Weight Loss Forum / Low Carb / March 2004
Akins cannot work as its written
|
|
Thread rating:  |
JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 03:42 GMT All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the same time are not doing it properly. It is not how it is written. If you are doing it that way then the reason it has worked so far for you is because at first you lost water, then you plateaued, and unhappy with your failure to progress, you tried to adjust your calories and because you are now on a reduced calorie diet THAT is why you are losing. Not because you are low carbing. Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. You just think it works cause you modified it, but thats cheating. The diet as it is written could never work.
btw, if you do the diet like jenny beans page tells you, you are starving yourself
jessi
Crafting Mom - 18 Mar 2004 03:47 GMT >failure to progress, you tried to adjust your calories and because you are now >on a reduced calorie diet THAT is why you are losing. You say that like it's a bad thing. I've tried to "reduce calories" in the past with other types of diets. Cutting out the filler foods and high starches and sugars is the easiest way to reduce calories for me. I actually feel like I've eaten after a meal.
DigitalVinyl - 18 Mar 2004 03:57 GMT You are a clueless troll. But you knew that before you ever started typing.
DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/316/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004
marengo - 18 Mar 2004 04:06 GMT | All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the | same time are not doing it properly. Perhaps you had better read your troll manual to gain a better understanding of your subject matter. You could be much more effective in agitating people; instead you just come off as a troll newbie.
Atkins *is* a reduced caloried diet. Eating high-fat/low carb gives one a feeling of being satiated more quickly so one eats less. In addition, the insulin-regulating effect of the low carb diet prevents the spikes and drops in blood glucose that helps lead to obesity and other health complications including Syndrome-X and T2 diabetes.
Perhaps if you keep practicing, with time you'll get the hang of it? ;-)
 Signature Peter 270/228/180 website: http://users.thelink.net/marengo
martymkm@webtv.net - 18 Mar 2004 14:37 GMT JessiJelloQueen wrote:
| All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the | same time are not doing it properly.
--------------------------------
And you post this in a low-carb newsgroup teeming with people that have been doing Atkins successfully for years because.....?
Regards; Marty
JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 15:22 GMT >And you post this in a low-carb newsgroup teeming with people that have >been doing Atkins successfully for years because.....? Youve been doing a modified version of a diet that is set up to fail.
DigitalVinyl - 18 Mar 2004 16:22 GMT >>And you post this in a low-carb newsgroup teeming with people that have >>been doing Atkins successfully for years because.....? > >Youve been doing a modified version of a diet that is set up to fail. Or perhaps you are the one that failed. Failed to educate yourself about how your own body works. I don't restrict my calories but I track them to see what's going on with them. And they are going down as is the weight, 3-4lbs a week for 9 weeks now.
No one can tell you how many calories to eat. If you think they can, you don't understand some basic concepts in life. You want others to come up with answers for you. You determine what is reasonable intake for your body based upon your metabolism (unmeasurable) & your activity level. If you weren't losing weight, then you should have cut carbs again or possibly looked for a medical/psychological issue why you continued to overeat without any food addictions being a cause. Your weight problems may have absolutely nothing to do with diet.
DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/316/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004
martymkm@webtv.net - 18 Mar 2004 17:34 GMT Marty wrote: And you post this in a low-carb newsgroup teeming with people that have been doing Atkins successfully for years because.....? --------------------------------
Youve been doing a modified version of a diet that is set up to fail.
--------------------------------
Do you have a crystal ball or something? How do you know if I, or anyeone else here count calories? Just because you decided to be a diet policeperson doesn't give you the right to categorise anyone. Apparently you are the one with dieting issues since you consider it your primary responsibility here to carelessly inform anyone as to their WOE.
Marty
Luna - 18 Mar 2004 17:53 GMT I agree with the OP, to a certain extent. Atkins works as written for some people. Some people, don't know how many, do not have to count calories while doing Atkins, their appetites are supressed enough that they just can't eat too many calories. There was even a study that showed that people on low-carb could eat a bit more calories and lose a bit more weight than people on low-fat diets.
However, for plenty of people, they DO have to limit calories in order to lose weight. Maybe they don't in the beginning, but when it gets down to the last 10 pounds they might find that they do. So in those cases, no, Atkins does not work as it is written. It is still a good tool though, because for many it makes limiting calories easier to do.
