Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion GroupsGeneral TopicsLow CarbWeightWatchers
WeightAdviser.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / March 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

does this sound about right

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Keke3737 - 02 Mar 2004 00:25 GMT
I have been doing atkins since Jan. 26th was 204.5lbs and i weighed in today at
182.5lbs. A loss of 22lbs in 36 days. I have had stalls and need to excersise
more. Im happy with the loss wish it was more. I started eating fruit.
Blackberries, strawberrys and blueberries because i missed fruit. I was trying
to stick to induction longer but the berries were screaming out my name and I
thought this is better than candy and cookies. Fruit never tasted so good!! I
guess im wondering over all from people who have been on atkins  does seem like
a good loss. I kick myself in the as all the time because im always worried i
will fail. Let me thanks
Karen
AnnieBrouton - 02 Mar 2004 00:40 GMT
>I have been doing atkins since Jan. 26th was 204.5lbs and i weighed in today
>at
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
>will fail. Let me thanks
>Karen

Karen, I started low carbing - though did not do induction - beginning Jan. 12.
Actually,  the week before that I just cut out sugar and in the next wee began
limiting my carbs to 50/day until I'm now doing between 30-35 carbs a day
(excluding fiber).  I've lost 20.5 lbs. since January 5.   Personally, I think
your weight loss sounds VERY good!

I generally eat a half cup of some type of berries every day - and sometimes
3/4 a cup if I have the carbs to spare.  I also eat 1/8 to 1/4 cup of
cantaloupe in the mornings. Even if it's just a taste, more or less, it makes
me feel good.    And you're right, fruit never tasted so good!
Annie
Rebecca - 02 Mar 2004 00:53 GMT
> I have been doing atkins since Jan. 26th was 204.5lbs and i weighed in today at
> 182.5lbs. A loss of 22lbs in 36 days. I have had stalls and need to excersise
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> will fail. Let me thanks
> Karen

You're doing great!  22 lbs in 36 days is amazing!  Add a few low
glycemic carbs.  Berries are good.  You'll continue losing.

Isn't it wonderful how eating low carb makes normal healthy food taste
so good?  I have been a sugar addict all my life.  Nothing was sweet
enough unless it was straight sugar and full of artificial flavorings -
I have been known to eat a pound of jelly bellies in one sitting!  But
now, I can sit down with an apple and really savor every bite.  I love it.

Rebecca
Keke3737 - 02 Mar 2004 06:22 GMT
Im not sure what low glycemic carbs are?
and thanks for the response.
Karen
Rebecca - 02 Mar 2004 16:42 GMT
> Im not sure what low glycemic carbs are?
> and thanks for the response.
> Karen

The glycemic index is a measure of how much your blood sugar goes up
following ingestion of a particular food.  The lower that number is the
better.  Here's a website I like:

http://diabetes.about.com/library/mendosagi/nmendosagi.htm

It's not really part of the Atkins diet exactly, but it can be a good
tool in a generic low carb lifestyle.

Rebecca
Bob in CT - 02 Mar 2004 17:02 GMT
>> Im not sure what low glycemic carbs are?
>> and thanks for the response.
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Rebecca

It is a good tool, but it has to be taken with a grain of salt.  Going by
GI, one could eat pasta (below 50) or brown rice, but both of these made
my head spin due to the insulin/blood sugar rush.  Even sugar has a GI of
around 60-70.  What's interesting is that malititol seems to range from 30
to 90!  What's the deal with that?

Signature

Bob in CT
Remove ".x" to reply

Rebecca - 02 Mar 2004 20:44 GMT
>>> Im not sure what low glycemic carbs are?
>>> and thanks for the response.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> GI of around 60-70.  What's interesting is that malititol seems to range
> from 30 to 90!  What's the deal with that?

You're right.  It's just one of the many tools I use.  I tend to combine
all the wisdom I read about everywhere.  G.I. does help me make
decisions though.  For example, barley is extremely low, so if I am
making soup, I'll throw in a handful of that rather than a handful of
rice, which is quite a bit higher.  I don't follow Atkins strictly
though, so take my advice with a grain of salt also.  It all depends on
what diet you want to follow and how you want to live the rest of your
life.  For me, this works pretty well.

I also agree with you about maltitol.  I try to avoid the sugar alcohols
myself.  They taste too much like real sugar to help in my efforts to
stay un-addicted to sweets, but not enough like sugar to be satisfying.
 I agree with most here that fake food is something to be avoided *for
the most part*, although I do indulge in it occasionally.

Speaking of rice, I read an interesting article once, but then lost it
so I can't show you to it, that mentioned the extreme variability in the
G.I. of the different varieties of rice.  Basmati seemed to have the
lowest G.I. and brown rice in general was also lower than white rice.
For my purposes that means that if I am going to serve rice to the
family and think that I might eat some of it, I should use brown basmati.

Rebecca
NoSpam - 03 Mar 2004 23:25 GMT
Thanks for explaining.

> >> Im not sure what low glycemic carbs are?
> >> and thanks for the response.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> around 60-70.  What's interesting is that malititol seems to range from 30
> to 90!  What's the deal with that?
Saffire - 02 Mar 2004 01:32 GMT
> I have been doing atkins since Jan. 26th was 204.5lbs and i weighed in today at
> 182.5lbs. A loss of 22lbs in 36 days. I have had stalls and need to excersise
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> a good loss. I kick myself in the as all the time because im always worried i
> will fail. Let me thanks

It's a GREAT loss!  I read your first sentence and exclaimed OUT LOUD at how
unfair it is that some people (like YOU) lose a lot of weight in such a short
period of time and it's taking some other people (like ME) MUCH longer.  It's a
VERY good loss!  The rate of loss will probably slow down for you pretty soon,
but it's an OUTSTANDING start -- you done good, kid!

Signature

Saffire
205/169/125  -  5'2.5"
Atkins since 6/14/03
Progress photo:  http://photos.yahoo.com/saffire333

NoSpam - 02 Mar 2004 01:49 GMT
Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
about low carbs?

Brian

> I have been doing atkins since Jan. 26th was 204.5lbs and i weighed in today at
> 182.5lbs. A loss of 22lbs in 36 days. I have had stalls and need to excersise
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> will fail. Let me thanks
> Karen
Aramanth Dawe - 02 Mar 2004 03:13 GMT
>Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>about low carbs?
>
>Brian

Induction is the term Atkins uses when referring to the most
restrictive phase of the diet he created.  Many people who haven't
read the New Diet Revolution assume that this phase (up 20 g of carbs
a day, a specific, limited list of carbs that are allowable and
intended ONLY to be followed for 2 weeks) is the 'entire' eating plan.
It is intended to be used as a kick-start, to help break a 'carb
addiction' and also uses up stored glycogen quickly - which can lead
to a big (water) weight loss.  That big loss is sometimes the
encouragement people need to keep on with the diet plan.  After you've
eaten at Induction levels for 2 weeks, the Plan calls for you to add
small increments of carbs to your daily intake until you find your
critical level for loss.

Different plans may have an initial very low carb phase which can be
similar to Induction.

Aramanth
Saffire - 02 Mar 2004 03:20 GMT
> Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
> about low carbs?

Induction is the initial two-week phase of the Atkins diet.  During that time,
you are limited to certain foods (which is still a LOT) while your body depletes
it's store of emergency glycogen in the liver and gets used to switching to using
fat as fuel as opposed to carbohydrates and YOU start to break old eating habits.  
It's a kickstart to the Atkins Way Of Eating (WOE)

Signature

Saffire
205/169/125  -  5'2.5"
Atkins since 6/14/03
Progress photo:  http://photos.yahoo.com/saffire333

Emil Mroz - 02 Mar 2004 05:21 GMT
>Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>about low carbs?

