I am not a woman so no TOM for me.  I don’t drink anything with caffiene.  I drink 128oz of water a day and take vitamins and fiber supplements.  I am going to switch to the OWL mode starting tomororw.  I am wondering if my body is in starvation mode and that is the problem. FF – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Start changing things.  If you’re drinking diet stuff, stop.  Caffiene also.  make sure you’re drinking enough water.  Take the vitamins. Try increasing carbs and/or calories.  Make sure you’re not in starvation mode.  Also, some people report reductions in measurements without changing pounds.  Also, if you’re a woman, that pound you gained could be monthly water weight gain. brian 290/269/210 july 8, 2003

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I lost 16 pounds in three weeks.  However, I lost only 2 punds from day 12 – day 21.  From day 21 to Day 30, I have gained 1/2 pound. I have followed the diet pefectly.  I have never cheated.  I have checked the ketstix and I am in Ketosis.  I exercise for a bare minimum of 30 minutes a day.  This is a combination of riding exericing bike and some free weights.  I have watched my calories to a great extent. I am just completely frustrated because if I was on a standard low fat/low calorie diet, I would be continuing to lose weight. I am wondering if I am one of those people who the Atkins diet is not going to work for?  I may have to go with a low fat diet.  I am going to continue to stick with it but I am really frustrated. FF

sEE A SHRINK fool….lol

Response:

I am not a woman so no TOM for me.  I don’t drink anything with caffiene. I drink 128oz of water a day and take vitamins and fiber supplements.  I am going to switch to the OWL mode starting tomororw.  I am wondering if my body is in starvation mode and that is the problem.

Your main problem is that you’re an idiot. Eat less and move more. Even an idiot like you can do it.

Response:

You are perhaps the dumbest shit on the face of the earth.  I guess you are familar with the *plonk* sound of you being filtered out. FF – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Your main problem is that you’re an idiot. Eat less and move more. Even an idiot like you can do it.

Response:

hahahaha!

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – You are perhaps the dumbest shit on the face of the earth.  I guess you are familar with the *plonk* sound of you being filtered out. FF Your main problem is that you’re an idiot. Eat less and move more. Even an idiot like you can do it.

Response:

Question:

On 06 Mar 2003 15:16:38 GMT, suf…@aol.comnospam (Susan Fein) wrote: >x-no-archive: yes >In article <a4rd6v4q1ka6pisml8j4l73orclp7nu…@4ax.com>, Kathryn ><droz…@shaw.ca> writes: >I’ve read both Taubes and Fumento, and I’ve concluded (you may, of course think >this is just self serving bias) that while Taubes plays exquisite attention to >the *quality* of the research he cites, Fumento is content to just go with >quantity and uncritical acceptance of conclusions.

Same people, same studies being discussed by both as far as I can see. As I mentioned earlier I’ve concluded this is just all about weight loss dieting, the Atkins diet in particular and no respectable researcher wants to be perceived as an out and out Atkins supporter, not even Taubes. [small quote, talk about drawing fine lines, I've added * * around the words italicized in the original ] – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->For starters, in his second paragraph, Fumento characterizes my article >as arguing "that the consumption of *too little* fat [Fumento's emphasis] >could explain the explosion in obesity." He does not quote the article, >which would have been easy to do had it included such a declaration >anywhere in its nearly 8,000 words, but it doesn’t. Rather my article >challenged the accepted dogma that obesity and excess weight are >caused by the *excessive* consumption of fat calories, and instead >suggested that it was caused by the *excessive* consumption of >calories from refined carbohydrates and starches. I referred to this >proposition repeatedly as the "alternative hypothesis", using the word >"hypothesis" to imply strongly that it is not a fact but a supposition that >should be rigorously tested. The article discussed the possibility that >refined carbohydrates and starches might have a unique effect on >our metabolism that either causes excessive hunger or an unbalanced >deposition of calories in fat tissue. If so, it suggested, such a metabolic >effect could explain the 150-year-old popularity of low carbohydrate >diets for weight loss.

