 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers WeightAdviser.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / January 2004Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/living/7499061.htm  SignatureRandy M 234/197/175 Atkins since 7/14/03 AMEN!! >Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters > >AMEN!! I agree wholeheartedly as well. I'm really saddened by the people here, especially the "newbies", who are rabidly cheering the advent of so-called "low carb" treats like Doritos, peanut butter, etc. And also saddened by all the folks who eat numerous bars and other treat foods that have been modified in some way to be low-carb. It's SO hard to lose weight on any program when you're used to eating any- and every- thing you want. I feel that these so-called LC foods are going to get too many people in a heap of trouble because they see LC and think it's okay to eat it endlessly. As the article says, the same happened with low fat...hey, it's low fat, I can eat the whole box of cookies! But it just doesn't work that way, and I think quite a few people are going to be very disappointed in their weight loss slowing down, the quality of the LC foods being sacrificed for that label, and the temptation to eat more and more of the treat foods. There are some great LC products out there. And there are some great LC recipes. But we all need to use some common sense when it comes to what we're eating and calling "the Atkins diet." I can almost guarantee that weight loss will be more consistent and show more progress if we keep these new LC foods to an absolute minimum. Connie ***************************************************** My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit. > >Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > ***************************************************** > My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit. YUP! What she said ^^^^^^^^. -- AmyB LC since 12/01/03 238/225/165 And then they will blame low fat dieting for their failure. And, to be honest, they would have a point since Atkins nutritionals, most closely accosiated with low carbing, is giving those junk foods credence to make a few stupid individuals a bit richer than they already are. i >>Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > ***************************************************** > My mind is like a steel...um, whatchamacallit. >>Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters >> >>AMEN!! > >I agree wholeheartedly as well. I agree that these products have the potential to damage the weight loss efforts of many people. However, the weight loss phase is not forever (I know it feels like it is, but it really isn't!) and these products can possibly make long term maintenance sustainable and more pleasurable for many folks. And then there are the folks simply trying to control blood sugar levels who can also benefit from these products. Just something to think about. Pat, Take it from someone in maintenance. The low carb products can pose problems there too. The reason is because so many of them are so high calorie. If I eat a Z-bar at lunch and a low carb Klondike popsicle at dinner, my blood sugar will stay normal, my carbs come in low, but I've just added 360 calories to my daily intake. That might not be all that much if I was a 220 lb male, but as a 140 lb woman, it's significant. Maintenance for someone my size and age isn't going to be much more than 1800 calories and may be less depending on activity level. 3500 excess calories turn into a pound of fat. Even if I'm burning half of the snack low carb calories, if I eat them 2 days out of three, within a month I could easily add a pound of fat. Add a pound every month and you are no longer maintaining. I'm pretty much convinced that a lot of the "magic" of low carb in the "good old days" was the fact that it eliminated so much of what you could eat, and made eating outside of the home so inconvenient, that it caused significant calorie reduction without people really noticing--aided, of course, by the hunger reduction. OTOH, in the "good old days" it was all too easy to burn out on feelings of deprivation because there was so much you couldn't eat. The availability of the low carb treats and alternatives helps cope with this. But it takes away the ease of low carbing and brings back the need to be aware of portion control, self-control, and all the other nasty stuff that went with traditinal weight control. -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm "Pat Paris" <patnparis@NOSPAMyahoo.NOWAYcom> wrote in message news:h22110t4a ksmomskc3acgu35ke0k00puuh@4ax.com... > >>Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters > >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > trying to control blood sugar levels who can also benefit from these > products. Just something to think about. :: Pat, :: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] :: be much more than 1800 calories and may be less depending on :: activity level. Whenever I eat something like a LC goodie, I always include it in my daily calorie count. Therefore, there are no "extra" calories unless I decide to eat more. Which is why I say count everything -- carbs and calories. Since calories count, count calories ($1 to Wayne C). :: 3500 excess calories turn into a pound of fat. Even if I'm burning :: half of the snack low carb calories, if I eat them 2 days out of [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] :: that it caused significant calorie reduction without people really :: noticing--aided, of course, by the hunger reduction. The magic of low carb, was, and is, the fact that it reduces appetite, imo. I disagree with your statement here that it worked because people had limited eating choices. In my world, carbs have always been, and will continue to be, in easy reach. People didn't notice they were eating less because the had much less desire to eat, not because there was little for them to eat. :: OTOH, in the "good old days" it was all too easy to burn out on :: feelings of deprivation because there was so much you couldn't eat. :: The availability of the low carb treats and alternatives helps cope :: with this. But it takes away the ease of low carbing and brings back :: the need to be aware of portion control, self-control, and all the :: other nasty stuff that went with traditinal weight control. If you have a treat, you have to remove something else. Checks and balances. :: -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 :: diabetes, hba1c 5.2. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] ::: simply trying to control blood sugar levels who can also benefit ::: from these products. Just something to think about. Roger, You and I and a couple other people here count calories, but we're a tiny minority of low carb dieters. The big message of all the low carb books I read in the late 90s was that you could lose weight simply by counting carbs and forgetting about calories. That is the general perception and it was only when I stumbled in here in 1998 that I heard anything to suggest it wasn't true. Even so, it took me a couple years to really believe it. -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 diabetes, hba1c 5.2. Cut the carbs to respond to my email address! Low carb facts and figures, my weight-loss photos, tips, recipes, strategies for dealing with diabetes and more at http://www.geocities.com/jenny_the_bean/ Looking for help controlling your blood sugar? Visit http://www.alt-support-diabetes.org/Newly%20Diagnosed.htm > :: Pat, > :: [quoted text clipped - 70 lines] > ::: simply trying to control blood sugar levels who can also benefit > ::: from these products. Just something to think about. :: Roger, :: :: You and I and a couple other people here count calories, but we're a :: tiny minority of low carb dieters. I agree we are in the minority, but I do think it is more than a couple of others. :) Fitday gets mentioned too much for that to be true. :: The big message of all the low carb books I read in the late 90s was :: that you could lose weight simply by counting carbs and forgetting :: about calories. That is the general perception and it was only when :: I stumbled in here in 1998 that I heard anything to suggest it :: wasn't true. Even so, it took me a couple years to really believe :: it. That is true. I do think that if one is willing to get hungry before eating, and then limit the amount you eat, one can lose easily without counting kcals. However, getting hungry before a meal is a sure fire way to get in trouble :) :: -- Jenny - Low Carbing for 4 years. At goal for weight. Type 2 :: diabetes, hba1c 5.2. [quoted text clipped - 89 lines] :::::: sugar levels who can also benefit from these products. Just :::::: something to think about. > Roger, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > here in 1998 that I heard anything to suggest it wasn't true. Even so, it > took me a couple years to really believe it. I count calories too. The "forgetting about calories" is a message that's been grossly misinterpreted to mean what people WISH it could mean. But my body interprets the "forget about calories" message thusly: When I am on the straight and narrow and CLEAN LIVING low carbing, (NO sugar, no fakey-fakey - just pure ingredient foods) I don't NEED to count calories anymore simply because it self-regulates (YMMV of course). That's a valid opinion which does happen to someone. However it is entirely different than a "calories don't count" message. The amount of food energy I take in DOES count. I can't go and eat 50 chicken wings, and drink a quart of olive oil, and chow down 15 eggs in a day and expect to LOSE weight on it LOL (huge exaggeration to illustrate my point). CM >Take it from someone in maintenance. The low carb products can pose problems >there too. No argument about that. But then eating excess calories of anything can cause problems, yes? Folks will need to be aware of what they are eating whether these products exist or not. But it is nice to have the option of eating lower carb products when the calorie budget allows for it. >OTOH, in the "good old days" it was all too easy to burn out on feelings of >deprivation because there was so much you couldn't eat. The availability of >the low carb treats and alternatives helps cope with this. That's the point I was trying to make. >But it takes away the ease of low carbing and brings back the >need to be aware of portion control, self-control, and all the other >nasty stuff that went with traditinal weight control. Oh, I think this applies whether these products exist or not. (I already said that, didn't I?). I much prefer having the option of eating these products when I want them over not having them available. I count all my calories either way, so I don't see having them available as a problem at all. > >Take it from someone in maintenance. The low carb products can pose problems > >there too. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the option of eating lower carb products when the calorie budget > allows for it. Exactly. Also, when you just want a little something, a 120 calorie chocolate bar may be a better calorie bargain than a handful of nuts. > >OTOH, in the "good old days" it was all too easy to burn out on feelings of > >deprivation because there was so much you couldn't eat. The availability of [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > I count all my calories either way, so I don't see having them > available as a problem at all. Me too. Really, anyone who thinks that something is a "free food" because it is low carb is going to run into problems anyway. Except lettuce of course. I really do think that's a free food. Martha SignatureBegin where you are - but don't end there. > >Re: Low-carb goodies tripping up Atkins dieters > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > lose weight on any program when you're used to eating any- and every- > thing you want. Yeah, but that's true about cream and steak and nuts and pork rinds. People overindulge on all these things and then wonder why they're not losing the way they want to. But, for some reason everyone turns to the manufactured foods as if the problem is somehow specific to them. The truth is we have to learn to honestly assess and control the amounts we eat of *all* foods. Some people have enough latitude in their calories that they can include nuts or cream in their weight loss regime, others of us have less slack. In fact, one of the reasons I find the bars so useful is because, at 200 calories, it's the lowest calorie breakfast that keeps me satisfied until lunch time. I feel that these so-called LC foods are going to get > too many people in a heap of trouble because they see LC and think it's > okay to eat it endlessly. As the article says, the same happened with Sure. Hell, I've overdone it on cabbage. The smart dieters realize things aren't going the way they expect, pause and regroup and figure out that they're overconsuming. The ones who think that there's some magic in this and they should necessarily be losing because they're doing Atkins would have failed whether their downfall was too many Atkins Endulge or eating a whole package of bacon. I bet if we could take this group back to a time when there were no Atkins brand products, we'd still see tons of people complaining that they weren't losing even though they were only eating steak and salad and cheese and cream and not realizing that it's not enough to eat the right foods, you need to eat them in the right amounts. I'm old enough to remember the last time Atkins was big. Lots of people tried it, most people failed. > low fat...hey, it's low fat, I can eat the whole box of cookies! But it > just doesn't work that way, and I think quite a few people are going to > be very disappointed in their weight loss slowing down, the quality of > the LC foods being sacrificed for that label, and the temptation to eat > more and more of the treat foods. There are some great LC products out But, by this logic we should all be down on nuts. Cause nuts certainly do that to lots of people right here, who know better (yes, Roger, I am talking to you <g>) > there. And there are some great LC recipes. But we all need to use some > common sense when it comes to what we're eating and calling "the Atkins > diet." I can almost guarantee that weight loss will be more consistent > and show more progress if we keep these new LC foods to an absolute > minimum. And I have an equally good claim that the same could be said for a lot of completely natural foods that many of us tend to overeat. Martha "the fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our bars, but in ourselves" Gallagher SignatureBegin where you are - but don't end there. :: darlaaz@aol.com (Darlaaz) writes: :: [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] :: guarantee that weight loss will be more consistent and show more :: progress if we keep these new LC foods to an absolute minimum. When you take these issues and combine them with the popular notion - expressed here a lot - that calories don't matter, just carbs, the problems really amplify, imo. A free pass by the LC experts to eat LC foods with abandon. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2012 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.