 |
 | 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 / General Topics / August 2007Two Week Induction Results
End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I didn't have bags of water to drop. Overall, I am now down more then fifty pounds from my original 298, and I'm really happy about that. I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting out. In addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common sense. For example, a 1/2 cup of blue cheese dressing is very low in carbs, but that's like 600 calories. A half-cup of that stuff, per day, split between two or three green salads does not work for me. Another example: I have to learn to be satisfied with eating two eggs and two strips of bacon vs. four eggs and six strips of bacon. The carb counts are almost identical. The stupidity factor of the double+ portion is pretty high. My plan for the next two weeks is this: 1) To stay slightly below induction levels of carbs, because I think I have a low carb tolerance. I'm thinking 12-15 carbs is a good target -- that allows for copious amounts of greenery, two or three eggs and a little cheese. 2) To cut the crap attitude that only carbs count and that I can eat anything so long as I don't go over the carb count. 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that I've really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage cheese, something like that. Most people can tolerate these things, on low-carb, on a daily bases. NOT ME. And... that's about it! As time moves on, every two weeks, I'm going to add three to five carbs to my daily diet, and experiment with different foods, until I figure out what works for me. Thanks for all your support! > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was > a switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Thanks for all your support! My diet goals consist of : one to two grams of protein per 3 pounds of my goal body weight. no more than fifty percent of total calorie intake from carbs. no more than 25 percent of calories from fat. I avoid refined carbs and saturated fats. for breakfast one serving of low fat milk two servings of whole wheat toast two servings of high unsaturated fat content margarine. one serving of fruit. for the rest of the day one to two servings of meat, fish or chicken. one serving of dairy one oz cheese, one glass low fat milk, or other dairy product two servings of green leafy vegetable one serving of beans, peas or other legume two servings of other vegetables two serving of fruit If I eat salad I use olive oil and vinegar with a little garlic. on Sunday I eat whatever I please. I walk for fortyfive minutes three times a week at fifty percent or more of my maximum heart rate. Bob > My diet goals consist of : Thank you for sharing that! > I walk for fortyfive minutes three times a week at fifty percent or more of > my maximum heart rate. I'm wondering how you picked 50%. That seems a little low to me. Then again, I haven't been exercising lately. I would be better off doing what you're doing as opposed to sitting here posting on Usenet ;-) >> My diet goals consist of : > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Then again, I haven't been exercising lately. I would be better off doing > what you're doing as opposed to sitting here posting on Usenet ;-) fifty percent is maximum fat loss vs muscle loss. As you increase the intensity you use more muscle tissue vs fat for energy. But you also gain more muscle. If your goal is cardio you do three times a week minimum. If your goal is weight loss five times a week with rest for two. 50 percent is the minimum 85 the maximum. My major block to increasing exercise is muscle pain, which gradually goes away. The recommended way to start the walking is to do 10 minutes a day to start and add 2 minutes per week. 30 minutes three times a week is the recommended minimum 60 minutes 5 times a week the max for mere mortals. Bob > fifty percent is maximum fat loss vs muscle loss. As you increase the > intensity you use more muscle tissue vs fat for energy. But you also gain [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Bob Thanks! great advice > > My diet goals consist of : > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Then again, I haven't been exercising lately. I would be better off doing > what you're doing as opposed to sitting here posting on Usenet ;-) Um, yeah -- you really should exercise :-). Exercise is good for you for so many reasons that have nothing to do with weight loss, so even if you are losing without it you still should really work on developing the habit. Re sycochkn's note about maximum fat loss: The "fat-burning zone" concept is valid, but all calorie-burning exercise is good, as you will burn fat after the exercise as well as during. And higher- intensity exercise has an important role in developing cardiac fitness -- something that's certainly a worthwhile goal in addition to fat loss. (Personally, I've never worried over much about fat burning zones and such. I've tried to do a wide range of exercise intensities and types to gain the most overall benefit. Seems to have worked and to continue to work, overall ;-).) Chris 262/130s/130s > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a > switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Thanks for all your support! Interesting -- sounds like you've done really well with this new plan. I'm not clear on why you decided that you need to keep carbs even lower than the plan recommends. I didn't think you'd have had enough data with a low-carb approach to reach that conclusion. But maybe I missed something. For the record: everyone I know who has had long-term success with a low-carb approach has paid attention to calories consumed as well as just carbs, as you are doing. Chris 262/130s/130s > Interesting -- sounds like you've done really well with this new > plan. I'm not clear on why you decided that you need to keep carbs > even lower than the plan recommends. I didn't think you'd have had > enough data with a low-carb approach to reach that conclusion. But > maybe I missed something. Hi Chris, I've been on low-carb and low-cal diets in the past a couple times and failed at it. I've learned a few hard lessons about me as a person and my ability to succed, and I also have a few theories about the diet itself and how it might work best for me. One of my theories is that I have to really keep the carbs down low, and I'm doing an experiment to see if that's true or not. > For the record: everyone I know who has had long-term success with a > low-carb approach has paid attention to calories consumed as well as > just carbs, as you are doing. Thanks for the encouragement! I am not counting calories, per se, but I am counting carbs quite religously and trying to make good decisions about the types of food that I eat. That might not be enough, and I may have to go back to counting calories. I hope not, though, I really dislike having to write down every piece of food that I eat. Now, I just have a little carb counter that I carry on my keychain. Its really easy to use. > > Interesting -- sounds like you've done really well with this new > > plan. I'm not clear on why you decided that you need to keep carbs [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > write down every piece of food that I eat. Now, I just have a little carb > counter that I carry on my keychain. Its really easy to use. Just to clarify -- the folks I know who've been successful haven't necessarily counted calories. They've just had the sense to realize that they can't eat unlimited calories just because their carbs are low -- no eating a can of nuts for an afternoon snack, or 6 eggs and a half pound of bacon for breakfast, or whatever. You seem to show the same good sense :-). Chris 262/130s/130s > For the record: everyone I know who has had long-term success with a > low-carb approach has paid attention to calories consumed as well as > just carbs, as you are doing. I agree, but... usually people don't need to get into calorie-counting until close to goal. Em has just started and has lost 8 lbs in 2 weeks. This is not only not a stall, but not even a "slow" rate of loss by anyone's measure. It's a damned good loss. Em, what you're doing is *working*. So... why are you looking to change it now? IMO, if you are up to exercising, add some of that in and don't fool with the diet just yet... unless you want to add carbs as per Atkins. This doesn't mean adding crap, but adding veggies. Veggies are good! A lot of people find exercising easier closer to goal. The studies I've read... men tend to exercise on the way, whereas women tend to started exercising afterwards. But those who maintain over time nearly ALL exercise. Some walking probably wouldn't kill you. If you want to do something more than that, I'd suggest strength training. The best resource I know is Krista's site, which is aimed for women, but applies just as equally to men (a squat is a squat no matter your gender): http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/index.php On Jul 30, 4:42 am, jackiepa...@gmail.com wrote: > > For the record: everyone I know who has had long-term success with a > > low-carb approach has paid attention to calories consumed as well as [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Em, what you're doing is *working*. So... why are you looking to > change it now? That was exactly what I thought too. Why worry about how many calories are in a half cup of blue cheese dressing, as long as you're losing very nicely? Also, as far as eating all you want, Atkins said to eat just until your satiated and no longer hungry. That's a lot different than eating all you want. > IMO, if you are up to exercising, add some of that in and don't fool > with the diet just yet... unless you want to add carbs as per Atkins. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > know is Krista's site, which is aimed for women, but applies just as > equally to men (a squat is a squat no matter your gender):http://www.stumptuous.com/cms/index.php > Why worry about how many calories are in a half cup of blue cheese > dressing, as long as you're losing very nicely? Who uses a half a cup of dressing at a time anyhow? Unless they're swimming in it. Sheesh. >> Why worry about how many calories are in a half cup of blue cheese >> dressing, as long as you're losing very nicely? > > Who uses a half a cup of dressing at a time anyhow? Unless they're > swimming in it. Sheesh. C'mon now... I think we've all swam in some sort of something at one time or another or we wouldn't be here. We'd be hanging out with our skinny friends who pole vault during their lunch breaks. I did say a 1/4 cup two times/day. That's only 4T -- not a lot of dressing on a big green salad (with Tuna.... yummm...) > >> Why worry about how many calories are in a half cup of blue cheese > >> dressing, as long as you're losing very nicely? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > I did say a 1/4 cup two times/day. That's only 4T -- not a lot of dressing > on a big green salad (with Tuna.... yummm...) I've never used a half cup of dressing on a salad in my life. I generally thin mine down with vinegar, so a tablespoon is more than enough. :: em <i@dun.no> wrote: :: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] :: generally thin mine down with vinegar, so a tablespoon is more than :: enough. I'd venture a guess that I have used as much as a half cup of dressing on a big gut busting salad. Certainly not something you do for weight loss. I cut my dressing with mustard and the juice that comes of the Mt. Olive Bread & Butter Pickles which are sweetened with Splenda. That way, I can get it down to just two tablespoons. Queenie, us big guys do sh*t like use too much dressing on salads. Normal doesn't apply (mostly). > 2) To cut the crap attitude that only carbs count and that I can eat > anything so long as I don't go over the carb count. I just want to add... During induction, almost everyone overeats. Really. First, you're getting to eat things like bacon and fullfat dairy and such, which you've probably not had for a while and therefore feel "indulgent" about. And second, you have all these cravings for stuff you're not allowed to eat, so you tend to over-do it on the stuff you ARE allowed. Induction is not for weight-loss. Induction is for switching from an insulin-mediated biochemistry to a glucagon-mediated biochemistry. It feels a bit like withdrawal in a way. In Atkins, OWL is the weight loss phase... and that comes *after* induction. Sure you lose weight during induction, but it's mostly water anyways. The real loss of fat comes after induction is over with - cause mostly everyone overdoes it during induction. That's fine, that's how it's *supposed* to be. So... yeah, you may well have been overeating during induction, and may have become aware of how strongly you crave carbs - that is what induction *does*. But you didn't crave bread or pasta or pastries because you were eating too many carbs on induction. You craved them cause it's withdrawal. The low-carbing DTs. You get over it. As you get over it, you find yourself losing your appetite. Well, not really. You have to learn what hungry feels like all over again because it's a *much* less painful feeling than the cravings you get when your blood glucose is high. When my bg is high, hunger is *painful*. When it's not high, hunger is some little minor feeling that I hardly notice and it becomes easy to forget to eat if I'm engrossed in something. It's VERY normal to have cravings in induction; it's just as normal that your appetite will drop... if it hasn't already, it will in the next week or two. You don't need to *cut* carbs. Atkins recommends getting most of your carbs from veggies, and eating more salad or green beans or spinach is NOT going to make you lose control. Seriously, NO ONE ever got fat from overeating broccoli or cabbage. :: Seriously, NO ONE :: ever got fat from overeating broccoli or cabbage. Ain't that the truth. > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a > switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I > didn't have bags of water to drop. Overall, I am now down more then fifty > pounds from my original 298, and I'm really happy about that. Especially since you switched from another type of plan, that is a superior result. > I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting out. In > addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common sense. Do you have any evidence for thinking that if low is good, lower must be better? It's not true. The concept of the Atkins CCLL is that every body has its own customized ideal carb intake level for loss, and CCLM for maintenance. The idea of the initial 20 is it's so low almost no one has ideal levels that low. > For example, a 1/2 cup of blue cheese dressing is very low in carbs, but > that's like 600 calories. A half-cup of that stuff, per day, split between > two or three green salads does not work for me. Agreed. Over time I've gradually switched to eating salad without dressing much of the time and with very little when I have it. But that's consistent with unmodified Atkins as well. Eat until full not stuffed, let the appetite suppression effect allow you to gradually taper down portions. > My plan for the next two weeks is this: > > 1) To stay slightly below induction levels of carbs, because I think I have > a low carb tolerance. I'm thinking 12-15 carbs is a good target -- that > allows for copious amounts of greenery, two or three eggs and a little > cheese. Do you have any reason to think lower is better when it isn't for something like 99.5% of the population? > 2) To cut the crap attitude that only carbs count and that I can eat > anything so long as I don't go over the carb count. Moving away from overeating habits, good plan. > 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that I've > really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage cheese, > something like that. Most people can tolerate these things, on low-carb, on > a daily bases. NOT ME. Another lesson from the other half of Atkins - The elimination system of very restrictive Induction followed by a gradual easing of those restrictions as a system to find your trigger foods and food intolerances. It has an interesting consequence - You can no longer afford to avoid trying foods on a schedule to avoid any possible binge trigger. Now that you're through Induction it is necessary to find the discovery of a binge trigger as a victory. So you know you don't binge on lettuce, cauliflower, chicken, beef and eggs. So what. Few can eat that forever. No try the items on the carb ladder one at a time. Binge and you've found a food you'll need to avoid from then on, but each and every food from the carb ladder that you don't binge on is a food that expands your allowed variety. Variety is good. Taking the view that trying a new food and ending up binging as a victory, extremely hard but a part of the process. > As time moves on, every two weeks, I'm going to add three to five carbs to > my daily diet, and experiment with different foods, until I figure out what > works for me. The process is every week. Step out in faith! It's *hard* to try those foods from the carb ladder on schedule. But life has a simple principle - Stepping out of your comfort zone leads to a better you. You did well on Induction, the simple boot camp. The hard step of moving out of cravings. Now it's the hard part of finding out what does and doesn't work for you by following the ladder. > > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a > > switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > the initial 20 is it's so low almost no one has ideal levels that > low. I'd say the best evidence that lower carb leads to faster weight loss is Atkins himself. When going over the option of why soemeone may want to stay at induction level of carbs longer, he asked the rhetorical question "Do you have a lot to lose?" Now if he thought lower carbs resulted in slower weight loss, it would be very strange to suggest people with a lot to lose may want to consider staying on induction longer. And if he thought higher carbs were better, that would be a perfect time to just say so too. I;ve presented this to you before, yet you ignore it. >> > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this >> > was a [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > > I;ve presented this to you before, yet you ignore it. No, I have not. I've been overwhelmed with information & busy with work and not been able to reply to all the posts I'd like to. > <trad...@optonline.net> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > No, I have not. I've been overwhelmed with information & busy with work and > not been able to reply to all the posts I'd like to.- Hide quoted text - Em, my remarks were directed to Doug, not you. He's the one asking for evidence that lower carb levels lead to faster weight loss. I meant that I had presented the above Atkins reference to him many times, yet he ignores it as if it doesn't exist and then tells you that you don't know what you're talking about. Em, congratulations on seeing results from your hard work! > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a > switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > Thanks for all your support! > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this > was a switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, > as I didn't have bags of water to drop. Don't delude yourself. Switching from low cal/high carb to low carb always results in significant water weight loss at first (until the storage glucose is used up). I tell people about the water loss trick all the time. A classic example is the person who has an event coming up in a couple of weeks and wants to fit into what is now a tight suit, dress, pants and shirt, etc. Most anyone who isn't restricting carbs and/or sodium can lose 5-15 pounds and really loosen up tight clothing in two weeks by restricting carbs, sodium, calories, exercising 30-90 minutes a day, and taking daily saunas if available. Your 8 pounds probably would have been 10+ had you done it all. The take home point is it's a trick. Go back to high carb, especially considering the "stupidity factor" that you mentioned (calories out of control), and that 8 pounds will be right back on. Basically, the way I see it, you took a break. I know what that's like because I do it myself. I do something I call "the ratchet method" where I switch back and forth between low carb and moderate carb (around 40% of calories from carbohydrate) in an effort to prevent stalls. When low carb stalls out and/or I get sick of the menu, I switch to moderate carb for awhile with the understanding that there will be a water weight gain. The cool part is that as long as calories are still restricted (it's not a binge or cheat period but rather part of a cycle), the meal count it high (shoot for 6 meals a day with 2.5 - 3 hour spacing and a minimum of 5 meals), and exercise is maintained or even bumped up a notch (carbohydrate is premium fuel for mind and muscle which makes exercise easier), the water weight gain will be less than that which is lost when you switch back to low carb. In a word, your weight "ratchets" down each cycle. Each cycle causes an increase that is followed by a larger decrease and a new low. The sub-cycles (the low and moderate carb phases of each cycle) can last as long as there is a benefit. For example, when you get sick of 6 meals a day, fruits, grains and other lower fat higher carb food you can switch back to low carb with a lower meal count, lower calories and less exercise. When that stalls out or gets boring you can switch back to moderate carb. The ratchet method keeps it fresh and is, in my opinion, a preferable/more effective alternative to cheat meals and/or cheat days because it keeps the calorie count under control and provides for cycled meal counts and exercise intensity. The variety (change in routine) is likely to be the magic ingredient. Don't be surprised to see something like this as the basis for a mainstream diet book at some point. Cyclical diets are nothing new to athletes, but the typical layman dieter is probably unaware. There is no one best diet for everyone. Healthy people, and by that I mean people without issues with specific foods or glucose/insulin problems, will respond favorably to a variety of macronutrient ratios. That's why there are so many diets to choose from; they all work for some of the people some of the time. The quest for what works best might also include regular macronutrient ratio changes over time. > End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering > this was a switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty > damn good, as I didn't have bags of water to drop. Overall, I am now > down more then fifty pounds from my original 298, and I'm really > happy about that. Excellent progress! As others have said, it sounds like what you're doing is working great, so keep it up. > I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting > out. In addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common > sense. I'm not sure why that amount is "a bit much" for you. If it tends to cause cravings, you may want to start monitoring your blood sugar. Twenty g/day, or even 30g, shouldn't cause significant cravings if your blood sugar is at all under control, but it could if you're diabetic. Bernstein recommends staying away from even trace amounts of actual sugar, like the less than 1g of maltodextrin in sugar-free Jello. That may not be necessary, but you may find you have to watch out for certain things. > For example, a 1/2 cup of blue cheese dressing is very low in carbs, > but that's like 600 calories. A half-cup of that stuff, per day, split > between two or three green salads does not work for me. Why not? I don't know how many calories you think you should get, but 200-300/meal isn't that many out of the total, is it? > Another example: I have to learn to be satisfied with eating two eggs > and two strips of bacon vs. four eggs and six strips of bacon. The > carb counts are almost identical. The stupidity factor of the double+ > portion is pretty high. I eat almost that much (usually 4 eggs and 4 strips of bacon) and I'm losing weight, but I'm a pretty big guy; I don't know what size you are. But two eggs and two (thick) strips of bacon only gives you 21g protein and 343 calories; not very many unless you're a fairly small and sedentary person. > 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that > I've really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage > cheese, something like that. Most people can tolerate these things, on > low-carb, on a daily bases. NOT ME. I'm still not sure what you mean by "tolerate." Can you elaborate?  SignatureAaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz >> End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering >> this was a switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Excellent progress! As others have said, it sounds like what you're > doing is working great, so keep it up. Thanks! & I will. >> I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting >> out. In addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common >> sense. > > I'm not sure why that amount is "a bit much" for you. I did low-carb some time back, maybe eight or so years ago? I did really well for quite a while & then I screwed it up pretty bad. So I learned a lot about what to do, what to not do and how to really screw up. I'm trying to carry those lessons forward. One thing I learned was that, at that time, IIRC, my tolerance for carbs on OWL was around 35, which (I think) is pretty damn low. I also learned that a lot of the foods that one is allowed to have when you up your carb limit are foods that are real "trigger foods" for me, such as nuts and seeds. I'm not in a hurry to eat more carbs and I'm just taking it one day at a time. I have found, though, that less then 20 carbs/day is too restrictive for me, and this morning I made the decision stick with 20 and see how it goes. (I did quite a bit less then that during induction, especially towards the end.) What I remember from doing LC in the past is that you lose quite a bit during the first two weeks, mostly water. Sometime within the next few weeks you hit a period where you don't make any progress for about a week, and then you fall into your regular loss pattern, whatever that is, say one to two pounds a week. I believe my OWL carb tolerance is going to be fairly low, and I'm not as active as I was back then. I want to stick with 20 carbs until I see my weight loss fall into some sort of pattern so that I can perform a reasonably valid experiment to find out what my daily carb limit should be. > If it tends to > cause cravings, you may want to start monitoring your blood sugar. > Twenty g/day, or even 30g, shouldn't cause significant cravings if > your blood sugar is at all under control, but it could if you're > diabetic. I do have type-2. > Bernstein recommends staying away from even trace amounts > of actual sugar, like the less than 1g of maltodextrin in sugar-free > Jello. That may not be necessary, but you may find you have to watch > out for certain things. There are a lot of things I have to look out for! Things that I want to eat, that are low-carb, but I know I have difficulty with, I buy in small amounts. Like almonds -- yah, I can buy the 16oz package for $3.99 but they'll disappear that night. So I buy the 2 oz packackage for $1.99 and save a dollar. Actually, I've been doing pretty damn good. My kids have all kinds of carb-o-la (as in crap-o-la) around the house, and I'm not even tempted to touch it. I know, for a fact, that if I have that one bite of the wrong food, I'll screw myself up. >> For example, a 1/2 cup of blue cheese dressing is very low in carbs, >> but that's like 600 calories. A half-cup of that stuff, per day, split >> between two or three green salads does not work for me. > > Why not? I don't know how many calories you think you should get, but > 200-300/meal isn't that many out of the total, is it? Depends on what you pour it on, I usually have a can of tuna or a can of chick with my salad, for example, which is another 150 calories or so. I can get just as full by using a much smaller amount of mayo, its fewer calories that way and I save those couple of carbs for something else. >> Another example: I have to learn to be satisfied with eating two eggs >> and two strips of bacon vs. four eggs and six strips of bacon. The [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > protein and 343 calories; not very many unless you're a fairly small > and sedentary person. I rarely eat meals, I snack (and snack and snack) all day long. I might eat bacon & eggs two or three times a day. When I was doing low-cal I was writing down everything I ate. I eat like 10 to 15 times a day, and THAT'S when I'm watching myself and counting calories! (I seem to be eating fewer times during the day since I started induction.) >> 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that >> I've really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage >> cheese, something like that. Most people can tolerate these things, on >> low-carb, on a daily bases. NOT ME. > > I'm still not sure what you mean by "tolerate." Can you elaborate? By tolerate, I mean what I can or cannot eat and still do well in regards to losing weight, be that carb count or the propensity of a certain food to drive me towards a binge. > Aaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz Em - 298/245/2?? > >> I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting > >> out. In addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > about what to do, what to not do and how to really screw up. I'm trying to > carry those lessons forward. So many people screw it up and need to start again. I've done it. The important part is to ask yourself what choices you have that actually work - Quiting and gaining it all back sure doesn't, so the real choice is switching to some other type of plan or trying to learn a lesson each fall so the next fall doesn't happen for longer than the last one. So what happened? Did you drop the carb ladder and start eating stuff well up the carb ladder? Did you follow the carb ladder, find a binge trigger, and treat it as a defeat instead of learning a trigger food to avoid? Did you stop viewing it as the right thing to do? > One thing I learned was that, at that time, IIRC, my tolerance for carbs on > OWL was around 35, This means you were out of ketosis at 40, right? That's how you find your CCLL - out of ketosis and/or carb cravings start no matter how you get to that carb count even with broccoli. > which (I think) is pretty damn low. They seem to cluster around 50ish for most people. It's why Protein Power by Drs Eades select the level of 50 for one of their phases IMO. I've seen CCLLs range from 15 to 150 so while 35 is lower than the most common number it's still well about the deliberate undershoot of Atkins Induction. Consider that you could get to 35 using a carby breakfast like steel cut oats and then eat like Induction for the rest of the day, not all that low. Or eat root veggies like a serving of carrot with dinner ... > I also learned that a > lot of the foods that one is allowed to have when you up your carb limit are > foods that are real "trigger foods" for me, such as nuts and seeds. On Atkins no food is ever allowed if it's a trigger. The carb ladder is the order to try things to find out if they are a trigger for you, not a list of what is allowed at what carb quota. If you didn't understand this, you missed half of the conceptual framework of the Atkins approach. > What I remember from doing LC in the past is that you lose quite a bit > during the first two weeks, mostly water. Sometime within the next few weeks > you hit a period where you don't make any progress for about a week, and > then you fall into your regular loss pattern, whatever that is, say one to > two pounds a week. That's the expected pattern. It is never guaranteed and each restart has its own chance of following expected patterns or not. > I believe my OWL carb tolerance is going to be fairly low, and I'm not as > active as I was back then. I want to stick with 20 carbs until I see my > weight loss fall into some sort of pattern so that I can perform a > reasonably valid experiment to find out what my daily carb limit should be. Do you have the belief that adding carbs will reduce your loss rate? It won't. Keep your carbs too low and thyroid starts cutting T3 output. That causes basal metabolism to drift down and reduces loss rates. The point of CCLL is it sets the carb intake high enough for the T3 reduction to not happen but to keep insulin low enough for fat to flow out of storage not into it. > > If it tends to > > cause cravings, you may want to start monitoring your blood sugar. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I do have type-2. Then controlling blood sugar levels aces loss rates for you. Track meter ratings as you move your quota up. Stop the increases if you either drop out of ketosis or your blood sugar levels start going up. > There are a lot of things I have to look out for! Things that I want to eat, > that are low-carb, but I know I have difficulty with, I buy in small > amounts. Like almonds -- yah, I can buy the 16oz package for $3.99 but > they'll disappear that night. So I buy the 2 oz packackage for $1.99 and > save a dollar. For me it's cashews. No matter the size of the package of cashews I eat them until it's empty. Not a bad thing with a two ounce package. A very bad thing with a 16 ounce jar! My strategy was to try other nuts until I found one I didn't have that problem with. A box of almonds, pecans or filberts for me can last a long time since I can take a handful, close the lid, and not think of it again for a couple of days. So is using a smaller package the right idea given the principles of Atkins? Food intolerances trigger binges and addictive responses according to Atkins. The way to acheive long term control is to learn all of your intolerances and practice complete avoidance on them. Eat small packages to control your portions and what you're doing is gradually eroding your control. Especially at first I suggest following this Atkins concept carefully. Try something other than almonds for a while not sue small packages. > Actually, I've been doing pretty damn good. My kids have all kinds of > carb-o-la (as in crap-o-la) around the house, and I'm not even tempted to > touch it. I know, for a fact, that if I have that one bite of the wrong > food, I'll screw myself up. One bite really does hurt. Maybe a direct binge, maybe gradual erosion of control. Those temptations will never, ever, ever, stop being under our noses in this world. > I rarely eat meals, I snack (and snack and snack) all day long. I might eat > bacon & eggs two or three times a day. Hard to control. The concept of "three square meals" may be nonsense for some, but I think for you it needs to be a goal. Set up long term habits that give control not take it away. > When I was doing low-cal I was writing down everything I ate. I eat like 10 > to 15 times a day, and THAT'S when I'm watching myself and counting > calories! (I seem to be eating fewer times during the day since I started > induction.) Journalling is still a good idea on low carb. > >> 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that > >> I've really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > losing weight, be that carb count or the propensity of a certain food to > drive me towards a binge. If it gives the urge to binge you need to avoid it not allow yourself one or two exposures per week. Find other stuff to use as treats. >> >> I do think that 20 carbs/day may be a bit much for me in starting >> >> out. In addition to counting carbs, I need to use a little common [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > So what happened? The same thing that happened to my previous quit smoking attempts. One cheat -- got away with it. Two cheats, three cheats... pretty soon back to a pack a day. The speed at which I can gain back lost weight is *amazing*. I don't have any stats, but it seems like 25 pounds in a month is nothing. I'm sure a lot of that is water, but holy cow. I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. There are a few things that have changed in my life that make me believe that I will succeed this time for the long run. For one, I'm older and more mature. Two is that I'm at the tail end of my divorce and wanting to date. No women, it seems, wants to date an obese guy. Number three is that I went through a very minor scare re. my heart. I went in for all kinds of testing, nuclear whatever, treadmil, and my heart is in perfect shape. However, that is like a HUGE blessing from G-d based on how I've treated my body. So, last but not least, I'm hitting "middle age" & am starting to realize that I am no longer immortal. >> One thing I learned was that, at that time, IIRC, my tolerance for carbs >> on [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > you find your CCLL - out of ketosis and/or carb cravings start > no matter how you get to that carb count even with broccoli. Yes, and would start gaining back a little instead of losing it. > Or eat root veggies like a serving > of carrot with dinner ... Carrots are about four carbs each. Not much, I know, but they're kind of a trigger for me. I can eat a one pound bag of baby carrots just as easily as a pound of raw almonds! So I may buy a nice carrot sometime at the grocery store, then sit down on a bench outside the store and eat it as a treat. Maybe if I'm on a walk & go past the store or something. >> I also learned that a >> lot of the foods that one is allowed to have when you up your carb limit >> are >> foods that are real "trigger foods" for me, such as nuts and seeds. I've been thinking about that too. I'm getting a little anxous to up my carb limit because I am starting to feel a little limited by the foods I can eat. But I'm still commited to taking it slow. > On Atkins no food is ever allowed if it's a trigger. The carb > ladder is the order to try things to find out if they are a trigger > for you, not a list of what is allowed at what carb quota. If > you didn't understand this, you missed half of the conceptual > framework of the Atkins approach. I read the old book, the first DANDR. I never bought the second one. I also read the original Protein Power, CAD, etc. I know how to count carbs and why; I should probably buy one of the newer low-carb books and learn more. >> What I remember from doing LC in the past is that you lose quite a bit >> during the first two weeks, mostly water. Sometime within the next few [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > That's the expected pattern. It is never guaranteed and each > restart has its own chance of following expected patterns or not. I went on-and-off low-carb so many times in the past, I built up a tolerance or something and it just plain stopped working for me. It seems to be going pretty well now, though. >> I believe my OWL carb tolerance is going to be fairly low, and I'm not as >> active as I was back then. I want to stick with 20 carbs until I see my [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > starts cutting T3 output. That causes basal metabolism > to drift down and reduces loss rates. That's an interesting thought! Do you have a reference for that? > The point of CCLL is > it sets the carb intake high enough for the T3 reduction to > not happen but to keep insulin low enough for fat to flow > out of storage not into it. I'm not interested in staying at 20 carbs forever. I've done induction & am looking forward to finding what my tolerance will be. Lets see, I'm at 245. I don't know exactly where I need to be weight wise, but I am a very big framed person. I'm thinking between 210 and 220 will be about right. Either way, I expect to be there by the end of this year. >> > If it tends to >> > cause cravings, you may want to start monitoring your blood sugar. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > increases if you either drop out of ketosis or your blood > sugar levels start going up. I have been controlling my blood sugar through my diet for quite a long time & don't have my finger-poker kit any more. (Probably in the x's garage somewhere.) >> There are a lot of things I have to look out for! Things that I want to >> eat, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > for me can last a long time since I can take a handful, close > the lid, and not think of it again for a couple of days. I love 'em all. Sunflower seeds are a good snack for me because you can find them in small packages just about anywhere. > So is using a smaller package the right idea given the > principles of Atkins? Food intolerances trigger binges and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > this Atkins concept carefully. Try something other than > almonds for a while not sue small packages. Makes sense. This is in the second book? >> Actually, I've been doing pretty damn good. My kids have all kinds of >> carb-o-la (as in crap-o-la) around the house, and I'm not even tempted to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > gradual erosion of control. Those temptations will never, > ever, ever, stop being under our noses in this world. "Gradual erosion of control." To me, that is where the "just one bite" philosophy goes. Been there. Done that. I don't care who's b-day it is or who I offend, I am not going to have that "one little bite" of birthday cake no matter how hard my fat friends try to shove it down my thought. Bastards! They're the reason I'm fat, you know ;-))) >> I rarely eat meals, I snack (and snack and snack) all day long. I might >> eat >> bacon & eggs two or three times a day. > > Hard to control. The concept of "three square meals" may be > nonsense for some, but I think for you it needs to be a goal. Elaborate on that, please. It is calories/carbs per day that count. I find my appitite is under much better control when I try to keep my stomach small. I'm a big guy, and if I were to cut down to three squares a day, I'd have to enlarge my stomach (I think). I'm not seeing that as a good idea, but I'd like to hear you out on that. > Set up long term habits that give control not take it away. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Journalling is still a good idea on low carb. I'm going to hold off on that & see where I go with what I'm doing now. I really hate having to write down everything I eat. I'll do it if I have to, but only if I have to. >> >> 3) Allow myself one or possibly two treats a week of something that >> >> I've really been missing. A few oz. of almonds or 1/2 a cup of cottage [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > If it gives the urge to binge you need to avoid it not allow yourself > one or two exposures per week. Find other stuff to use as treats. Another interesting thought! With cigarettes, you can give them up completely. Same with liquor. Food, if your a food addict, you can't just stop eating. I have been doing pretty good at controlling my binging for some time now and still eat a lot of the foods I really enjoy. I bought a 16oz container of cottage cheese this week -- one of my favorite foods -- it lasted for four days & I stayed within my limits. I've had two 2oz packages of almonds and that went pretty well too. I could probably binge on just about anything. If I do find something that drives me nuts and makes me want to binge, as I continue on, I'll definitely avoid that food in the future. Thanks! :: I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. :: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] :: I'm hitting "middle age" & am starting to realize that I am no :: longer immortal. This sounds exactly like something I might have written back in 2001 before I started LCing. > I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. I've always been resistant to calling it that, simply because there seems to be a attitude of victimhood that often goes along with addiction talk, and I suspect that doesn't help people take charge of their own actions. If you say you're "suffering from <whatever>", it makes it sound like something else has control of you. Still, the parallels between carbohydrate cravings and addictions to drugs and alcohol are pretty strong, so I do think there are things to be learned from the comparison. > There are a few things that have changed in my life that make me > believe that I will succeed this time for the long run. For one, I'm > older and more mature. Two is that I'm at the tail end of my divorce > and wanting to date. No women, it seems, wants to date an obese guy. You'd be surprised. Women really are attracted much more by personality than looks. If your gut isn't actually hanging out under your shirt, many women, especially older ones who aren't still caught up in the fantasy of bagging Brad Pitt, will overlook your size if you have the right body language. Just look around; there are tons of dumpy guys married to women far more attractive than them -- physically, anyway. What you'll probably find -- what I found, anyway -- is that losing weight improves your confidence drastically, which makes you both much more attractive to women and more likely to approach them. You don't have to finish one first; if you work on both, they can build on each other. Success breeds success, even in other areas of life. Lose a few pounds, gain some confidence and optimism, your body language improves, an attractive woman buys you a drink, up goes your dedication to continued success, more pounds come off, ladies are asking for your number, etc..... It's a beautiful thing. > Lets see, I'm at 245. I don't know exactly where I need to be weight > wise, but I am a very big framed person. I'm thinking between 210 > and 220 will be about right. Either way, I expect to be there by the > end of this year. Protein Power has a method for determining your ideal weight range, or you can just lose until you're happy with the way you look. Mine is about 200 pounds (I'm a very large-framed guy too), so I'm shooting for next summer to have it all off, but I want to hit 220 by the end of the year. SignatureAaron -- 285/254/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz > I've always been resistant to calling it that, simply because there > seems to be a attitude of victimhood that often goes along with [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > alcohol are pretty strong, so I do think there are things to be > learned from the comparison. I have *absolutely* used carby foods as a drug in the past. When a more "normal" person has a bad day - gets yelled at by the boss, dumped by their girlfriend, etc. - they often want to knock off a few drinks to unwind and relax. I would want a half pound of pasta. I've also used food as a sedative... having insomnia or such, a candy bar will put me right out. I'm currently on the Fentaynl patch with Percocet for breakthrough pain subsequent to surgery. And while they make me lethargic, I do *not* find these narcotics put me out to the same degree as carbs have in the past. Whether you chose to use the word "addiction" or not, I can absolutely see that I have used carby foods the same way other people use drugs. I do think alcoholism is a reasonable metaphor. An alcoholic can drink, just can't drink *alcohol*. The idea is that they lose control after the first drink. I can eat, I just can't eat sugar or starch. Not that I completely lose control after eating some, but the cravings are VERY strong, making it a lot easier to continue eating carbs than not. Alcoholism is more extreme, of course. While induction does feel like withdrawal to me, I don't suffer DTs. ;) > I have *absolutely* used carby foods as a drug in the past. > > When a more "normal" person has a bad day - gets yelled at by the > boss, dumped by their girlfriend, etc. - they often want to knock > off a few drinks to unwind and relax. I would want a half pound of > pasta. For me it'd be chips or ice cream, but I agree. And it's definitely about carbs, not food, even if people don't consciously make the distinction. I don't think many people have ever gotten dumped by a lover and consoled themselves with a pile of pork chops; but chips, candy, ice cream, and the like? You bet; that's why we call them comfort foods. Mmmmm, dopamine. > I've also used food as a sedative... having insomnia or such, a > candy bar will put me right out. Same here, sort of. It wouldn't quite knock me out, but it'd kind of fog my mind like static on a TV screen, which is always handy when you don't want to face something. > Whether you chose to use the word "addiction" or not, I can > absolutely see that I have used carby foods the same way other > people use drugs. Absolutely. Maybe I should say that I don't object to the idea of "carb addiction," just to the methods some people use for dealing with addiction (of any kind). But I rambled about that enough in my other post. > I do think alcoholism is a reasonable metaphor. An alcoholic can > drink, just can't drink *alcohol*. The idea is that they lose [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > lose control after eating some, but the cravings are VERY strong, > making it a lot easier to continue eating carbs than not. You do eat some sugar or starch, though, unless you eat only meat, butter, and oil. An alcoholic is told his tolerance for alcohol is zero; our tolerance for carbs is some small number above zero, and it varies from person to person and also depends on the type of food. But we can apply the "one drink" method to a lot of foods -- bread, potatoes, sugar, rice, etc. -- so I think that's still a good way of looking at it. We're going to have to do the math and testing when it comes to low-carb and kinda-low-carb foods, though. > Alcoholism is more extreme, of course. While induction does feel > like withdrawal to me, I don't suffer DTs. ;) I don't have any personal basis for comparison, but if carbs were treated as an official addiction like alcohol or tobacco, the high rate of dieting failure might rank carb addiction as the hardest one of the bunch to break. The cravings, effects, and withdrawals may be more subtle, but not necessarily less powerful. SignatureAaron -- 285/254/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz Hi, Jackie -- >> I've always been resistant to calling it that, simply because there >> seems to be a attitude of victimhood that often goes along with [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >I've also used food as a sedative... having insomnia or such, a candy >bar will put me right out. Boy, can I related to that. There was a big "ding! ding! ding!" going off in my head as I read it. I didn't consciously realize it until I read your statement, but I *did* take a snack to bed with me that was guaranteed to make me drousy and sleepy. SignatureBlueBrooke 254/228/135 > Boy, can I related to that. There was a big "ding! ding! ding!" going > off in my head as I read it. I didn't consciously realize it until I > read your statement, but I *did* take a snack to bed with me that was > guaranteed to make me drousy and sleepy. I think some people who have different metabolisms from us don't experience this. I have a friend who just won't believe that I've used food as a drug. I don't think he gets the same reaction to carbs as I do, so he thinks I'm exaggerating. But it's why "portion control" of carby foods does not work for me. I can't eat a reasonable serving of potatoes anymore than an alcoholic can drink a reasonable amount of beer. I can eat insane piles of potatoes or none. It's also why I think of induction as a withdrawal process. It's always felt like that to me... days of feeling crappy, headachy, and half-ill with massive cravings, and then suddenly it's over and I feel good again. For me, if I've gone off plan and need to get back on, it takes a degree of determination and willpower to get through induction. But it takes much, much less willpower to just *stay* low-carb in the first place. Temptation is minor and fleeting when my bg is controlled. >>Boy, can I related to that. There was a big "ding! ding! ding!" going >>off in my head as I read it. I didn't consciously realize it until I [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > used food as a drug. I don't think he gets the same reaction to carbs > as I do, so he thinks I'm exaggerating. I used to have several friends like that. They could only understand others in terms of themselves. I was very happy to see each and every one of them move away to "find a better bunch of people and a better community". > But it's why "portion control" of carby foods does not work for me. I > can't eat a reasonable serving of potatoes anymore than an alcoholic [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > first place. Temptation is minor and fleeting when my bg is > controlled. I still screw up occasionally, and perhaps deliberately. It isn't really rational that I would go off on a carby binge..... but I do every once in a while. Jim > > So what happened? > > The same thing that happened to my previous quit smoking attempts. One > cheat -- got away with it. Two cheats, three cheats... pretty soon back to a > pack a day. Ah, the feeling of immunity when you find something that works and that you have some amount of freedom. > The speed at which I can gain back lost weight is *amazing*. I don't have > any stats, but it seems like 25 pounds in a month is nothing. I'm sure a lot > of that is water, but holy cow. In one month of binging I gained 10 pounds back. And that's 10 left over after I did a week at induction levels to drop any water that was added as well. All fat. Amazing. Yet I had "only" gained 50 pounds in 20 years ... > I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. Aaron Baugher doesn't like that because it sounds like a victim's statement. I do like it because it makes it completely clear that the one and only way I have to deal with [insert word] is complete and utter avoidance. The two of us see the word addiction very differently. It's only a question of victimhood if it is something that can't be avoided. So "food addict" I don't like but I don't think anyone is addicted to "food". It's just that they haven't been able to figure out what types are and aren't their problem. > Number three is that I went > through a very minor scare re. my heart. I went in for all kinds of testing, > nuclear whatever, treadmil, and my heart is in perfect shape. However, that > is like a HUGE blessing from G-d based on how I've treated my body. So, last > but not least, I'm hitting "middle age" & am starting to realize that I am > no longer immortal. My wife saw my during a back spasm. They had gotten severe enough that I could no longer suppress the grimace when one happened. They had been happening for a few years as the muscle stress on my back from the spare tire got worse and worse, so that grimace was a threshold. > > This means you were out of ketosis at 40, right? That's how > > you find your CCLL - out of ketosis and/or carb cravings start > > no matter how you get to that carb count even with broccoli. > > Yes Fabulous. > and would start gaining back a little instead of losing it. That suggests your CCLM is 40 or 45 then. Not a very low CCLL but it is a very low CCLM. > > Or eat root veggies like a serving > > of carrot with dinner ... > > Carrots are about four carbs each. Not much, I know, but they're kind of a > trigger for me. One reason I mentioned carrots - They are high glycemic load compared to other carby root veggies. Being type-2 it may be that your triggers are more determined by glycemic load than by specific ingredient, or that you have both issues. > > On Atkins no food is ever allowed if it's a trigger. The carb > > ladder is the order to try things to find out if they are a trigger [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > read the original Protein Power, CAD, etc. I know how to count carbs and > why; I should probably buy one of the newer low-carb books and learn more. The versions are 1972 (white label), 1993 (yellow label), 1999 (blue label) and 2002 (completely updated). All discuss food intolerances throughout. But go in thinking it's all about carb counts and glycemic loads and that other half gets missed. Atkins has two main concepts - carb counts and glycemic loads and insulin swings causing cravings, food intolerances asking like addictions and learning what to avoid. It's why the carb ladder isn't in strict carb count order. > I went on-and-off low-carb so many times in the past, I built up a tolerance > or something and it just plain stopped working for me. It seems to be going > pretty well now, though. I believe the "it stopped working for me" has to do with leptin resets. I know how leptin resets work - Leptin tracks highest carb count eaten in the last couple of months plus it tracks amount of excess stored fat, so leptin stays high as long as you still have 100+ to lose or you do occasional high carb days or you stick close to your CCLL then leptin stays high. I know how T3 output drops after 2+ weeks in study after study of VLCD, 20 and under. How the two work together and how being off low carb for a while work like that, I don't have any way to conduct a study on the correlation. > > Do you have the belief that adding carbs will reduce your > > loss rate? It won't. Keep your carbs too low and thyroid > > starts cutting T3 output. That causes basal metabolism > > to drift down and reduces loss rates. > > That's an interesting thought! Do you have a reference for that? Google T3 thyroid VLCD and you'll find plenty of studies. But note that dropping T3 output does not indicate thyroid damage just reduced metabolism - aka starvation mode. > > For me it's cashews. No matter the size of the package of > > cashews I eat them until it's empty. Not a bad thing with a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I love 'em all. That doesn't have much to do with it. I love pecans as much as cashews, but I can close the can of pecans and put it back in the drawer. If I open the can of cashews the thing is empty before I put it away. > > So is using a smaller package the right idea given the > > principles of Atkins? Food intolerances trigger binges and [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > Makes sense. This is in the second book? All of them. > > One bite really does hurt. Maybe a direct binge, maybe > > gradual erosion of control. Those temptations will never, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > no matter how hard my fat friends try to shove it down my thought. Bastards! > They're the reason I'm fat, you know ;-))) Binge triggers can be obvious, like my example of cashews being gone once they open or when I start on popcorn my hand keeps moving until the bag is empty. But there are also more sutble "slippery slope" ones for me. I can eat a little corn without binging but if I have it two days in a row I want more the third day. It eventually roller coasters. it takes a long time to isloate the subtle ones if they exist for you. > > Hard to control. The concept of "three square meals" may be > > nonsense for some, but I think for you it needs to be a goal. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > have to enlarge my stomach (I think). I'm not seeing that as a good idea, > but I'd like to hear you out on that. Different strokes for different folks. I needed to learn what correct portion sizes were - If Atkins is about right-sizing portions to trigger loss without hunger and then maintenance without hunger, I needed to learn what the right size was. So I counted calories and grams at meals and figured it out. I also benefited more from the stability of the habit of eating at meals during OWL. >> I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. > Aaron Baugher doesn't like that because it sounds like a victim's > statement. Well, I'm ambivalent on it. Like I said, I do think there are a lot of similarities between carb cravings and other addictions, and things we can learn from addiction theory. My girlfriend just finished a college course on drug addiction, and we've talked about the many parallels: The way addicts rationalize "rewarding" themselves with cheats; the chemical euphoria that's triggered in your brain when you cheat; the remorse when the "high" wears off; the way people often fail to deal with it until hitting bottom or getting a good scare somehow. Carb addiction has all the same physical, mental, and social components of other types of addiction, so I think it qualifies. Where *some* addicts and addiction experts start to lose me is when they treat it like it's something that *happened to* them, instead of something they *did*, as if they were just walking along one day, and whammo, Fate slapped them upside the head with alcoholism. Granted, some people may have had genetic or social pressures that encouraged dependency, but they still had to drink the drinks or smoke the smokes to get there, just as I had to eat the potatoes to get to 285 pounds. I realize a lot of that is just a reflection of modern society's dislike of responsibility. Somewhere between the 1960s and the Clinton Presidency we went from, "The buck stops here," to, "Mistakes were made." Everything's in the passive voice now. So maybe that's all I'm seeing: people applying post-modern thinking to addiction theory. I'm pretty sure AA *does* try to get people to take responsibility for their addictions, so maybe the people I'm hearing are avoiding that part because it's harder to face than being a "sufferer." > I do like it because it makes it completely clear that the one and > only way I have to deal with [insert word] is complete and utter > avoidance. That's where the comparison breaks down a bit, though, because you can't completely cut out carbs like you can alcohol, tobacco, or other drugs, at least not as a practical matter in the long term. Going cold turkey and removing the substance from your life in every possible way is considered the key to dealing with addiction, but we can't do that. We can do it part-way, by clearing the high-carb foods out of our cabinets and things like that, but still, three or more times a day we're going to consume some amount of carbs, so we're going to have to decide how much and from what. If an alcoholic tried to curb his addiction by cutting back to one beer per meal, anyone would say that's a recipe for failure, but that's kind of what we carb addicts have to do. I like to think of carbs as a poison. Like arsenic and many other substances, they're harmless below a certain level but poisonous in greater quantities. I can have a small amount of carbs in each meal -- around 10g or so, depending on how fast-acting they are -- without any harmful effects. Triple that, and I'll start getting symptoms like heartburn and fatigue. Raise it to where the USDA says it should be, and I'll be injecting insulin in a few years. Sounds like a poison to me. > That doesn't have much to do with it. I love pecans as much > as cashews, but I can close the can of pecans and put it > back in the drawer. If I open the can of cashews the thing > is empty before I put it away. That's interesting. Do you suppose it's because of the higher carb count in cashews, or something else? I used to hate cashews, but since low-carbing, I don't mind them. I still wouldn't buy them alone, but in a can of mixed nuts, they aren't bad. Oddly, they seem *less* sweet to me than they used to, while most foods seem sweeter on low-carb. SignatureAaron -- 285/254/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz > >> I'm a [insert word] addict. Carbs addict, food addict, whatever. > ... [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > would say that's a recipe for failure, but that's kind of what we carb > addicts have to do. But we can eliminate added sugar, or foods above a certain glycemic load. And in extreme cases it does work to eat very close to true zero carbs - Consider the few Inuits who still live the traditional hunting lifestyle on the floating ice. The exact foods it takes to stay healthy when eating an all meat diet aren't ones that westerners would want, but it does work. And so it's a matter of judgments and thresholds. What is the trigger that causes addictive response? Specific foods like my wheat intolerance that's so specific I can even have crisps made from 100% rye? Avoiding foods that specific can be done. Carbs in general above some glycemic load threshold that triggers an insulin response? That's not as specific so it isn't as easy to define but avoidance can be done. So, like "food" I consider "carbs" to be too general for use as an addiction. If so far you've concluded that you're addicted to "carbs" then I think you haven't yet isolated the cause down enough. It doesn't make sense to have potato hash browns trigger a binge, conclude you're addicted to "carbs", and so start avoiding broccoli. Compare like glycemic load foods first so if the hash browns triggered a binge then compare with rice or corn ... > I like to think of carbs as a poison. Like arsenic and many other > substances, they're harmless below a certain level but poisonous in [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > be, and I'll be injecting insulin in a few years. Sounds like a > poison to me. The same can be said for salt, or potassium. But they don't get anywhere near the same emotional reaction! > > That doesn't have much to do with it. I love pecans as much > > as cashews, but I can close the can of pecans and put it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > That's interesting. Do you suppose it's because of the higher carb > count in cashews, or something else? The best I can do to answer that is compare how I deal with another tree nut that's higher in carbs - pistachios. When I bring a big can or sack of nuts to work it might be pecans or walnuts or filberts or pistachios. Any one of those nuts I can take a handful, then return the sack to the drawer and not bother with it again that day. Since pistachios and cashews are both high carb compared to other tree nuts, that tells me that with cashews for me it's more than just the carb count. But I do tend to take a bigger handful of pistachios than pecans or filberts so the carb count does have meaning for me; it just doesn't overwhelm the other effects. Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own stupidity. Whether its your weight, problems in your job, your marriage, alcohol, run-ins with the law, money problems, whatever, if you're suffering from the problem, its you're fault 99.9% of the time. The concept of the "planned cheat meal" just blows me away. How can somebody seriously be trying to lose weight and build "cheats" into their diet? That's like an alcoholic saying, "I'm on the wagon for good, except Friday nights." In any event, its going on three weeks of low-carb here and no problems yet. Its looking like this week's going to be break-even on the weight, which is expected. We'll see though. I'll clean my ears on Sunday, shave extra close, pop all my pimples, get a haircut, lob off a couple of my extra toes & see if I lose at least a little. > Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, > caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own stupidity. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > The concept of the "planned cheat meal" just blows me away. How can somebody > seriously be trying to lose weight and build "cheats" into their diet? Combine not having addictive behavior patterns, or worse not knowing or believing you have them, with viewing your diet as a fad diet where more extreme means more success. Those folks who want to do nothing but Induction and then wonder at why it eventually stops working (and how refuse to look at how none of the books say to do that and at thyroid T3 release studies) are also folks who are being extreme enough to feel deprived. So the choice ends up being crash and burn out, or do an occasional planned cheat meal. A planned cheat meal basically ignores all popular plans and the principles taught on ASDLC. But the bad part is a planned cheat meal generally does a leptin reset and so lots of people see a whoosh shortly after a cheat. This sets up a terrible feedback loop of extremism alternating with cheats. > That's like an alcoholic saying, "I'm on the wagon for good, except Friday > nights." For folks who don't accept that addictive behavior happens. Check. But I'm not an addict! Like bleep I'm not ... > In any event, its going on three weeks of low-carb here and no problems yet. > Its looking like this week's going to be break-even on the weight, which is > expected. Yup. > We'll see though. I'll clean my ears on Sunday, shave extra close, > pop all my pimples, get a haircut, lob off a couple of my extra toes & see > if I lose at least a little. Chortle. BTDTgtTS. But at least the tee-shirt is a size smaller than when I first started. ;^) > Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, > caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own stupidity. > Whether its your weight, problems in your job, your marriage, alcohol, > run-ins with the law, money problems, whatever, if you're suffering from > the problem, its you're fault 99.9% of the time. I call it an addictive personality. I've never been drunk, but if I have one drink I wake up the next morning and think "Wouldn't a drink be nice about now?" I've done it with caffiene, food, TV, books, all manner of things that are bad for you in excess. Before I got pregnant I had managed to get addicted to lifting weights. I'd wake up in the morning and think "I get to lift today!". I'd have cravings to hit the gym.. just for a few minutes. It was great and the weight dropped right off. When I was pregnant they told me I had to stop lifting, and then I had to eat more carbs because I wasn't gaining weight during pregnancy, and then I was ravenous all the time while nursing.. Bleh. Now I'm trying to get over that initial lifting hump and regain my weightlifting addiction. It was much healthier for me than a newsgroup addiction. And I didn't really fall victim to overdoing the exercise because I could just direct my compulsion to better form or add a different form to learn. > The concept of the "planned cheat meal" just blows me away. How can > somebody seriously be trying to lose weight and build "cheats" into > their diet? That's like an alcoholic saying, "I'm on the wagon for good, > except Friday nights." Heh, I made some kind of "coconut bark" yesterday - cocoa powder, coconut oil and splenda. Wayyyyy too sweet for me, even with half the splenda the recipe called for and remarkably unsatisfying. I craved real chocolate most of the afternoon. I don't think that a "cheat meal" is in the cards for me anytime soon. None of the foods I've tasted in the past are worth a miserable afternoon to me. >> Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, >> caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own stupidity. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > about now?" I've done it with caffiene, food, TV, books, all manner of > things that are bad for you in excess. I hate dealing with words like "addicted". Its a simple word, it means "a person can't/doesn't/won't stop doing something". But then there's the victems and the underprivledged and the angry people who are mad because they're addicts and don't want to deal with it, and then there are the recovering addicts who get pissed off because people use the word addict but really mean victem, and then there are all those people who make the excuse, "I'm addicted". When I pick up a good book at night to read before I go to bed, I can't set it down. I'm not a victem. Nobodys fault but mine. I'm not a book-a-holoc. I don't need welfare, free counseling or amnisty. What I need to do, and I do quite well, is to not pick up a book late at night. Now, cigarettes, there's another one. Fact is: my fault. When I was TWELVE I knew smoking was stupid but I started anyway. At every age since then, I've known that its stupid and I need to quit. Yes, I'm addicted. But I'll be damned if I'm going to argue that out with anyone, so f-it, I'm not addicted. Whatever. Just send me my gov't cheese in the mail, pay $500/tablet for my welbutrin through medi-cal, I'll buy cigarettes with my welfare cheks whilst pumping out more babies just for the money, and let the liberals eat all the totsie rolls while they put a "fat tax" on fatty meat. E-gads, democrats. Lol. Don't vote for 'em, aye? Please? >>> Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, >>> caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > I hate dealing with words like "addicted". Its a simple word, it means > "a person can't/doesn't/won't stop doing something". No, It doesn't mean that. YOU MEAN THAT. The word doesn't mean that. Can you tell the difference between a real meaning of a word and the meaning you wish to attach to it? PLONK! >>>> Well, I've got a lot of problems with addiction -- food, cigs, carbs, >>>> caffeine... & I've never been a victim of anything but my own [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > PLONK! SEE.... SEE!!! that's exactly the kind of thing I was talking about. Another idea with nuts and seeds, rather than just buying small packages is to go ahead and buy a large package and freeze small portions. That way you have to thaw each ahead of time. I've never done this myself, but have heard it suggested so maybe it'll work for you. I don't have a problem with nuts and seeds which I often use as a salad topping. But for some reason, once they're ground up, I can easily eat like a thousand calories of the stuff with a spoon. I've had to decide to only use them in recipes or as flavorings in protein powder shakes cause I just can't eat a TB of pistachio butter and stop. Doing low-carb deals with the vast majority of the foods I might be tempted to binge on; nut butters are the only healthy low- carb food that I just can't handle. I have never heard of anyone who binged on carrots before. You must have incredible eyesight! ;) The whole leptin thing is discussed in some of Lyle Mcdonald's newer books. As for the meal frequency thing... there seems to be research/evidence on both sides. There's a bunch of info on Intermittent Fasting, where you only eat for 2-4 hours during the day, that seems to imply you can eat more carbs/calories and still lose if you eat this way. And then there's a bunch of info on how eating many small meals is better and that people who eat breakfast daily lose faster. It seems to me this research is very contradictory. So... pick the frequency of meals you prefer and you can read the research to support you. ;) > The whole leptin thing is discussed in some of Lyle Mcdonald's newer > books. Lyle Mcdonald. I haven't heard that name in ages. He had some nutty gf & after their breakup they tore each other apart on the various newsgroups. Something like that -- can't quite rememeber. em wrote in message ... >> The whole leptin thing is discussed in some of Lyle Mcdonald's newer >> books. > >Lyle Mcdonald. I haven't heard that name in ages. He had some nutty gf & >after their breakup they tore each other apart on the various newsgroups. >Something like that -- can't quite rememeber. I don't remember her being nutty at all. She knew a heck of lot about LC, weight training, and was a lot of fun. I never saw them tear each other apart either, at least that I can recall. Are you sure you're not thinking about a Canadian poster? :-) Cheri > em wrote in message ... >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > other apart either, at least that I can recall. Are you sure you're > not thinking about a Canadian poster? :-) "The slack mistress", something like that. > "The slack mistress", something like that. Her name is Nina. She taught me how to lift weights, and even though I haven't seen her in several years, she's a lovely human being who gave freely of her time and expertise. Myra >> "The slack mistress", something like that. > > Her name is Nina. She taught me how to lift weights, and even though > I haven't seen her in several years, she's a lovely human being who > gave freely of her time and expertise. Hey, any friend of Myra's is a friend of mine ;-) I remember not caring too much for her, but its been years & there's no grudge or anything. I hope she's doing well. Maybe her and Lyle are married or whatever & that's cool! > Do you have the belief that adding carbs will reduce your > loss rate? It won't. Keep your carbs too low and thyroid [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > not happen but to keep insulin low enough for fat to flow > out of storage not into it. He isn't the only one that has seen this. In fact, adding carbs and seeing weight loss slowly decrease is part of the whole concept of Atkins as you move through the stages. And at some point the weight loss stops all together. You think there is just some magic on/off point, and you can add carbs and weight loss just goes on at a fixed rate, until you past some point and then it instantly stops. That hasn't been my experience. Like EM, I've lost most rapidly when at no more than 20g of carbs. If I add carbs, it slows down. If it works for him, what's your problem? >End result: 253 down to 245 -- 8 pounds in two weeks. Considering this was a >switch from low-cal to low-carb, I think that's pretty damn good, as I [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > >Thanks for all your support! Nice, start! Congrads! SignatureBlueBrooke 254/228/135 CLENBUTEROL :: 50 tabs x 20 mcg :: USD 26.00 http://www.giogen.com |
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.