Want my take on all this? You’ve mentioned that you had some bad experiences with a very low fat diet ( Ornish?).  I had  bad experiences with very low calorie dieting which is why any mention of weight loss in so called ‘healthy diet’ studies presses my buttons. Which is why I was quite taken with the inclusion of the DASH diet information in the back of Love’s book– enough to buy a copy. Low fat aside for a moment, the DASH comparative diet study is ‘quality’ research. For that reason alone it is worth at least reading I think. You do not see any mention of DASH in the media diet fights simply because DASH is not about weight loss. It is a study about diet and blood pressure, it’s already been established that losing weight may help blood pressure , no further evidence on this is needed, so DASH was designed so that the participants would NOT lose (or gain) weight in the eight weeks of the study. [ the participants were weighed each week day and calories in the provided meals and snacks adjusted accordingly. btw about half the participants were women, average age 44 and average BMI 29 ] Anyway the full text DASH diet study is available (with free registration) on the NEJM website also the accompaning editorial. I think some of the current nutritional research ( Nurses study on walnuts for example) came about because of these study findings, that’s why I think looking at the food patterns in the three comparative diets is interesting. The ‘combination’ diet included nuts and dairy for example. Which brings me back to my take on the media diet fight again. Willett bemoaned the fact that nut consumption among the women in the Nurses study declined in the years followed in the study. ( magazine interview mentioned here earlier) He put the blame for this on the low fat is good diet proponents. I think women cut out nuts because they thought they were fattening and not because they particularly thought eating fat was unhealthy. A couple of week’s ago one of the Fen Phen court cases was in the news. The women who took this diet drug combination was only 160 lbs. Now why would a woman think it was important to her ‘health’ to take a drug to lose weight? She didn’t most likely, but that was the theory behind the approval of these diet drugs and the reason doctors prescribed them. Being thin in and of itself is not necessarily a good thing imo, nor is being a little overweight a bad thing. There I’ve had my rant for the day. <GR> Well there is this too. I told myself after my last ‘diet’ attempt that I would not try to lose weight again until I improved my overall fitness first.  That was over 10 years ago and I’m still working on it : (  I don’t like my current weight particularly but first things first. I want to be healthier not thinner. http://www.ideafit.com/fit_vs_fat.htm Kathryn

Response:

It is getting pretty nasty, shockingly so in fact. The fight still seems to be about what is the best diet to lose weight rather than what is healthy eating IMO. http://www.reason.com/0303/taubes.shtml >Michael Fumento

Question:

New diet guide takes the stress out of losing weight Forget every low calorie, low fat diet you have ever tried.  Many folks have tried such diets time and again without long-term success.  Much of the advice provided in these kinds of diets quickly turns into frustration and stress when put into action, resulting in a negative dieting experience. With overeating now the most common of American vices, obesity has become all too regular.  Statistics linking obesity to a range of health issues has made eating right a prominent concern and reason enough for people to become serious about losing weight.  But the stresses of losing weight can be great. A new diet guide, "The Joe Lunchpail Diet" is now available that places emphasis on making the task of losing weight fun and positive. Following the new diet revolution of high protein and low carbohydrate intake, the guide is a step-by-step guide taking you through the process of dropping weight. From ridding yourself of undesired pounds to maintaining your goal weight, the booklet is an aid making the diet experience fun and includes; grocery lists, recipes, a daily meal planner, tips and tricks as well as additional resources creating an environment for a positive and lasting diet experience. The fact that a person is trying to lose weight implies that he/she is not satisfied with his/her present shape and/or is concerned about their health. The Joe Lunchpail Diet Guide is available through Mike Thayer Media, for details check out www.mikethayer.com.  Filled with research and reading on foods, nutritional values, anecdotes, ideal weights for different body frames and other related information, the guide helps make the dieting experience fun and positive.

Response:

Troll.

Response:

The book simply puts the Atkins diet in everyday, hard working layman, "Joe Lunchpail" terms, based on personal experiences and success with the diet. Grocery lists, a daily meal planner, tips and tricks, recipes, nutrition information and more is included.

Response: