BrightAngel check-in

[BrightAngel]

I love to share various posts and links here in my Personal Daily Thread.
Partly to help others who drop by, and partly for my own easy reference.

Several months ago I purchased a DVD documentary from Amazon titled "FatHead",
which was an amusing and entertaining way to view some of the concepts
contained in the book, Good Calories Bad Calories by Gary Taubes.
I've shared that DVD with my friends and family, who have expressed amusement and amazement.

Anyway....Yesterday I saw a 5 part lecture by the DVD's producer on YouTube,
which covers much of the material in the documentary.
Here are the links:

Big Fat Fiasco part 1 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exi7O1li ... re=related
Big Fat Fiasco part 2 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cmwNpUJU ... re=related
Big Fat Fiasco part 3 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuxDuLKz ... re=related
Big Fat Fiasco part 4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9mQ-QZk ... re=related
Big Fat Fiasco part 5 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEayi6IB ... re=related

[connorcream]

Outstanding links. Thank you taking the time to post them. They certainly ring true in my life.

[Teemuh]

Thanks so much for the links. That was very interesting and eye opening!

[BrightAngel]

We get many links on the General Discussion Threads
of this Forum about the "latest research" findings.
Here is a Very Interesting Article on that subject.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/arc ... ence/8269/

[BrightAngel]

I think you tend to crave foods you deny.

It's not that we eat too much sugar,
but it may be that we eat too little saturated fat.

Kathleen,
I'm so pleased that you followed and watched those 5 links.
I found it to be an interesting and entertaining presentation.

Re your comment about craving foods denied....
I know that this is one of the basic premises of the Intuitive Eating philosophy,
and personally, I've experienced cravings for foods that I've denied myself...
...Unfortunately, I also experience cravings when I DON'T deny myself.

Many people say....
that their own cravings for sugar, grain products, and starchy foods like potatoes, brown beans etc
(which are the higher carbohydrate foods - both refined and complex)
completely go away after a few weeks of abstinace from them. ..
and as long as they abstain from those foods, they don't crave them
UNTIL they choose eat such foods again. ..when the cravings descend upon them again.

Certainly there are genetic differences between people,
and I think there may well be a genetic condition
that makes some people less tolerant to sweet and starchy foods,
somewhat similiar to a lack of tolerance of Alcohol for Alcoholics.

I've seen times in my life where this has seemed to be true for me personally,
but to date, I've found myself unwilling to adopt a food plan with that long-term restriction.
Perhaps that is why I still HAVE severe food cravings...
even though for more than 5 years I've treated all foods as equal,
and merely worked to keep my calories down.
At this point, I just don't know.

Re your comment about sugar and saturated fat....
My problem with that concept is that everyone...across the board...
(except for the Sugar Industry)
...has always said that too much sugar is harmful ,
but until that "fat fiasco" happened..saturated fat was not considered to be harmful.

Even the "pro-saturated fat" people believe that sugar and refined starches,
whether or not combined with saturated fat, or any other kind of fat,
are ultimately harmful substances for the majority of people.

In fact when one looks at the data throughout all known history ...
it is hard to avoid reaching the conclusion that
these foods do appear to have a connection with,
and....Perhaps...be primarily responsible for the "diseases of civilization".

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,

One of the advantages of No S, for me, has been that I can't eat as much in sweets because I limit myself to six days per month. My concern about the presentation is that restriction of sugar might include restriction of fruit, and I flat out don't buy into that.

As for carb restriction, I also don't buy that. I think that carbs like oatmeal are just fine.

I have read enough to be concerned about a low carb diet.

As for restriction on fat, I have started to not buy that. On Valentine's Day weekend, Tom and I went out to dinner, and I had a cassoulet. It was delicious, it was very filling, and it had fat in it. I think fat may be what makes foods filling, so I switched from skim milk to 2% milk.

Basically, I think that we can learn from religious tradition in which there are some food restrictions (Catholic no meat on Fridays on Lent, for example) and restrictions on when you eat (used to be no eating until 3 PM on Wednesdays and Fridays), and no restriction on quantity that I have found at least until after the medieval period

The Catholic tradition used to have very big eating times. What remains is Mardi Gras, which is the day before Lent starts. When I was a girl, my father once made the traditional German doughnut for Mardi Gras. The traditions have been lost.

Now there is this relentless restriction of portions and foods. Ugh!

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

My concern about the presentation is that restriction of sugar might include restriction of fruit,
and I flat out don't buy into that.

As for carb restriction, I also don't buy that.
I think that carbs like oatmeal are just fine.

I have read enough to be concerned about a low carb diet.

As for restriction on fat, I have started to not buy that.

I try to keep an Open Mind,
which involves continuing to receive and process information
about subjects on which I have already formed an Opinion.
I constantly work to retain the Ability to Change My Mind.

It sounds as though you might tend to have a "closed" mind on some issues.
To see if that's true for you....
Can you get yourself to Accept the Possibility that there may be Truth in These Thoughts ?

• "Perhaps carb restriction is an excellent thing for some people."
  ....."Perhaps...even though I hate the idea....I MIGHT be one of those people."
  
  "Perhaps fruit and oatmeal are not good foods for some people."
  ....."Perhaps...even though I love them...I MIGHT be one of those people."
  
  "Perhaps I need to continue gathering information about a low-carb diet
  ...while retaining my current opinion....
  and keep open my Option to CHANGE MY MIND."

There is a principle
which is a bar against all information,
which is proof against all arguments and
which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance
– that principle is contempt prior to investigation.

I offer this reverse statement and a possible cure for everlasting ignorance;
"Investigation prior to contempt."

• To begin with we must keep an open mind and not fear alternative ways of thinking.
  
  Second we must look at multiple sources
  to see if they provide answers with similar views and beliefs.
  
  Third we must consider the date in time of the previous statement
  and any advancements in technology and research that may now
  adequately disprove this past belief and
  
  Fourth we must be aware of our own ability to interpret the truth utilizing our sixth sense
  because deep inside we all have the ability to know when something feels right.

Self-honesty is not easy but it is attainable
if we have the willingness, courage and patience to stay the course!

Life is an amazing journey with many twists, turns and unexpected road blocks,
but there is no need for us to make things worse.
Sure we need to trust,
and sure we would love to trust everything from doctors to the Holy Scriptures,
from our Grandma to Google,
but blind faith doesn't necessarily guarantee that all statements are true
and that they’re actually in our best interests.

• Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it.
  
  Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumoured by many.
  
  Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books.
  
  Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders.
  
  Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations.

But after observation and analysis,
when you find that anything agrees with reason
and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all,
then accept it and live up to it.

[Teemuh]

Thanks, for that article, Bright Angel. It's kind of funny, because I've always noticed that things that are good for you one day seem to be bad for you the next, and this helps explain why. Nothing like confusing the masses.

[Kathleen]

Hi BrightAngel,
What came to mind as I read what you wrote was "black swan." I think I've done lots of testing and have moved away from some ideas. The most blatant example of this is that I have fully tested the idea of 24 X 7 "unconditional permission to eat" and found that this is not a way that I could lose weight.

I have also concluded that "portion control" is not the way to go, but I concluded that after attempting portion control almost continuously from 1976 to 2007.

Now is the time for me to try testing fasting. I got a really good contracting job that starts at the end of the month and runs through the beginning of January. At this point, the diet needs to go on the back burner because I'll be busy, very busy!

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Is there a point after maintaining for a while,
when your body just has a mind of it's own about what weight it wants you to be?

I lose weight when I have to, but much slower, even with lowering my calories.
I can't get down to the 105-106lbs. that i was staying at for 15mo.
(which was my feel good weight), & is within a healthy range for me.

What more can I do to stop the weight gain or is this normal for most people?

What did you experience?, please help.

Question interests me,
since I have been dealing with this problem for the past two years.

About 5 years ago, after reaching my 115 lb weight goal,
while eating an average of around 1200 calories,
I increased my calories about 100 or so -to 1250-1350
but continued dropping weight down to the 109-112 range,
and held in that weight area for several months.

However, after about 6 months inside maintenance
when working to lose a few more pounds,
in order to give me a bit of "bounce" room pre-Vacation, pre-Holiday,
I found that although a few weeks of lower calorie dieting would bring me a 2 or 3 lb weight loss,
my weight refused to Stabilize in that area...no matter what..

Despite all efforts, my weight would return to a stabilized weight of around 112-115 lbs...
This continued for about two years..with an average calorie burn of around 1200-1300
(For perspective- remember - I'm 5'0", over 60, AND "reduced obese")

HOWEVER, After about 2 1/2 years, while continuing my SAME behavior,
my weight began creeping up a fraction of a lb at a time,
and to avoid this, I had to gradually reduce my calorie intake.

Long story short (I know....Too Late)
Anyway, for the first 2 years of my maintenance,
I maintained and even lost a tiny amount on 1200-1300 calories.

For the next 2 1/2 + years of my maintenance,
due to gradual weight creep,
I've worked to maintain my weight around 118-120 lbs at an average calorie amount of 1050.
All attempts to raise my calorie level above the 1050 calorie area has only caused increased weight.

During my most recent 2 1/2 + years I've experimented with
periods of increasing calories
and periods of decreasing calories,
Remember.......My 1050 average number is over 2 1/2 years...
and that 1050 average breakdown is also the same over all 6 month periods...
however, in the short term, for 2 to 3 month periods or so,
I've done a lot of experimenting both with higher and with lower food intake calories.

Higher calories always simply resulted in higher weight,
and lower calories always resulted in only temporary loss--back to my Stabilized weight...
but no overall weight-reduction.

There's little or no scientific research about what it takes for "reduced obese" people
to maintain a normal or light weight for a LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

You talk about a change after around 16 months of Maintenance.
I experienced a change after around 30 months of Maintenance.
Coincidence? I don't know... But my experience seems a bit similiar.

How to stop the weight-creep? I don't know.
Increasing Exercise has not been effective,
and I'd have great difficulty in reducing my calories further.

However, whatever happens with my weight,
I am committed to continue with my efforts.
I figure that weight "creeping" back on is FAR BETTER
than the "galloping" that I've previously experienced.

On the Bright Side..
If the creep continues at the rate of about 1/4 or 1/2 pound a year,
..........no matter what I do..................
the life span I have left probably won't be long enough for me to become obese again.

Bright Angel-
Does carb intake effect your efforts?
Could your body become more more carb sensitive over time/with aging?
Could you eat more calories, while eating lower carbs?
Just wondering if you are tracking this too.

My answer to these first two questions is....Perhaps.

For the past 5 months or so I've been analyzing low carb,
both through research and personal experimentation.
I've found the Low Carb research on Low Carb extremely interesting
..especially that contained in "Good Calories Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes.

However, So far...for my own body...I have not arrived at any pro-or-con conclusion.
My personal research efforts along this line are hindered
by my difficulty in adhering to Low-Carb eating.
I greatly enjoy eating the complex carbs contained in grains, legumes etc.
and, so far, I've found it difficult to abstain from them for more than short time periods.
I've run several experiments with this during the past 5 months,
and have not yet been able to complete a consistent two-week
low-carb period.
However, I shall continue to experiment with this issue
until I feel I have a personal answer to those questions.

[Teemuh]

Hi Bright Angel. You said increasing exercise has not been effective. Did that include muscle building? I wonder if that might help since we lose muscle mass as we get older, and muscle does burn more calories than fat.

[connorcream]

Thank you for taking the time to respond. I am following your experiences with intense interest.

[BrightAngel]

Hi Bright Angel. You said increasing exercise has not been effective.
Did that include muscle building?
I wonder if that might help since we lose muscle mass as we get older,
and muscle does burn more calories than fat.

This past 6 years I've exercised more than I did during my entire life.,
both with Cardio and Strength Training.

My choice as a 60+ year old, small, lightweight woman,
is to use only light weights and bodyweight for Strength Training,
and my choice is to limit myself to low-impact Cardio.
I have neither the ability nor the desire to do more,
and there is no way I'm going to gain a ton of muscle from that activity.

Furthermore, my own research into muscle mass and calorie burn
tells me that...despite what many trainers say.....
this is another one of those exaggerated, myth-like beliefs.
A few lbs of additional muscle actually increases one's calorie burn only a very little.

Here's a quote from a BodyBuilding Expert whose opinion I respect:

Question: #4 – Adding muscle mass through weight training
helps accelerate fat loss/weight loss.

Answer: FALSE

An additional pound of skeletal muscle only burns an extra 5 calories per day.
This is an insignificant amount of calories.

It doesn’t matter how much muscle you think you can build,
it will never add up to enough to help burn any real amount of fat.

http://johnbarban.com/4-adding-muscle-a ... ss-answer/

[Sienna]

I've been following your daily check in, and I had a thought about your weight creep. You mentioned your creep seems to be ~1/4 - 1/2 pound per year. Incidentally, I've run some BMR numbers for myself recently and found that the estimated* decrease in BMR from aging is around 5 calories per day each year.

5*365 = 1825 and 1825/3500 = .52 pounds per year. So it's possible that some of what you are seeing is just a natural consequence of aging.

*I know that BMR formulas are only estimates, but that aging lowers BMR seems to be fairly well established.

[BrightAngel]

I've run some BMR numbers for myself recently
and found that the estimated* decrease in BMR from aging is around
5 calories per day each year.

5*365 = 1825 and 1825/3500 = .52 pounds per year.
So it's possible that some of what you are seeing is just a natural consequence of aging.

*I know that BMR formulas are only estimates,
but that aging lowers BMR seems to be fairly well established.

Thanks for your comment.
Yes, I agree that aging tends to decrease one's BMR,
and your numbers look right to me.

My burn runs lower than the average BMR/RMR for my age and size,
however, this shouldn't be an issue
because I am not comparing myself with the charts,
but am comparing me with me.

However, the difference between
maintaining while eating 1200-1300 calories per day,
as I did the first two and a half years
and gaining 3 - 5 lbs while eating 1050 calories per day
as has happened the last two and a half years,
is too high to be explained by a yearly increase of 5 calories per day.

Since one figures it as a yearly increase...
this would be 5 in year 1; 10 in year 2; 15 in year 3; 20 in year 4; 25 in year 5.

For Example:
1300 minus 5 = 1295
minus 10 = 1285
minus 15 =1270
minus 20 = 1250
minus 25 = 1225 ...

In this example...assuming I was eating approx 1300 calories and maintainlng my weight,
With an age reduction 5 years later, I should still be able to eat approx 1225 and maintain my weight.
However, in actuality, I had a 3 to 5 lb gain while eating 175 per day less than that...i.e. 1050.

175 x 2.5 years (912 days)
3 lbs x 3500 = 10,500 divided by 2.5 years (912 days) = 11 calories per day
175 plus 11 = 186 daily calorie decrease unexplained by age increase.
PLUS one would add to that number a 5 calorie per day yearly increase for 1.5 of those 2.5 years.

It is an interesting issue.
I don't mind having my daily calorie burn reduced by 5 every year...
but I'm not happy with losing that additional 186+daily calories in just 2 years.
If that gain rate continued, I would enter obesity again,
....unless my life span is much shorter than I expect.....

The calculations become ridiculous...
Starting now in 2010 with 1050 daily calories...
.....in Theory...186 + 5 per year would soon bring me down to zero food intake ..
....Year 2011--859; Year 2012--663; Year 2013--462; Year 2014--256; Year 2015--45.

Actually, I'm beginning to believe that while the Scientific Rule (Theory) of 3500 calories = 1 fat pound
seems to hold true in that middle range between High-Morbid-Obese-weight and Normal-to-Light-weight,
it DOESN'T seem to always be the case when applied to gains for very-fat people or losses for very-light people.

[Teemuh]

Hi Bright Angel. Have you tried lowering your theromstat? Shivering burns more calories , I hear:) Just kidding !! It's a tough situation when you're being that disciplined and still face weight gain. It's seems rather unfair.

[BrightAngel]

It's a tough situation when you're being that disciplined and still face weight gain.
It's seems rather unfair.

Like our mamas told us,
and like we told our children....
"Life Isn't Fair"

[BrightAngel]

Someone who is still Fat recently told me that
they didn't want Thoughts about Weight/Food/Exercise to "Rule their Life".

I had no way to Help them toward that Goal of Mindlessness,
because Thoughts about Weight/Food/Exercise have ALWAYS "Ruled MY Life."
I did not spend any less time Thinking about those issues when I was Fat than I do now.
The difference is that when I was Fat my Thoughts were not accompanied by Action,
while during my weight-loss period ...and now inside Maintenance...
my Thoughts about those issues are a whole lot more productive and positive.

[BrightAngel]

This is a Copy of a Terrific recent post from a Maintainer on another Forum.

We each do different things, to some degree.

For myself, it is:
“This is what I choose to do and this is what proves to be effective for me.â€

We don't need anyone's approval; what has worked for us has worked for us.
What works for other people works for other people.
We aren't obligated to try to convince anyone of anything,
and we might have good intentions to help others,
but ultimately they have to want to be helped, and that isn't our business.

I find myself looking back and remembering what my thoughts and feelings were
when I was fat--both when I was fat and not really losing weight,
and when I was fat and actively committed to losing weight.
I'm trying to remember what my beliefs and excuses and fears were, back then.
Maybe that will help me relate to people with a little more compassion and less exasperation.
It can be pretty overwhelming when you're starting out,
or even partway through, and have a long way to go.

One of the things I remember plain as day
was seeing Ali Vincent--the first female winner of "The Biggest Loser"—
on Oprah one day, a few years ago.
She was walking the viewing audience through a typical day in her life,
and one of the things they showed
was Ali carefully weighing out the food to make her lunch.
She said that's what she still needs to do and chooses to do,
even though she's lost and kept off her weight.

I thought "Oh for God's sake, who wants to live like that?!"

Well, as it turns out, I do.
I never would have thought it would be not only okay with me,
but something I value and appreciate.

At the time, with so much weight to lose, I thought:
"Well, that's just obsessive and unhealthy.
I can't imagine having to weigh and portion your food all the time.
That's just not natural."

Yeah, but was eating whatever felt "natural" working for me?
No, it wasn't.
I honestly didn't think I ate any more than a lot of thinner people did.
I thought I ate pretty well--pretty mindfully.

So I think when people are near their starting weight,
they have not yet arrived at a place where it "clicks"
that the very things they dread, fear, and reject
might be the things
which are going to possibly change their lives.

You can't tell somebody something she isn't ready to hear.
If it falls on defensive ears, it comes off like yet another scolding lecture,
or further confirmation that she will be asked to do things
that feel extremely uncomfortable and out of reach.

I wasn't at all ready to accept, let alone embrace,
the idea that if I want to have what Ali has,
I have to be open to doing what Ali does.

It took me a long while to get there.


**
Start weight: 212
Current weight: 118

[BrightAngel]

Copy of a recent Post by a Maintainer on another Forum.

I know I will be 'counting' calories and carbs for the rest of my life-
-unless I want to end up back over 300lbs!

The 'listen to your body' advice cannot possibly work
for someone like me
who has been morbidly obese much of her entire life.
I doubt that anyone gets to morbid obesity without some metabolic dysfunction
which interferes with 'normal' body eating signals.

My body really doesn't give me reliable 'signals.'
And if it did, I long ago learned to completely ignore them,
and, if I every had it, that ability is lost forever.

A lifetime of morbid obesity obviously has totally distorted
my relationship to food from a psychological perspective.
Food is never a benign presence in my life;
it was a good friend who has become the 'enemy.'
It is something I have to deal with one day at a time,
trying to make sure I remain in control.
In a way, it's like being an alcoholic,
but worse because total abstinence is not possible.

Last winter, I went on a two-week cruise with a very good friend of mine
who has been normal weight all her life.
She is a model of 'eating when hungry/stopping when full,'
and I could bore you with examples of that behavior that I saw over and over.
One in particular was striking.

We were having dinner at a buffet,
and she had a moderate portion of several items.
Her plate was in no way full.
She was 3/4 through the food and stopped (I was still shoveling it in).
She happened to glance over to the buffet and said,
"I didn't notice they have fried catfish; I just love that" (she's from New Orleans).
I expected her to go get some, but she just sat there,
so I said, "Aren't you going to have any catfish?"
She replied, "No, I'm full, and I'm finished eating."

I was amazed that she would ignore a food she loves
simply because she wasn't hungry!
Fat from early childhood, I've always been a "food for entertainment,"
"food for stress," "food for boredom" eater.

My friend is a 'normal' eater who can listen to her body-
--but she's never had to lose weight in her life.
It seems to me that the advice to eat when hungry/stop when full
is ONLY useful for people who have already always done that.

**
Start: 340
Current 165

[BrightAngel]

The long post below PRECISCELY describes my own Belief.
Thanks TexArk for copying it to your Thread,
and allowing me to copy it to mine.

While thinking about how every bite counts, I came across this post from a blog that says it all.
I think the podcast on S Days Gone Wild is great,
but I never overcame the S day mentality until I admitted that every bite counts.

Every Bite Counts.
I had a huge light bulb moment last night
as I was reading this thread on the "3 Fat Chicks" website
(GREAT place for support, by the way!)
It's a thread about "cheat days,"
which is what some people call it
when you plan a day to go off your eating plan and eat whatever you want.

The theory is that if you PLAN a day like that every so often,
it makes it easier to stay on plan the rest of the time.
Whenever you are craving something,
you just tell yourself that you can have it on your cheat day,
but you have to wait until then to have it.

The problem is that for some people (like me),
a cheat day turns into a cheat week or a cheat month
and it's really hard to get back on track.
Or if you have problems with bingeing,
it isn't any hardship to ingest upwards of 4 or 5 thousand calories on a cheat day
(yes I have done that),
and it really messes up all your hard work you did eating right all week.

Anyway, reading through that thread, it hit me.
Every bite counts.
EVERY.
Now, maybe this sounds obvious, but how many times have I gotten up,
started a healthy eating day, and then at lunch "slipped up" and had pizza?
Then I would tell myself, "oh well, I ruined my day,
so I may as well have candy bars and burgers and fries for dinner
and start over fresh tomorrow."
Isn't that something a LOT of people are in the habit of doing?

We look at our eating aka "diet" in terms of a UNIT.

One good day
(eating the right number of points or calories or whatever your plan is)
is a Unit of Success,

and a Bad Day
(eating over your limit, not counting calories, eating junk)
is a Unit of Failure.

Sometimes we even try to string days together,
as in "I will start on Monday" or the first of the month
or after Christmas or whatever,
which is an excuse to eat badly and not count anything
until we "start again" on that special date.

WHO came up with this idea???
Why is a "DAY" the unit of success or failure??
Who decided that if you eat badly for lunch,
you can just eat whatever you want for the rest of the day
and start over in the morning?
It's as if we think that "one bad day" is a single unit of failure,
whether we ate 2000 or 5000 calories,
that it's the same because it is just ONE bad day.
It makes no sense!!

EVERY BITE COUNTS, whether you eat a Hershey bar on a "bad" day
because you are bingeing
or eat it on a "good" day and add it into your calorie count,
it is STILL 210 calories going into your body.
You HAVE to stop looking at it as good and bad days.
It is your LIFE.

What I mean is this.
Say you are aiming to eat 1500 calories per day to lose weight
(substitute WW points or whatever other unit or plan you are using).
Now, say your week looks like this:

Monday: 1500
Tuesday: 1470
Wednesday: 1460
Thursday: 1520
Friday: 1460
Saturday: 3200
Sunday: 2900

You slipped up on Saturday and told yourself you would start over on Monday.
You had only 2 bad days.
But now you have eaten 13,510 calories for the week
which averages out to 1910 per day... way over your limit.
And you wonder why you haven't lost weight.

Because every bite counts,
and the unit is not a day, or even a week.
It is a lifetime.

When you eat something you shouldn't have, it's over.
Stop, and eat right from that very moment on.
Have a healthy dinner.
Keep going.
A bad meal is way better than a whole bad weekend.

You want a cheat day?
Every bite you take counts, because it still goes into your body, counted or not.
Every bite either helps you get closer to your goal
or slows you down from reaching it.

So the question becomes, how badly do you want it?
Do you want to lose weight more than you want that cookie?
Then put it down.

Every time you eat something unhealthy or go over your calorie limit,
you are effectively putting a speed bump... or even a roadblock...
in between you and your goal.
Every bite you take determines whether you will reach your goal weight
in 6 months, 12 months, 3 years, or never.
What do you REALLY want?

[BrightAngel]

I'm copying this Post from the General Thread
to make these Links more easily accessible in the Future.

Would any calorie-counting members mind sharing their methods of combining it with No S?

I am one of the people who support calorie-counting as a No S modification.
There are many Threads here in the General Discussion that discuss the opinions of various forum members.

I think you might benefit from reviewing
the individual Daily Check-in Threads of some No S forum members who support calorie counting.
Of course, one of them is me.
At present my Thread contains 8 pages, and much of that talks about calorie-counting.
My Thread contains comments of others, as well as my own comments,
and I believe it contains a great deal of helpful, and or, inspiring information.
In that Thread on page 7 (post of 10/7/10) is a copy of a post by KCCC,
a successful No S member who does not like calorie-counting,
and in that post, she provides a link to a prior discussion of the General Forum on that subject.

Here is the link to my most recent page.
No need to use it, since if you are reading this, you are already here.
http://everydaysystems.com/bb/viewtopic ... &start=350

Another No S forum member who has achieved great success is Connorcream.
At present her Thread contains 6 pages, with many posts about calorie-counting.
Here is a link to her most recent page.
http://everydaysystems.com/bb/viewtopic ... &start=250

Two other forum members who have recently made that modification to their No S plan,
are Parnetty, and TexArk. Links to their Threads are:
http://everydaysystems.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=6814
http://everydaysystems.com/bb/viewtopic.php?t=6881
I believe if you read the pages that are contained in these Threads
many of your questions about calorie-counting combined with No S will be answered,
and, you will find information that is both interesting and helpful.

[BrightAngel]

Gary Taubes said it was carbohydrates that triggers appetite.
The problem with eliminating carbs is you need them so you end up craving them.

The above-quoted statement is inaccurate.

There is a difference between Hunger and Appettite.

Hunger is the "body's call for nourishment".
Appetite is the "desire for gratification of some want, craving, or passion;
therefore appetite is eating and drinking for relaxation and pleasure.

But...of course...Cravings and Urges don't ONLY originate in the Body.
Some, due to conditioning, originate in the Mind.

The craving for Alcohol by an Alcoholic seems to have a physical element,
and these cravings are reduced and even disappear via abstinance.
Low-Carbers believe that cravings for carbs--especially refined sugars and starches
have a physical element,
and these cravings are reduced and even disappear via carb-restriction.

The Low-Carb position is:
Insulin is what drives physical Hunger.
A reduction of carbohydrates is a reduction of insulin.
Therefore, reducing carbs...and thereby reducing insulin...
will reduce the physical craving for excess food.

Research studies have proven that the Human body
will SURVIVE and THRIVE without carbohydrates.

While the Body can USE Carbohydrates, it does not NEED them. .

Furthermore,
Low-carb eating is only a reduction, not a total elimination, of carbs.
Almost every low-carb plan includes green leafy vegetables,
and other low-starch vegetables like green beans, broccoli, cauliflower,
cucumbers...and father along, nuts and berries etc., all of which have carbs.

Even those hard-core, zero-carb people get a few carbs from their eggs,
cheese, yogurt, trace amounts of onion, garlic and spices for seasoning.

I find it interesting to note that studies clearly show
that meat and other animal products contain,
every single vitamin and mineral...except for vitamin C,
and in much larger amounts than what is found in fruits and vegetables.

and these studies also indicate that
eating a high amount of sugar and starch
actually DEPLETES the body's vitamin and mineral supply.
and that this process actually causes the body to need more of them,
including vitaman C.

For example--the famous scurvy that English seamen got
which was remedied by eating lemons ..citris fruit...,
only happened to those whose diets were Very High Carb,
while the seamen who ate higher protein with few carbs
did not suffer from scurvy.

So WHY aren't these dietary facts commonly known and understood?
I think this becomes very clear when we are wise enough to..
FOLLOW THE MONEY.

[BrightAngel]

This is a copy of a Post I recently made on KCCC's Daily Check-in Thread:

True, I can't speak to the level of weight that they're discussing -
I was 35 lbs overweight when I was yo-yo dieting in my youth, not 100 - but I WAS obese.

I agree that body signals get out of whack,
and if you're used to over-riding them then you don't notice them at all.
I also agree that you can't go from having them "broken"
to trusting them in one fell swoop,
as some of the intuitive eating books advise.

But I think that the ability to recognize and respond appropriately
to hunger/fullness can be re-built.
And I think the No-S habits do that, over time.

The concept of Intuitive Eating involves letting one's BODY tell one how much to eat.

No S is NOT actually a plan based on Intutive Eating.
No S sets a few specific simple "rules" that, when followed,
become Habits that tend to restrict caloric intake...without calorie counting.

As I have previously stated on my Thread,
the simple No S Plan appears to be effective for people
who have been less than 50 lbs overweight,
especially those who have been normal weight for most of their lives.

However, the simple No S Plan appears to be far less effective for people
who have been overweight, or obese, for most of their lives,
and especially for those who are more than 50 lbs overweight.
Those people need some modifications to the rules that provide
additional restrictions of caloric intake....which could include calorie counting.

You are correct when you say you cannot speak to the level of weight discussed.

While a "slightly" obese person can have a similiar MENTAL state,
The BODY of a person who has spent a few years a bit over the BMI Obesity Border,
is far, far different from
the BODY of a person who has spent much of their lifetime far over that border.

I agree with you that new HABITS can be learned,
and that one can gain a new MINDSET,
however, the PRIMARY PROBLEM with INTUITIVE EATING
for those who've spent time well into the area of Obesity or are "Reduced Obese"
is the difference in their BODY's Physical Responses due to their condition, or former condition.

The body responds and changes to Increased weight,
and many of those inner changes are not eliminated by weight-loss,
or evidently....(based on the experience of myself and others)...
by maintaining that weight-loss for 5 to 10 years.

One Example of this is:
Fat cells are not simple storage deposits,
but each one actively relates to the body continually.
Anyone who has ever been morbidly Obese, has far, far more fat cells
than someone who has never been less than 50 lbs overweight,
and with weight loss, fat cells shrink, but NEVER disappear.

Another Example of this is:
Body changes were addressed in the research of Dr. Rudolph Leibel, M.D.
who assessed the reasons for the frequent regaining of weight by reduced-obese patients.
Results of that research were:

"The mean individual energy requirement of reduced-obese subjects
was less than that for the control (normal-weight) subjects,
despite the fact that they still weighted 60% more than the controls.
In order to maintain a reduced weight,
some reduced-obese or even partially reduced patients
must restrict their food intake to approximately 25% less
than that anticipated on the basis of metabolic body size."

Intutive Eating is a MENTAL process of teaching oneself to rely on the BODY's NATURAL hunger and appetites.
However, the NATURAL BODY RESPONSE of a reduced obese person
provides hunger and appetite cues that intend to return that person to their former weight.

My position has always been that while Intuitive Eating principles MAY work
for those who have spent a brief period of their life in the BMI "overweight" category,
or even slightly over the BMI "obesity" category,
but
it is totally ineffective for those who have spent long periods of time
well into the BMI category of "Obesity".

[connorcream]

Research studies have proven that the Human body
will SURVIVE and THRIVE without carbohydrates.

While the Body can USE Carbohydrates, it does not NEED them. .

BA_
I find this very useful. Not only for myself with weight maintanence but more importantly for my son. Carbs in so many forms are a nightmare for him. The worry of colon cancer is always in the back of my mind. Not needing carbs would make his life easier. I wish you had a passion for studying Crohns as you do for weight loss:-) I am finding, WL and auto immune diseases (of which Crohn's is one manifestation) over lapping. Thank you for taking the time to post.

[BrightAngel]

I know I am supposed to-- I mean--NEED to "make S Days S Days so N Days aren't",
but I just am hoping that indulging in sweets
won't set me up to binge on Saturday and then crave come Monday.

If anyone has any lessons learned about this situation,
I would really appreciate hearing them.

Just because it is an "S" day,
doesn't mean sweets or snacks or seconds are REQUIRED.
It just means there's no RULE against them.
It isn't permission to binge.
Following N day principles on S days is a good thing.

Remember, Reinhard's No S is actually:
....except SOMETIMES on S days.

Also, don't forget his basic warning:
"Don't be an IDOT.

[BrightAngel]

No diet or food-plan,
No Matter What It Is...No-S, Calorie Counting, Low-Carb, WW, Low-Fat, etc....
will work for you if you don't adapt the plan to fit your personal tastes and lifestyle.
There is a great deal of room in the No S Plan...even inside Vanilla No S....to do this.

[Pernetty]

You are so right, BA, the plan has to fit who you are - not the other way around. I think the reason it hasn't clicked for me in the past is that I had this warped view that a diet meant lots of salads, deprivation and hunger.

Even NoS presented challenges that didn't fit my lifestyle. I like having treats daily, even if it means a 50 calorie piece of chocolate or an orange sliced after dinner. It felt too restrictive for me.

CC puts me in charge of my own plan. I've learned that I don't crave many sweets and that I really don't like to overeat. It really was the extra calories here and there that were adding up to the 10-15 pound creep.

I'm thankful for the circle of ConnorCream, yourself, TexArk who are living proof that calorie counting can work - especially for women over the age of 40.

P

[clarinetgal]

Pernetty, I know what you mean. I'm somewhere in between calorie counting and No S. I'm following the No S structure of no seconds and no snacks (most of the time), but I like to have a treat every day, too. The calorie counting helps me make sure that I stay within my budget, so to speak (I'm paraphrasing something Connorcream wrote in one of her earlier check in threads). It's a great reality check. I'm 35, but I'm finding that my metabolism has slowed over the past year or two, so I strongly suspect that calorie counting will become even more vital as I get older.

[BrightAngel]

The plan has to fit who you are - not the other way around.
I had this warped view that a diet meant lots of salads, deprivation and hunger.
Even NoS presented challenges that didn't fit my lifestyle.
It felt too restrictive for me.
CalorieCounting puts me in charge of my own plan.

I know what you mean.
I'm somewhere in between calorie counting and No S.
I'm following the No S structure of no seconds and no snacks,
but I like to have a treat every day, too.
The calorie counting helps me make sure that I stay within my budget.
It's a great reality check.

Pernetty and Clarinetgal,
It's great that you've found adding a calorie counting Habit to be helpful.

[connorcream]

The calorie counting helps me make sure that I stay within my budget, so to speak (I'm paraphrasing something Connorcream wrote in one of her earlier check in threads). It's a great reality check. I'm 35, but I'm finding that my metabolism has slowed over the past year or two, so I strongly suspect that calorie counting will become even more vital as I get older.

A very accurate summation of my views, thank you. I agree that that habit of CC becomes more important as we age. Our bodies do not need more calories but rather less. A fact is a fact whether I like it or not.

[clarinetgal]

That's a good point, Connorcream. When I was in my 20s, I used to be able to eat like a pig and maintain a weight several pounds lower than I'm at right now. I'm still at a decent weight for my height and bone frame, but now, I can only get away with maybe 1-2 splurge days a week before my weight starts creeping up to numbers I don't like. That's why I've been really rethinking the way I eat. What I love about calorie counting is I'm totally in the driver's seat. If I want to eat 3 meals with an equal number of calories (which is how I feel best), then great. If I want to eat one big meal and two smaller meals or even several smaller meals throughout the day, then that's fine, too, but it's my choice.

[BrightAngel]

The quote below is very much like my own experience.

I’ve learned along the way to find a satisfying Way Of Eating that I can sustain,
and to accept the fact that I'll never be able to eat like so-called "normal people".

For me it's like having a chronic illness.
If I don't continue to do the things
that I know help keep the symptoms (in this case gaining weight) under control,
I will have to face the consequences,
and, unless something miraculous occurs, this isn't going to change.

I've learned to accept that I will always have to be vigilant,
and am doing the same things I did when losing the weight,
except I stay within what I have found to be my maintenance calorie range
and I have a 5 lb. maintenance weight range.

My plan is that if I hit the top of that range,
I go immediately to weight loss mode until I am back to at least the middle of that range


***
5’6â€
Starting Weight: 208
Current Weight: 148

[BrightAngel]

This is such a good post about "S" days from a successful No S member,
that I've decided to copy it to my Thread for easy future reference.

Dear Self,

This is your internal voice of reason, and I just want to remind you of a few things... things you know, but sometimes forget.

You've been doing No-S for a while, and you have experienced the difference between "good" S-days and... and well, S-days that aren't so good.

On a Good S-Day, you have a scrumptious, satisfying treat of some nature. Maybe more than one - and you savor every bite. However, you also eat regular meals (maybe extra-yummy, but on time), refrain from perma-snacking, and enjoy the day. Emotionally, you feel proud of yourself, and deeply satisfied by what you ate. Physically, you feel good.

On a Not-So-Good (okay, pretty bad) S-day, you fall back into perma-snacking mode. You eat so much between meals that meals don't taste very good. Neither does anything else... for all the food you're inhaling (without even tasting), you don't feel satisfied. Emotionally, you feel desperate, out of control...and dissatisfied. Physically, you feel bloated and queasy.

Reinhard says S-days are meant to be a reward. A good one is exactly that. A bad one... nope.

So, what can you do to have a rewarding S-day? Well, start by remembering what works for YOU (other people will have different strategies, and that's okay). And remember to use the strategies your user name, which stands for Keep, Chuck, Change, Create.

KEEP what works for you during the week. Reinhard says habits will naturally carry over, but you don't have to passively wait for it to happen by magic! Pick an easy habit or two that you actually like, and incorporate them intentionally. For instance, eating regular meals and remembering to drink enough.

CHUCK what doesn't work for you. Right now, the biggest issue is snacks - they're a slippery slope, and you don't even like them that much. Do you need them to have a special day, or will seconds/sweets do it? (And when that self-destructive little voice whines "but it's an S-day, it's allowed!" tell it firmly that "allowed does not mean obliged. I don't HAVE to eat that if I don't want it!")

CHANGE the day's patterns to make them work better. For example, you have more energy in the morning, so maybe cook a big lunch and an easy supper. Or try one of those "put it in the oven and bake for an hour" recipes that you never have time for during the week.

CREATE new routines and habits that give you pleasure. Plan a special outing with the family. Buy flowers. Find something special to do... and savor it.

And yes, I know you know all this, but sometimes it helps to be reminded at the right time.

So have a great S-day. And remember, there will be a lot of weekends in your life. If you miss a treat, there will be another chance. And if your S-day is not-so-good... well, learn from it. There will be another chance.

Best wishes,

Your Internal Voice of Reason

[clarinetgal]

I love it!

[Starla]

BrightAngel, I replied to your comment in my thread, but I want to make sure you see this. Yesterday I got home from work to find that a friend had left a tin of homemade Christmas goodies on my doorstep. I debated internally, with one voice telling me I could just make it an S day or take a failure - that if I didn't open that tin I was setting myself up for obsessing about those treats for the rest of the week. But then I asked myself "Just what have you made a commitment to? Are you willing to abandon the very basics of No S for these treats?" The tin is now safely stashed away where I won't see it until Saturday.

I've been amazed how often someone posts what I need to hear just when I need to hear it. Thank you so much for helping me stay honest with myself about what I'm trying to do and what my goals require.

[BrightAngel]

The past six months or so I’ve been investigating low-carb issues
(although not often actually eating low-carb ),
due to my exposure to the book “Good Calories Bad Calories†by Gary Taubes.
I’ve previously posted details about this,
and anyone interested should read my prior posts on earlier pages.
While researching that issue,
I recently ran across this interesting post by a member of another forum,
and am copying it here for future reference.

A BBC TV show called "Horizon: Why are Thin People Not Fat?" did some very interesting studies. They stated that there is far too much research in obesity concentrating on the people who are obese or have been obese, but very, very little has been done on those people who are NOT obese, except as part of a control group. Few people have rounded up a group of thin subjects to see why they are thin.

Horizon studied a small group, so by no means conclusive research or anything, but they were logging their activity and diets very carefully. Most of the people had to withdraw from the program because they were physically unable to consume the required number of calories to take part in the weight gain experiment. One participant (an Asian male) actually gained muscle when he ate excess calories, and there's no evidence he worked out or did anything that would normally lead to muscle gain, just that it appears this is how his body metabolized and stored the excess calories.

The amount of weight gained by each subject was not at all in keeping with how much they ate, it did not follow the 3,500 cals to 1 lb rule at all. Every single thin person automatically shed their extra weight after the experiment with no effort.

To maintain your weight you must eat a difference of no more than 7 cals per day, and the mechanism by which the human body does this naturally in some people is a source of fascination, as 7 cals is the most tiny, tiny amount, how on earth does a body sum up all the different types of food and pick out a diet that varies by no more than 7 cals on average each day? With so much variety of food that our bodies have not had before no wonder they find it difficult to analyze the foods and assign values to it. Perhaps if you ate nothing but rice each day then not only would you become very bored with it and the desire is minimal but your body knows exactly how rice is ingested, digested, burned and stored, and will regulate your intake of rice to ensure it's appropriate to your physical needs. When you suddenly eat a Pop Tart your body doesn't know what to do with that. Maybe it's not so much what people in many carb-staple countries are eating, it's the sheer repetitive consumption of it?

Very interesting starting points, but unfortunately there is little funding to do obesity research with thin people as the powers that hand out funding don't see how it contributes, they'd rather "get fat people thin" than find out what causes the desire to get fat. And I think that's the underlying problem too, that they concentrate on factors that scientifically and objectively cause obesity - eating too many calories - but do not do much on "why does this person choose to eat too many calories when the next person doesn't" just assuming it's all "willpower". That's nonsense, if I desire a chocolate cake and my friend does NOT desire a chocolate cake then her refusal is not due to better willpower! It is not through willpower that I resist alcohol, illegal drugs, prescription drug addiction, etc. I just don't like them. I'm not better than the alcoholic, I'm not full of a fabulous willpower that he does not possess, I just look at alcohol and think "yuk".