 Signature Michelle Levin http://www.mindspring.com/~lunachick
I have only 3 flaws. My first flaw is thinking that I only have 3 flaws.
Bob in CT - 18 Mar 2004 18:10 GMT > I agree with the OP, to a certain extent. Atkins works as written for > some [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Atkins does not work as it is written. It is still a good tool though, > because for many it makes limiting calories easier to do. Doesn't Atkins say (in the New book) that some people might have to count calories?
 Signature Bob in CT Remove ".x" to reply
Renee70 - 18 Mar 2004 18:14 GMT > Doesn't Atkins say (in the New book) that some people might have to count > calories? Yes
Roger Zoul - 18 Mar 2004 19:04 GMT :: On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 16:53:56 GMT, Luna :: <lunachick@NOSPAMmindspring.com> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] :: Doesn't Atkins say (in the New book) that some people might have to :: count calories? I would argue that many of us who count calories don't have to do so to lose weight....however, counting calories has advantages...I do so because I can basically lose weight at will -- just by lowering my food intake -- stalls are something that I control. I don't like hit-and-miss weight loss....it makes me feel as though I'm out of control....also, it helps me calibrate my hunger....if I eat 2000 kcals a day and don't lose weight, lower it to 1800 and start to feel hunger, then I know I'm going to lose on that amount...and it works that way. Also, counting is not nearly as painful as people seem to think. I do take breaks from counting now and then...but mainly when I'm not actively trying to lose...like on a carbup...
JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 15:22 GMT >Atkins *is* a reduced caloried diet. Eating high-fat/low carb gives one a >feeling of being satiated more quickly so one eats less No, it is not. If you read the book and call atkins hotline they tell you never count calories. And to eat as much protein and fat as you want. I told them what i ate. I was eating 3000 calories a day. They told me my portions and carbs were correct i told them 3000 calories seemed like alot they told me were not counting calories and yours are fine. So if you are counting calories on atkins you arent doing it right and if you do it the way the book and hotline says then atkins cant possibly work as prescribed. That is all im saying. If you cant lose without modifying a diet then the diet doesnt work.
Jessi
Roger Zoul - 18 Mar 2004 16:52 GMT ::: Atkins *is* a reduced caloried diet. Eating high-fat/low carb ::: gives one a feeling of being satiated more quickly so one eats less [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] :: That is all im saying. :: If you cant lose without modifying a diet then the diet doesnt work. Well, unless you weigh 300 lbs you probably won't lose any fat...
:: Jessi jamie - 18 Mar 2004 19:06 GMT >>Atkins *is* a reduced caloried diet. Eating high-fat/low carb gives one a >>feeling of being satiated more quickly so one eats less [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I told them what i ate. > I was eating 3000 calories a day. Was that a hotline on Atkins Nutritionals products? He sold off that company some time ago. Of course they want you to "eat all you want" especially of their products, so you'll continue to "need" them. Atkins never, ever wrote "eat all you want."
 Signature jamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com)
"There's a seeker born every minute."
Archon - 18 Mar 2004 19:37 GMT > No, it is not. > If you read the book and call atkins hotline they tell you never count > calories. > And to eat as much protein and fat as you want. > I told them what i ate. > I was eating 3000 calories a day. When I lost weight, I was eating 2000 (and I am a 6'1" male), and that was eating as much protien and fat as I wanted without counting calories (except once out of curiosity.)
And you have lisunderstood that a reduced calorie diet is one where you count calories. Atkins says that it is not necessary to count them. It usually works out without counting. But if (as in your case) it doesn't make you eat less, then you might have to do something else, like count. Or maybe you are eating too much because of otehr factors, like boredom, emotional trouble, etc, which you need to address. Start excercising bigtime, to allow higher calorie intake, and to get your mind on something else than food and personal pain.
Ross Himes - 18 Mar 2004 19:44 GMT Hum........... I sure think I remember reading in an Atkins book that somewhere along the line, if you're not losing weight then you should consider the caloric intake. I don't think calories can be completely ignored in some cases.
Gotta remember: "Calorie is king." If you require 2000 calories a day and eat 3000 calories of anything you WILL gain weight. Biology 101.