Induction is a term used by Scientologists and Heaven's Gate cultists
to describe the process of being converted to the "proper" way of
life.

--
Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated. Smile! Have a nice day.
Nikole - 04 Mar 2004 04:00 GMT
> >Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
> >about low carbs?
>
> Induction is a term used by Scientologists and Heaven's Gate cultists
> to describe the process of being converted to the "proper" way of
> life.

Not to be intrusive or to say your opinion isn't welcome but if you
think so little of the low carb way of life then why are you posting
on a low carb support website?  I understand some people don't believe
in the diet and that is fine but I don't think it is very nice to
criticize those of us who do follow and believe in it.
revek - 04 Mar 2004 05:29 GMT
Nikole  burbled across the ether:

>>> Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when
>>> talking about low carbs?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> in the diet and that is fine but I don't think it is very nice to
> criticize those of us who do follow and believe in it.

I read it like he was being cutesy in a mildly sarcastic way (there are
some people who treat the book/website as gospel and that is sort of
cultish), while at the same time kind of explaining what induction is
partly about.  It is not about weight loss.  It *is* about:

breaking carb addiction
learning to listen to your body (find out what real hunger is, find out
what saited means)
breaking the 'lowfat' habit/fear
breaking the 'starve myself to lose weight' habit/fear
cleaning out/detoxing your system as much as possible
stabilizing your blood sugar and insulin response
prepping your system for a food intolerance test

The weight loss is a nice side benefit, but not the purpose of Atkins
induction.

Signature

revek  www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html  lowcarbing since June
2002 5'2" 41 F  165+/too much/size seven petite please
This memory brought to you by a brain cell that might have cured cancer
instead.--Steve Coltrin

Emil Mroz - 06 Mar 2004 03:21 GMT
>> >Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>> >about low carbs?
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>in the diet and that is fine but I don't think it is very nice to
>criticize those of us who do follow and believe in it.

First of all, this isn't a website, it is usenet. But that's not
really important.

The question was, "what does induction mean when talking about low
carbs." My answer is, NOTHING. Induction has no meaning that I know of
in connection with a low carb diet.

I know of mathematical induction, logical induction, electrical
induction, and induction into the military, but I don't know of any
low carb induction.

However, I understand that a certain diet plan (or way of eating, if
you prefer) uses a stage that is referred to as Induction. But, and
this is a big but:

LOW CARB DOES NOT EQUAL ATKINS!

Sorry for shouting, but I sometimes think that The Scarlet Letter
makes some people go deaf.

Anyway, my point, and I do have one, is that it is entirely possible
to eat a low or lower carb diet without buying into one certain
company's money-making machine.

One need not buy all the books, or snack bars, or squid shakes, or
tube socks, or whatever else they want you to buy. Just because it is
branded with the Big A doesn't mean that it is good, right, or
necessary.

BTW, if you thought what I wrote in the last message was criticism,
you obviously haven't been around Usenet very long. I'm a rank amateur
compare to some of the folks around here.
Jean M. - 06 Mar 2004 03:53 GMT
>>> >Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>>> >about low carbs?
[quoted text clipped - 41 lines]
>you obviously haven't been around Usenet very long. I'm a rank amateur
>compare to some of the folks around here.

And none of what you wrote answered the question. "Induction" does
have a meaning re: Atkins. Feeling a bit defensive is understandable.
Emil Mroz - 06 Mar 2004 04:28 GMT
>And none of what you wrote answered the question. "Induction" does
>have a meaning re: Atkins. Feeling a bit defensive is understandable.

But that wasn't the question, was it.

The question (in this portion of the thread) was:

>Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>about low carbs?
>
>Brian

No mention of Atkins there, is there?

Defensive? I don't think so. I have absolutely nothing to feel
defensive about. I live my life on *my* terms. Can you say the same?