[connorcream]

BBC TV show called "Horizon: Why are Thin People Not Fat?"

I just watched the 7 part videos. Fascinating. Thanks for posting.

[BrightAngel]

I decided to post an edited copy of
a recent comment I made another No S member
.....specifying what I feel a Vanilla No S Commitment means.....
because it has a universal application to many members.

Please Listen to the voice of reason.

Your comments remind me of an old and common child's trick which goes like this...
There is something nearby that a child plans to get,
but the child doesn't want a nearby person to see it taken.
So the child says to the other person...."LOOK OVER THERE",
and while the other person is looking...the child takes the object.

You are both the child and the other person.
While the other person is distracted and soothed by devising new diet rules and strategies,
the child continues to eat just as it wishes.

You have made a COMMITMENT that you will do Vanilla No S for the month of December.
You need to HONOR your COMMITMENT.
Vanilla No S gives plenty of room for individual preferences.

You have "N" days, in which you eat only 1 plate of food
at each of your meals..(normally 3),
No seconds, No snacks, and No sweets.

Within those N day peremeters you can choose to ......
eat whatever foods you like,
schedule your 3 meals when you like,
skip meals or eat nothing if you like (fasting is okay),
write any or all of your food down or not,

Exercise is not an issue of Vanilla No S.
Things like allowing an occasional breath mint or piece of gum for bad breath
is like brushing your teeth with toothpaste...i.e. shouldn't even be an issue...
certainly not during one's first month of committing to vanilla no s.

If you eat outside the basic N day rules, DURING N DAYS, it is a Failure.
End of story.
No rationalizing, no justifying, no excuses.
No matter what you find your mind telling you, the rules didn't change and it's not okay.
IMMEDIATELY...that day, that hour, that minute, that second,
resume compliance with your N day rules.

You have "S" days, in which you have the Freedom to eat as you like.

Within those S day peremeters you can choose to......
eat the same way you do on N days,
have S day events - in which you limit eating outside the "N" day rules,
eat whatever, whenever, and as much of whatever you like,
fast or binge part or all of the day.

Whether you do any or all of those things DURING S DAYS, it is a Success.
End of story. No rationalizing, no justifying, no excuses.
At any time, during S days, you have the ability and the choice to
IMMEDIATELY...that hour, that minute, that second, change your mind,
because there is nothing you MUST comply with on S days.

THIS IS YOUR DECEMBER COMMITMENT. You don't get to change it.
You might break the N day rules, but You can't break the S day rules...there aren't any.
Individual choices within the basic rules during December are acceptable,
and you can play with scheduling eating events during your S days,
or with allowing yourself to break the rules during N days,
however...it is CLEARCUT. You've made a Commitment.
There is no justification or excuse
for deviatiating from this overall Basic Vanilla S Plan in December.

THE IDEA IS TO STICK WITH THE SAME BASIC PLAN - Vanilla No S - for ONE MONTH.
and stop this endless and repetious cycle of figuring a way to weasel out of the Basic rules.

Reading and re-reading the NO S book will be Helpful.

[thtrchic]

This is a great post, BA. Thanks for writing it. Even though I'm "on track" at the moment, its incredibly helpful to hear.

Julie

[clarinetgal]

Yes, it is helpful. For those who are committed to Vanilla No S, it's a very good system. What I like about Vanilla No S is that the rules are very easy and clear cut.

[BrightAngel]

Many No S members have been following recent posts on a fellow member's Thread.
I am copying this Post as it states Principles that could be Helpful to others.

I don't want to review the mess that was November.

I suggested that you review it to avoid repeating it.

This does NOT mean that I never overate or never binged during the past 6 years,
It merely means that I ALWAYS entered ALL of my food into the journal.
It became, and is, a HABIT.

This is the principal of ACCOUNTABILITY.
I am accountable for every bite I eat....
even on vacation days, sick days, stress days.
NO MATTER HOW HIGH MY FOOD-INTAKE, I LOG IT.
This has provided me with long-term success.

Your commitment to logging ALL food intake, BrightAngel,
is what inspired me to consider
recording ALL indulgences
as a way to avoid labeling the dessert at a holiday dinner as a failure.
It can be a success if I'm willing to record it.

I don't think I need to record all food intake
because I'm relying on the N Day food rules to keep me from overeating
except for those indulgences which are outside the no snacks and no sweets rules.
It's not practical to follow N Day rules with perfection.
It is practical to record all eating outside N Day rules with perfection.

As you said yourself, your logging of your food intake
is what provided you with "long-term success."
I think 100% success in something related to dieting
is helpful in creating and maintaining a strong habit.
Recording any food I eat outside N Day rules, I think,
could keep them to a minimum, to ones that are very reasonable.

My modification is one indulgence on Sundays
and other indulgences that are recorded and justified.

Why do you think this isn't a good idea for me?

There are several different issues here.
I will try to address some of them one at a time.


The Value of Recording Food Intake

Recording food can help one to be Accountable for it.
Accountable = Responsible.
"This is what I did, and I am responsible for it."

The act involves Awareness
because you must become aware of what and how much food you ate
in order to record it.


Making Recording Food Intake into a Habit

I record everything that goes into my mouth.
No conscious decision about what to record is needed.

Your plan to record only some of what goes into your mouth.
will require a conscious decision, and a choice, about every item recorded.

The more that consciousness is involved,
the less likely that a behavior can become a Habit.


Using Recording as an Excuse to Break Rules

Recording ALL deviations from N day rules, despite any reason for that deviation,
would keep you Aware of each choice you make to break those rules,.
but it would not Excuse them
This is behavior that involves the principle of ACCOUNTABILITY.

Your plan is to use recording all “indulgences†as an excuse for breaking N day rules.

Your plan doesn’t require recording ALL deviations from N day rules,
only “indulgencesâ€â€¦which will need to be decided on an individual basis.
To do this you have look for a “good†reason to “excuse†the behavior,
and make the following conscious choice about each deviation.

"Is this simply breaking the rule?"
or
"Do I have a good reason for breaking the rule?"

THEN… If I have a “good reasonâ€, I will record this food,
which will excuse me from following N day rules.

This is not behavior that is based on the principal of ACCOUNTABILITY
This is merely a re-labeling of your “Exception†principle.
Just another method of staying in DENIAL, which means:
“refusing to admit the truth or reality of something unpleasantâ€.


December Vanilla No S Commitment

You have commited yourself to Vanilla No S for the month of December with no changes.
Therefore, any "tweaking" must be INSIDE the basic Vanilla No S rules.

My Plan for "S" days is one indulgence on Sundays
and all other indulgences on "S" days will be recorded and justified.

I suggested this OPTIONAL plan as an alternative to yours…
Because you said you no longer want to give yourself permission to binge on “S†days,
and
Because it makes clear that your “S†day intention is to..:
Confine yourself to N day behavior, except for one “indulgence†on Sundays.
Other “N†day deviations on “S†days will also be called “indulgences†and will be recorded.

If you want to include “N†days in your OPTIONAL recording plan,
I suggest the following language.

My Plan for "S" days is one indulgence on Sundays
and all other indulgences on "S" days will be recorded and justified.
I wil also record all deviations from “N†day rules.

[BrightAngel]

I recently ran across this very Amusing and Appropriate Song.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygWO30gdpK4

[BrightAngel]

Following Vanilla No S is a good way
to get out, and to stay out, of Denial about one's eating practices.
The word Failure simply means unsuccessful, and no one is successful all of the time.

Being in Denial means:
“refusing to admit the truth or reality of something unpleasantâ€.

To succeed at weight-loss and maintenance of weight-loss
one must face and accept some essential unpleasant Truths.

One of these unpleasant Truths is
that without some form of portion control,
an obese person cannot become normal size.

Another of these unpleasant Truths is
that facing failures is necessary to achieve success.

[TexArk]

Judith Beck has several characteristics that make following a "diet plan" difficult. Several apply to this discussion it seems.


CHARACTERISTICS THAT MAKE DIETING DIFFICULT

1. You confuse hunger with the desire to eat.
2. You have a low tolerance for hunger and cravings.
3. You like the feeling of being full.
4. You fool yourself about how much you eat.
5. You comfort yourself with food.
6. You feel hopeless and helpless when you gain weight.
7. You focus on feelings of unfairness.
8. You stop dieting once you lose weight.

[BrightAngel]

Judith Beck has several characteristics that make following a "diet plan" difficult.
Several apply to this discussion it seems.