> No, it is not. > If you read the book and call atkins hotline they tell you never count > calories. Doug Freyburger - 19 Mar 2004 00:25 GMT > If you cant lose without modifying a diet then the diet doesnt work. Did you even read the book? Atkins is a process not a menu. If you do not follow a program of modification, then you are not following the directions. If you don't modify you aren't on Atkins.
Jean M. - 18 Mar 2004 04:13 GMT >Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. Your reasoning is flawed, Queenie. Better dust off your troll suit and try again. ;-)
-- Jean M. New food of the week: Ice water. Lots of it. (The jalapeño peppers are very hot!)
Do away with flipfloping to e-mail.
The Queen of Cans and Jars - 18 Mar 2004 04:42 GMT > >Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. > > Your reasoning is flawed, Queenie. Better dust off your troll suit and > try again. ;-) there's only one "Queenie" around here! hmmmph!
marengo - 18 Mar 2004 05:16 GMT ||| Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. || || Your reasoning is flawed, Queenie. Better dust off your troll suit and || try again. ;-) | | there's only one "Queenie" around here! hmmmph! ... and one is enough! <g>
 Signature Peter 270/228/180 website: http://users.thelink.net/marengo
The Queen of Cans and Jars - 18 Mar 2004 15:15 GMT > ||| Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. > || [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > ... and one is enough! <g> damn straight!
JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 15:00 GMT >From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars)
>there's only one "Queenie" around here! hmmmph! Yes, i know all about you qocaj's, and id say you are a lowcarb drop out who is sitting there right now eating a high carb chocolate cake. How come you never post your stats or pics? I dont think you have ever tried to diet because you couldnt hack it. You just like to argue and put people down. You are one sour hearted biddie.
Jessi
JC Der Koenig - 18 Mar 2004 15:07 GMT LOL
 Signature Most of us probably aren't in danger of eating too little. :)
Becky P.
> >From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars) > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jessi The Queen of Cans and Jars - 18 Mar 2004 15:15 GMT > >From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars) > > >there's only one "Queenie" around here! hmmmph! > > How come you never post your stats or pics? just because i post to usenet, that doesn't entitle people to access to my private life.
Roger Zoul - 18 Mar 2004 15:17 GMT ::: From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars) :: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] :: out who is sitting there right now eating a high carb chocolate cake. :: How come you never post your stats or pics? Some people aren't into stats and pics. To each their own....
:: I dont think you have ever tried to diet because you couldnt hack it. :: You just like to argue and put people down. :: You are one sour hearted biddie. :: :: Jessi Linda Harms - 18 Mar 2004 20:01 GMT > >From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars) > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Jessi QUEEN FIGHT!!!!!!!!
 Signature ************************************ Linda Harms New York, NY
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage And then is heard no more. It is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
Macbeth, Act 5 Scene 5
The Queen of Cans and Jars - 18 Mar 2004 22:46 GMT > > >From: dhrravr@ohatzhapu.bet (The Queen of Cans and Jars) > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > QUEEN FIGHT!!!!!!!! hee!
Tom - 18 Mar 2004 05:33 GMT I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come from chemically treated, mechanically separated, and genetically engineered processes and then we would be eating healthier and would feel full after we eat? What is so healthy about eating foods that dissolve and enter your blood stream so quickly, as to overload the bodies systems? Are you saying that eating white flour, sugar, and high starch veggies like potatoes that do not occur that way in nature is the proper way to eat? Because businesses that make these products say that you must have them to be healthy? Don't you think that eating food in it's natural form is far better for you then what our scientists and food experts can artificially process? Do you think that eating grains that some machine crushed into a fine powder so your stomach doesn't have to do any work to extract the calories is way better than natural food? Do you think maybe, just maybe, that by eating natural foods that stay in your digestive tract a little longer than that artificial white stuff, might just keep your blood glucose levels at an even rate, therefore satisfying your hunger? Don't you think that eating protein and fat in their natural proportions of 33/66 of a variety of different meats might just be what nature intended you to eat? Maybe the reason that a lot of us are getting fat, is that we are living too easy a life, with too low of an activity level, and our foods are to easy and available and too artificial for our bodies to handle. Maybe the reason that a lot of us could not control our calorie intake was because the food we were told to eat that would keep us healthy, is in fact killing us slowly by making us feel great when we eat them, but then feel really low an hour later, which then makes us hungrier for more artificial food. Personally, I don't count calories, but I guess a lot of people who do Atkins' diet are suspicious of eating 'till your satisfied, and are therefore driven to find out how many calories they are consuming, to make sure that they are eating enough, because the "feeling" on a lo-carb diet has been so foreign to the way that a traditional diet rich in carbs has made them feel in the past. Don't believe all the bullshit that this way of eating is unhealthy, and that there is some sort of trick or cheat. I feel better than I have ever felt, and I am able to control my calorie intake by allowing my body to tell me that I am hungry, not some artificial food re-action that causes me to over-eat because I feel like I'm starving. Yes, I believe that my calorie intake is lower than before, but I'm also more satisfied after I eat. Label reading is so much easier as well. Steak says "made from beef". Broccoli is broccoli. How many vitamins and nutrients do they have to add to cereal just to make it edible? Most of the carbohydrate rich foods are artificial and should not be eaten. Natural foods should be, and will satisfy your hunger and you will not have to count calories. Tom 210/184/180
> All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > jessi Eileen Dougal - 18 Mar 2004 07:12 GMT Wow, Tom, that was a great read!
Eileen
> I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come > from chemically treated, mechanically separated, and genetically engineered [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > > > jessi Bear - 18 Mar 2004 13:22 GMT Well said!
 Signature - Bear Grrrrrrrr : o)
297/267/210 Highest weight 353 http://home.earthlink.net/~polarbear50/index.html
> I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come > from chemically treated, mechanically separated, and genetically engineered [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > Tom > 210/184/180 Evelyn Ruut - 18 Mar 2004 14:43 GMT Great post, Tom.
 Signature Evelyn
(To reply to me personally, remove sox)
> I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come > from chemically treated, mechanically separated, and genetically engineered [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > > > > jessi Tom - 18 Mar 2004 15:25 GMT Thanks Eileen, Bear, and Evelyn. I'm hoping Jessi and other misinformed diet gurus will benefit as well. Tom
> Great post, Tom. > [quoted text clipped - 82 lines] > > > > > > jessi JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 15:23 GMT >From: "Tom" tpgallant@shaw.ca
>I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come >from chemically treated, I cant read this post. Its hard to read when its all in one clump.
Jessi
Tom - 18 Mar 2004 15:54 GMT Summary for Jessi. "The diet works" Tom
> >From: "Tom" tpgallant@shaw.ca > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Jessi DigitalVinyl - 18 Mar 2004 16:09 GMT >>From: "Tom" tpgallant@shaw.ca > >>I guess what you are saying then is that 50% of your calories should come >>from chemically treated, > >I cant read this post. Then I see why you call hotlines and not bother reading... since long paragraphs are so difficult to read. That explains everything.
>Its hard to read when its all in one clump. > >Jessi DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/316/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004
Mirek Fidler - 18 Mar 2004 10:37 GMT > All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. ...........
> btw, if you do the diet like jenny beans page tells you, you are starving > yourself Thank you for coming here and saveing us! You finally opened my eyes! I am goint to do shoping some pasta, bread, sugar and pizza right now!
Mirek
JessiJelloQueen - 18 Mar 2004 15:28 GMT >Thank you for coming here and saveing us! You finally opened my eyes! I >am goint to do shoping some pasta, bread, sugar and pizza right now! Oh no dont do that. All i meant is that if your self created version of atkins works for you do it but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you had to modify it its no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet.
Jessi
DigitalVinyl - 18 Mar 2004 16:15 GMT >>Thank you for coming here and saveing us! You finally opened my eyes! I >>am goint to do shoping some pasta, bread, sugar and pizza right now! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you had to modify it its >no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet. You've missed major points in atkin's book... they can be hard to find because he wrote so poorly. It is your job to customize the diet, find food addictions/allergies and try to incorporate foods or pull them out of your diet. Each person MUST customize a diet to fit the functions of their body. Everybody is slightly different.
I had no problem consuming up to 3500 calories a day in the begining, but my appetite did reduce without trying to restrict myself at all. I'm down to less than 2000 calories a day average. My guess is you were eating something that caused cravings and simply didn't want to give it up, nutrasweet-flavored products, heavy amounts of caffeine, sugarfree/SA-laden products. I gave up all sugar, all caffeine, and would not eat sugar substitute in the first four weeks. I found it very easy after the first week to stay away from all of them.
Also Atkins Nutritionals Inc. has nothing to do with Dr. Atkins since before his death and is just another company making money off of a diet fad. SO if you are listening to them you need to double check what they tell you.
DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email) 350/316/Mar-315/200 Atkins since Jan 12, 2004
Roger Zoul - 18 Mar 2004 16:54 GMT ::: Thank you for coming here and saveing us! You finally opened my ::: eyes! I [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] :: you do it but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you :: had to modify it its no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet. Not true....how can counting calories make it not atkins...does atkins get to tell me exactly what to do? please...
:: Jessi Coff - 18 Mar 2004 19:42 GMT > All i meant is that if your self created version of atkins works for you do it > but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you had to modify it its > no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet. > > Jessi Jessi-
sa·ti·ate ( P ) Pronunciation Key (ssh-t)
tr.v. sa·ti·at·ed, sa·ti·at·ing, sa·ti·ates
To satisfy (an appetite or desire) fully. To satisfy to excess.
adj. (-t) Filled to satisfaction.
This is what NO low-fat high-carb diet has ever done for me. I watch my carbs and my calories BECAUSE I WANT TO. Here's breaking news: Dr. Adkins doesn't say to eat "all you want" or "all you can". He acknowledges that one can over-indulge and negate any benefit.
I track my calories on fitday.com and know what? The better I am at controlling and selecting my carbs, the more my calorie intake falls. It's not a deliberate calculation, it just happened.
Please worry less about the semantics that are at the foundation of your troll and try harder to support the millions (and growing) numbers who are breaking the chains that manufactured, high carb crap has kept them in.
For the first time in my life I AM FREE. It's my buddy "satiation" kicking in, and you know who I have to be eternally grateful to? The late (and great) Dr. Adkins. I pray he is in heaven looking down chearing us all on, because he has done more than ANYONE in my life to help me be a better person.
Nabisco, Sara Lee, Coke, Taco Bell, McDonalds, and all the rest can go straight to hell. They don't own me anymore!
Coff
Post less, contribute more
Stargazer - 19 Mar 2004 12:07 GMT > >Thank you for coming here and saveing us! You finally opened my eyes! I > >am goint to do shoping some pasta, bread, sugar and pizza right now! [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you had to modify it its > no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet. Straight from the Atkins website FAQ, added emphasis mine: http://tinyurl.com/2k92r
"I'm used to counting calories. How many am I allowed on Induction?
The Atkins Nutritional Approach counts grams of carbohydrates instead of calories. In Induction, you are allowed 20 grams of Net Carbs. When you progress to Ongoing Weight Loss, you gradually add carbohydrates in 5-gram increments as you move toward Pre-Maintenance, and finally, in 10-gram increments as you approach the Lifetime Maintenance phase. Although you do not need to count calories, *it is certainly possible to consume too many calories even if your carb intake is on target*. If you are losing weight, there is no need to concern yourself with counting calories. *However, if you are unable to lose weight or actually regain weight lost, one possibility is that you are taking in more calories than you expend through exercise, thermogenesis (the body's own heat production) and other metabolic functions.*
Research has shown that on a controlled carbohydrate program, more calories are burned than on a low-fat, high-carbohydrate diet, so there is a certain metabolic advantage to the controlled carb approach. *But understand that this does not give you a license to gorge.*
If you are used to counting calories and are more comfortable with such an approach, the general rule of thumb is to multiply your present weight by 10 to 12 to get the daily caloric range at which you would lose weight. For example a 150-pound woman who consumes 1,500 to 1,800 calories daily should continue to lose weight.
The real goal of the Atkins program is to learn eating habits that will enable you to permanently maintain a healthy weight and lifestyle. *This includes changing old habits such as overeating that contributed to your original weight problem.*"
*****************
IIRC, this does not at all contradict anything that the Atkins book says. It merely clarifies what he said himself, which is that the Atkins plan is not a license to overconsume. If you think that through for just a minute, what really is the definition of 'overconsumption', besides eating past fullness and/or when you're not hungry?
The real measure of overconsumption is still caloric intake vs. outlay. And what is 'overconsumption' for one person may be maintenance or even loss for another. So following that thought to its logical conclusion - if you aren't losing weight while limiting carbs, then how do you know whether or not you're 'overconsuming' unless you also know how many calories you're taking in and burning?
The answer given above from the Atkins site is IMO perfectly in line with the Atkins plan - if you are losing at your carb limit (20g for Induction, and then at whatever your CCLL for OWL is), then there is no need to count calories. If you _aren't_ losing, you should count them to see if you're overeating.
The possibility of having to count calories is provided for in the Atkins plan - just as the 'fat fast' is also part of the plan, which not all of us have done or have needed to do. Just because I haven't done it myself doesn't mean I'm not following Atkins - it means that I didn't have any need to follow that part of the plan, per Atkins. Just as I also didn't have any need to cut dairy to deal with yeast overgrowth (which is also mentioned as a potential pitfall in the book). The book is full of 'if this is a problem/then try this' scenarios - which means that it's _meant_ to be tailored as you go along, to whatever your particular situation might be.
Atkins has worked just fine for me. I see the proof of it every day in the mirror.
Stargazer Atkins since Apr '03 192/147/140
LCer09 - 20 Mar 2004 17:31 GMT >Oh no dont do that. >All i meant is that if your self created version of atkins works for you do >it >but dont call it atkins or say atkins works cause if you had to modify it its >no longer atkins but a locarb lowcal diet. Atkins never said to be a glutton and pig out on 3000 calories a day. You would have to be a sumo wrestler to be following his "eat until no longer hungry" (NOT stuffed) advice and consuming THAT much.
LCing since 12/01/03- Me- 5'7" 265/219/140 & hubby- 6' 310/238/180
Stargazer - 18 Mar 2004 10:56 GMT > Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. > The diet as it is written could never work. ROFLMAO! Yup, sure hasn't worked for me at all...
Stargazer Atkins since Apr '03 192/147/140
Nikole - 18 Mar 2004 22:45 GMT First of all I have to say Tom that was a terrific post, bravo! Second Jessi, maybe if you bothered to read all of Dr. Atkins book before you got on your soap box to show us all the error of our ways you would have seen that the diet is designed to be tailored to each individual (as someone has already so wisely pointed out on here) and the way their body functions. So next time maybe you should think before you talk then you won't make such an a.s out of yourself like you have on here.
Nikole http://www.geocities.com/tater7712001/nikoleslowcarbadventure.html?1078386019830
JJ - 19 Mar 2004 00:56 GMT > First of all I have to say Tom that was a terrific post, bravo! > Second Jessi, maybe if you bothered to read all of Dr. Atkins book [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Nikole http://www.geocities.com/tater7712001/nikoleslowcarbadventure.html?1078386019830
Hey Nikole. I was raised in Destin...graduated from FWBHS many years ago...
 Signature JJ.
Stargazer - 19 Mar 2004 10:31 GMT http://www.geocities.com/tater7712001/nikoleslowcarbadventure.html?1078386019830
> Hey Nikole. I was raised in Destin...graduated from FWBHS > many years ago... <waves to neighbor Nikole in Destin>
That makes three of us here on the Emerald Coast that I know of now - there is another poster here who is in Milton.
Stargazer <in Pensacola, and loving the 70+ deg temps we've been having lately, *grin*> Atkins since Apr '03 192/147/140
JJ - 19 Mar 2004 10:42 GMT > That makes three of us here on the Emerald Coast that I know of now - > there is another poster here who is in Milton. I was raised there but don't live there now. I do remember it fondly. I believe that I will be in Destin/Fort Walton sometime in June/July if current plans stay in place. I live just north of Atlanta now...after having lived quite a few years in Arizona and the Netherlands.
 Signature JJ.