--  
Emil
DJ Delorie - 06 Mar 2004 05:04 GMT
> >Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
> >about low carbs?
>
> No mention of Atkins there, is there?

Atkins wasn't the question.  Atkins was the *answer*.
Emil Mroz - 06 Mar 2004 08:03 GMT
>> >Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>> >about low carbs?
>>
>> No mention of Atkins there, is there?
>
>Atkins wasn't the question.  Atkins was the *answer*.

Clever.  :)

I've been meaning to ask you. Are you the same DJ Delorie of DJGPP
fame? If so, I just wanted to say good work.

--  
Emil
DJ Delorie - 06 Mar 2004 15:09 GMT
> I've been meaning to ask you. Are you the same DJ Delorie of DJGPP
> fame? If so, I just wanted to say good work.

I am, thanks.  http://www.delorie.com/
Jean M. - 06 Mar 2004 15:58 GMT
>>And none of what you wrote answered the question. "Induction" does
>>have a meaning re: Atkins. Feeling a bit defensive is understandable.
>
>But that wasn't the question, was it.

You did not answer the question. It's simple, really.

>The question (in this portion of the thread) was:
>
>>Please forgive my ignorance, but what does "induction" mean when talking
>>about low carbs?

Induction is the first 2 weeks of Atkins. See how easy that was?

>No mention of Atkins there, is there?

Only because you didn't know the answer.

>Defensive? I don't think so. I have absolutely nothing to feel
>defensive about. I live my life on *my* terms. Can you say the same?

Did Atkins scare you as a child? ;-)

Get back to me when you lose the weight and we'll see how well your
terms work. I do wish you well with it, but you need to lose the
defensiveness. Time will tell if your way works, and I hope it does.
Emil Mroz - 06 Mar 2004 17:13 GMT
>Get back to me when you lose the weight and we'll see how well your
>terms work. I do wish you well with it, but you need to lose the
>defensiveness. Time will tell if your way works, and I hope it does.

MY way. What exactly is my way? I don't think I've mentioned one
single thing about my way of losing weight.

Do you mean to tell me that you believe that anything that is *not*
Atkins is wrong or doesn't work? If so, you are very much mistaken.

BTW, I've lost and continue to lose weight, and I am perfectly content
with my rate of weight loss. Can you say the same?

--  
Emil
Jean M. - 06 Mar 2004 17:58 GMT
>>Get back to me when you lose the weight and we'll see how well your
>>terms work. I do wish you well with it, but you need to lose the
>>defensiveness. Time will tell if your way works, and I hope it does.
>
>MY way. What exactly is my way? I don't think I've mentioned one
>single thing about my way of losing weight.

Good grief. You just like to argue. You first said:
>>Defensive? I don't think so. I have absolutely nothing to feel
>defensive about. I live my life on *my* terms. Can you say the same?

Your terms, your way. Potato, potahto.

>Do you mean to tell me that you believe that anything that is *not*
>Atkins is wrong or doesn't work? If so, you are very much mistaken.

Backatcha, bubba. Where did I say that? Again with the defensiveness
about your way. Nobody is attacking your way. Nobody knows your way.
The objection as I saw it was that you gave a smartass dumb answer to
a question and then went on to rant that Atkins isn't the be-all and
end-all.

>BTW, I've lost and continue to lose weight, and I am perfectly content
>with my rate of weight loss. Can you say the same?

Yes, I can. Thanks for asking. You still didn't answer the question
about induction. LOL!
Emil Mroz - 06 Mar 2004 18:46 GMT
>Yes, I can. Thanks for asking.

Fantastic, and you're welcome!

>You still didn't answer the question
>about induction. LOL!

I'm sorry, I must have missed that. What was your question about
induction?

I really don't know all that much about the specifics of the Atkins
way, but I'm sure that I could find the answer for you easy enough.

--  
Emil
 
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.