I like Judith Beck, and I agree with her
that all of those listed characteristics make following any diet plan difficult.
By "discussion", you are probably referring to recent communictions
between Kathleen and myself, primarily on her Thread,
concerning her one-month commitment to Vanilla No S.
Although my own personal weight-loss/maintenance plan is not Vanilla No S,
I see a great deal of value in it.
On page 80 and 82 of Rinhard's book, regarding "no seconds", also known as the 1 plate rule.

"The no seconds rule means you get one physical plate of food per meal.
You can load up that plate with however much food you want--once.
When you're done eating the food on that plate, the meal is over."

"The sight of excess is embarrassing, even just to yourself.
When it's all right there in front of you, on one plate,
you can't deceive yourself into thinking that you aren't eating a lot.
By forcing that excess into the open you'll gradually shame yourself into smaller portions.
Shame is powerful, it's deep, it's part of human nature, it isn't going away.
So you might as well use shame instead of pretending it isn't there.
Make it your ally."

On page 95 of Rinhard's book, regarding "S" days:

"....look at the calendar, and you'll know when you can take it and when you can't.
This clarity is powerful.
It means you'll have a hard time abusing or extending the exception
without it being very obvious what you are doing.
It limits the scope for self-deception.
You can abuse this rule...by gorging yourself with gallons of ice cream every weekend,
but you can't do it without knowing you're being a bozo.
And most of us, most of the time, will not knowingly be bozos."

As you know, PERSONALLY, I choose to log all of my food into a computer journal every day,
which forces me to continually face my own food intake and my own food issues.
For many years, I've also found a Focus on Behavior,
rather than on Results, to be essential for my own success.
One of the things I like about Reinhard is that he agrees with me in this.
On page 130 of Rinhard's book, regarding "focus on behavior" :

"When you focus on behavior,
you get results thrown into the bargain because behavior causes results.
When you focus on results,
you get neither because results cannot exist without behavior.
And behavior, besides being a better thing to measure,
is also an easier thing to measure."

[BrightAngel]

On page 95 of Rinhard's book, regarding "S" days:

"....look at the calendar, and you'll know when you can take it and when you can't.
This clarity is powerful.
It means you'll have a hard time abusing or extending the exception
without it being very obvious what you are doing.
It limits the scope for self-deception.

You can abuse this rule...by gorging yourself with ....(insert sweets of choice)... every weekend,
but you can't do it without knowing you're being a bozo.
And most of us, most of the time, will not knowingly be bozos."

Since I posted the above-quoted passage,
It was brought to my attention that some people are not familiar with the word "bozo".
Therefore, I include this dictionary definition.

Noun: bozo - a person who is a stupid incompetent fool,
a cuckoo, fathead, goof, goofball, jackass, twat, zany, goose,
fool, muggins, saphead, tomfool, sap, - a person who lacks good judgment.

[clarinetgal]

I love the passages you quoted in Reinhard's book. Especially about results versus behaviors. I'm going through a major paradigm shift in my own eating. I was always focused on results (mainly what the scale says), but now, I really, really want to focus on behaviors. I don't think doing Vanilla No S will work for me, BUT I do want to focus on three meals a day, no snacks or seconds, and having one treat each day that fits onto my plate, along with doing some calorie counting, to make sure I'm not consuming too many calories in my meals. I've been doing a lot of thinking lately, and I think that is a plan that will work the best for me, and it's one I can stick with for life.

[BrightAngel]

I really, really want to focus on behaviors.
I want to focus on three meals a day, no snacks or seconds,
and having one treat each day that fits onto my plate,
along with doing some calorie counting,
to make sure I'm not consuming too many calories in my meals.

I think that is a plan that will work the best for me,
and it's one I can stick with for life.

Sounds like a good plan.
Using a computer food journal to track calories
has become an enjoyable Habit for me.

[BrightAngel]

I know there are a lot of different schools of thought
on how often you should weigh yourself .
But how about maintenance?
Do you weigh more/less frequently than you did during your weight loss?

Also, do you have a trigger weight
that means to you that you need to go back to loss mode,
even if it's just for a few pounds?

I know people fluctuate, so getting used to those rhythms is part of it,
but what number means to you that it's not just a water/natural fluctuation
but that you're starting to gain?

I weigh every day,
enter it into my computer food journal, and watch my Trend.
I've been Maintaining at or around my goal weight for nearly 5 years.

My signature contains a graphic that shows my Maintenance plan.
I have frequent large bounces due to water/salt/waste, which can easily be from 5 to 8 pounds
so I use a larger Maintenance area than some people.

If I am in the "Blue area", I work to stay inside it.
Sometimes that involves dropping several pounds in anticipation of a special eating event.
I've been inside my "Green area" for two days of the entire 5 year period,
and I think that was due to an unusually large water/salt/waste loss during illness.

If I am in the top "Red area" or...God-Forbid...the "Black area",
I work to stay in weight-loss mode just like when dieting-to-goal the first time.
I've never been in the bottom "Red or Black area",
so I've never had to deal with deliberately trying to gain weight.

[BrightAngel]

Today my hairdresser and I got into a discussion about diets.
As a result he expressed an interest in trying out the No S diet in January.
So I went to Amazon and had them mail him a book as a Xmas gift.
I’ll be interested in hearing an update when I see him again in February.

[BrightAngel]

Good Advice from a No S forum Member.

It really is going to be somewhat a matter of deciding
that this is important enough for you to go through some times of toughing things out.
But sometimes, having the right motivation can help.
Down deep, you want to do this, but in your moments of temptation,
the present urges outweigh the long-term desire.
This is actually natural. There is a perfectly good biological basis for it.
This doesn't mean it should be an excuse,
but knowing about it can give one the impetus to muster the effort to thwart it.

One idea that might help to know, is that reports of successful losers on the National Weight Loss Registry
show that learning to stop a slide off one's plan right away
was considered to be the turning point for many maintainers.
It can be easy to get on a roll, but sooner or later, most losers hit a point at which it's not particularly easy
to stick with their restrictions, whatever they are, and they eat too much.
They say they just stop right as they realize it, and just wait until the next appropriate time to eat.
Many were not successful at this many times before they got determined enough to stick with it.
Even two or three times of doing this can reinforce a sense of control.
As one of the other posters said, "Yes, you can".
Hard to hear, but actually, when you do it, it's exhilirating!
And it starts creating new memories of new habits, which is what this is all about.

it can be the same decision to just stick to say,
a 3-hour time frame of not eating in the morning between your 9 a.m. breakfast and a noon lunch.
While you are working up to compliance, you might allow yourself a mid-morning tea break.

You'll notice that much of the time you want to eat, you are not actually empty-stomach hungry.
The urges to eat when we are not hungry are very similar to the thoughts of obsessive compulsives
in that there is a specific brain pattern that reinforces the strength of the urges,
and there is a strong, false sense that something terrible will happen if the urges are not obeyed.

When OC-ers acknowledge that the urge they experience to wash their hands or whatever
is not actually an emergency and they then turn their attention over and over to another activity,
it was found that their brain patterns changed
and they experienced a great decrease in the intensity and frequency of the urging thoughts
over a period of weeks.

The same brain change happens with food impulses.
Participating in the urg-ent behavior reinforces and strengthens the cycle,
in fact more so the more they eat; resisting it greatly decreases it,
but not usually before the urges get stronger!
(That's when people usually give in; then the cycly gets reinforced again,
and they think it is impossible to end.)
And they reduce in cycles.
It is not a linear change and certainly not a big drop off for most people.

I'm sure that you see this matches your own experience,
and dovetails with what Reinhard tells us about habit change,
though he doesn't use all the chemical foundations.
It FEELS as if you can't do anything
because your brain is sending very powerful messages to other parts of your body and your mind.
But they are false emergencies, and mostly represent habit.
Plain old habit!
Not immorality, slovenliness, emotional weakness, or the like,
though the urges are often paired with certain emotions,
and not always negative ones.

The bottom line is that if you don't do something to thwart these habits,
they will likely continue.

Others have made very good suggestions about behaviors;
I've tried to give one about the reasonable motivation to adhere to those behaviors.
It is worth the effort! it will become easier!
The greater your adherence to moderation, the easier it will be sooner,
but do expect it to take more than a few weeks to feel relatively solid.

[BrightAngel]

Copied from the General Thread

BrightAngel,

This is unrelated to the overall topic here, but I just had to jump in and say
that I was fascinated by your use of the term "hobby" in regards to dieting.
I have often stressed over the fact that dieting was one of my main "hobbies"
and thought other people would not consider it a valuable use of time
(compared with other hobbies, I guess).