Stargazer - 19 Mar 2004 12:35 GMT > > That makes three of us here on the Emerald Coast that I > know of now - [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > live just north of Atlanta now...after having lived quite a > few years in Arizona and the Netherlands. Ya, I understood that you said you were raised there but don't live there now, <g>. I was counting myself, Nikole, and Susan S. (she posted in the "Where is everyone" thread a while back) as the three. I am a transplant here myself - the Navy brought me here in late '97 and I liked it so much that I stayed after I got out. Destin/Ft. Walton is nicer, but was not as good a job market for me.
I also may end up having to leave myself, though. Civil service is being reduced (and in many cases replaced with contractors) around here and if I don't want to get RIF'd I may have to move. And unfortunately most of the current openings are in places I don't really want to go (such as DC and surrounding area). :(
Nikole - 19 Mar 2004 16:26 GMT > http://www.geocities.com/tater7712001/nikoleslowcarbadventure.html?1078386019830 > > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Atkins since Apr '03 > 192/147/140 I've lived here for a while, I graduated from Freeport High School. <waving back to Stargazer> Yea I've been loving the weather too, now if I could just get a day off to go out and enjoy it. :) Nice to know I've got some neighbors on here. Nikole http://www.geocities.com/tater7712001/nikoleslowcarbadventure.html?1078386019830
Connie Joy - 19 Mar 2004 21:28 GMT > > Thus atkins doesnt work for the vast majority of people out there. > > The diet as it is written could never work. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Atkins since Apr '03 > 192/147/140 Same here...it hasn't worked for me at all either!!
Connie Joy LC Since April 14, 2003 272/185.5/165ish
Also just got my blood work back from my yearly physical: Total Cholesterol 179 HDL 59 LDL 111 Triglycerides 47
Not bad for someone who in early april of 2003 was about to be put on insulin, lipitor, and high blood pressure meds :) I stalled on going on the meds and started Atkins instead, and I have never looked back. By the way, I carry a copy of my blood work report around with me now in my purse and I pull it out every time someone tells me that, "you are going to die from eating all of the fat in that "fad" Atkins diet". I will let the results of almost one year of living an "Atkins" lifestyle speak for itself.
Steve Gallagher - 18 Mar 2004 18:32 GMT > All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > You just think it works cause you modified it, but thats cheating. > The diet as it is written could never work. We have a Sophist in our midst! I believe the proper reply if I remember my Plato correctly is something like: "Why yes, Socrates. You are obviously right. Clearly so."
jamie - 18 Mar 2004 19:03 GMT > All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. > It is not how it is written. Atkins sample menus don't suggest eating enough meat and fat for a family of four at each meal, like some people misreading the diet are wont to do.
Atkins books read as though chronic overeating never really occurred to the man, but nowhere does he ever say that calories don't count, nor does he ever actually say eat all you want of LC food.
 Signature jamie (jamiemck@newsguy.com)
"There's a seeker born every minute."
Cubit - 18 Mar 2004 21:00 GMT The point to counting calories is to measure appetite. If you eat the wrong foods appetite goes up. You might not know what you are doing without a log. *It is a feedback system.*
Cubit 308/263.5/165
> All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > jessi Skaught - 18 Mar 2004 22:24 GMT > All of you who are doing atkins and counting calories at the > same time are not doing it properly. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > jessi Funny, I don't recall every plateuing. I that period where I was unhappy...I must have been so unhappy that I put the period out of my mind because I have no memory of it. Thanks so much for telling me about what I experienced. You have an amazing talent if you can know exactly what strangers you never met have gone through!
Not that the sarcasm is out of the way, let me state that I have never once counted a single calorie on this diet, not plateued, nor been unhappy. I lost 57 lbs. simply by keeping my carbs under 50 a day give or take.
You're simply wrong, or a troll.
Scott
Jean M. - 19 Mar 2004 01:04 GMT >> btw, if you do the diet like jenny beans page tells you, you are starving >> yourself >> >> jessi I quit reading before I got to this part. Lady, you are off your rocker. If you are a troll, you are a poor one. If you aren't, you are terribly misinformed about the ways of Atkins. I'd suggest you actually read the book before you attempt a discussion. But you'd have to quit your bitching, and that would take all the fun out of it, wouldn't it?
-- Jean M. New food of the week: water chestnuts
Do away with flipfloping to e-mail.
|
|
|