In fact, that is partly why I cling to No S despite the fact that I have some difficulties with it.
My understanding is that No S has the "benefit"
of putting dieting into the background of your life and making it less of a hobby.

But maybe I shouldn't worry so much about having dieting as a hobby.
When you say it, it sounds legitimate and reasonable.
Maybe dieting as a hobby is just a fact of my life,
just like stamp collecting is a fact of someone else's life.

Thanks for helping think about this in a new light!

OlderandNotWiser,
Dieting as a Hobby is part of my Basic philosophy.
I've never read anything about the concept, just figured it out myself,
and will be writing more about that in the future.
In fact, I am in the process of...(sometime in 2011)....
creating a Blog at my brand new Domain, DietHobby.com,
which I bought specifically for that purpose.

[connorcream]

In fact, I am in the process of...(sometime in 2011)....
creating a Blog at my brand new Domain, DietHobby.com.
which I bought specifically for that purpose.[/color]

Yeah, hallejuah, amen sister, way to go, fantastic, awesome, rock on

[BrightAngel]

Here is an amusing Christmas video done by Byron Richards who wrote "Mastering Leptin"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8i1gGcOR ... r_embedded

[BrightAngel]

Personal Diet Modifications have their place,
but making any food plan into a Habit, requires Consistency and Patience.

It is impossible to successfully make a Food Plan into a Habit,
if one changes the Plan every time one fails to meet its Guidelines.
No one is successful all of the time.

To build a successful eating Habit it is necessary to:

Recognize a failure,
Accept that failure,
Resolve to reduce future failures,
Continue working to follow that Food Plan.

Overcoming obstacles one at a time

Our goals may not come easy.
There is no accomplishment without work,
and no "win" without something to beat.

It's easy to get discouraged when roadblocks appear--
--in fact, it's only natural.
We've invested time and emotion into creating the perfect plan,
and then something has to come along and muck it all up.

Sometimes, though, all we have to do to beat that barrier
is to get back up and move forward again.
Obstacles are like the Wizard behind the curtain—
--they're a lot less intimidating once we see them up close.

Next time we take a step back,
don't let guilt pile it on top of our previous "stumbles."
Just take two steps forward
and we're still farther along than we were before.

It doesn't matter how many walls we face.
We only have to get the better of that last one.

Fall seven times. Stand up eight.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Japanese Proverb

[BrightAngel]

This morning I saw this post on a Low Carb Thread,
and it reflected some of my own current Thoughts.
I’m posting it here to remind me.

Obviously I’m Stupid
...because I've learned nothing over the past year.
For the last week I have been eating pretty much whatever
and however I've wanted...and it is reflected on my scale.
How can it take a month or more to *lose* 10 pounds
and a week to put it right back on?

All I can think looking back at this last week is that sugar makes me stupid.
Even by yesterday when I was obviously feeling the effects of this added weight,
not to mention the carbs and sugar running through my body,
I was still eating that crud and thinking,
"I can't wait until tomorrow so I can stop eating this junk."

After breakfast this morning I'm going to be cleaning out the pantry
and all the junk...and stuff to make junk...is going into the trash.
Stick a fork in me because I'm 'done' and so ready to get back to my low carb eating.

***
Start Weight: 330
Current Weight: 236
Future Goal Weight 130

[BrightAngel]

Now that December is ending and the New Year is almost here,
I have decided to keep most of my future posts on other personal check-in Threads short,
and to post those quotes that I find Thought-Provoking,
along with my own comments,
here on my own personal Thread.
In this way, readers can choose to access them or not
and this will make my presence less intrusive on other personal Threads.
I welcome postive comments here on my personal Thread,
and I prefer that any negative comment be made to me by PM.
If anyone wishes to make a public negative comment,
or make a long comment about any of my posts,
I ask them to do this by posting my quote along with their comment on the General Thread for discussion.
Here is a recent quote I found interesting,
because it appears to agree with points that I've recently made.

I found an entire chapter on fasting in Rediscover Catholicism by Matthew Kelly.
Here is the first sentence I found on fasting:

"As I have observed it, people want a diet
that will allow them to eat whatever they want, whenever they want,
yet still allow them to look great, feel great, and lose that undesired weight.
Basically what we are looking for is a miracle product
that will remove the need for any discipline in our eating and exercise habits
so that we can continue to indulge in the hedonistic ways
that violate the-best-version-of-ourselves at every turn." (p. 251).

Later in the chapter on fasting, the author writes:

"Our lives change when our habits change.
Our habits change when we make resolutions,
remind ourselves of those resolutions,
hold ourselves accountable for them,
and perform them.
Sometimes we fail,
but there is no success that isn't checkered with failure.
Don't give up. Press on, little by little."

[BrightAngel]

Those who have been following the posts between Kathleen and me on her Thread
know that there is much that she and I do not agree on.
However, I do agree with the below-quoted statement that she posted today.

...the brilliance of The No S Diet is not in the specific rules of the diet.
Instead, the brilliance of the diet is in the philosophy
of cultivating habits that are sustainable for life and that result in weight loss.

It is so obvious that it almost seems like a tautology, but it is not:
the way to be thin is to cultivate habits that result in being thin.

Although Kathleen and I do not agree on what those particular Behaviors are...
.....i.e. those Behaviors that, when solidified into Habits, will result in becoming thin......
I do agree with the above-quoted statement.

[BrightAngel]

Every year so far, I've promised myself
that I wouldn't overeat between my birthday and Christmas Day,
but so far... I've always been unsuccessful with that Effort.
In fact, I'd say that overeating during that week is a HABIT.

But Today I feel encouraged.
I love the week after Christmas,
because during that week my pattern is to get back on my path of weight-loss or maintenance eating,
and this is what I'm doing...
It's my HABIT. No waiting until the New Year for me.

Today is going to be a really great day for me,
because my husband is back at work, and my chores are completed,
and I get to sit in front of the fire
and read Gary Taubes' new diet book
that was published TODAY.
Reading new diet books is part of my Hobby,
but I'm especially interested in this one, because
Taube's 2007 "Good Calories Bad Calories" is one of my all-time favorites.
I pre-ordered this book from Amazon a long time ago,
The Title is: "Why we get Fat and What to do about it"
I understand it is primarily supposed to be an easier version of GCBD.

However after I pre-ordered my book,
I decided I didn't want to wait till it was shipped to me to read it,
and gave myself the luxury of ALSO pre-ordering a Kindle version.
It arrived on my Kindle around mid-night last night,
and today I get to read it.
No doubt my hard copy will arrive in a few days,
and maybe then I'll use my my pink highlighter while I read it again.
Some might find that a bit "Obsessive",
but as I've said before....
“Obsessed†is what the weak and lazy call the dedicated."

[BrightAngel]

Some Very Good Advice.

[BrightAngel]

Re Gary Taubes' new book "Why we get fat and what to do about it"
Although I've never been a "low-carb" person, I loved the book.

Since I've already read Good Calories Bad Calories several times,
and watched all of his University Lectures on YouTube,
I was worried that Taubes' new book would just seem like old info.
However, this was not the case.

He did a GREAT JOB.
His use of less detail made his concepts far more understandable
for someone like me, who is not a scientist or a medical professional.
I found it very motivating,
and I recommend it to every open-minded person

[connorcream]

Thanks for the review. My book is on order. I too wondered if it would a rehash of topics. I am extrememly interested in this research both for my DS with Crohn's and myself with maintenance. There is a lot of overlap in our needs.

[BrightAngel]

Many of you who follow my Thread know that for the past 6 months or so,
I've been studying the Low Carb Way of Eating,
and doing a bit of occasional minor experimentation with it.

As a believer in being an ongoing "Experiment of One"
I have been inspired by Gary Taubes' new book :
"Why we get fat and what to do about it",
and I have decided that in 2011, I'm going to make a real Effort
to do an ongoing, long-term, personal experiment with the low-carb way of eating.

Behavior Goals:

• Continue to eat about the same amount of food, but make it low-carb;
  Continue to track and log all my food, working to keep my calories at my normal maintenance level;
  Continue working on other eating Behaviors that I'd like to make into Habits.

Result Goals: (Any or all of these would be great.)

• Maintain my current weight with less cravings and hunger;
  Drop my weight lower into my Maintenance Weight Range, while eating the same calories;
  Maintain my weight lower in my Maintenance Weight Range, while eating the same or more calories.

While I've become open to the Idea of Low-Carb,
I still have many personal reservations.
But as Samuel Johnson said:

Nothing will ever be attempted
if all possible objections must first be overcome.

so I'm going for it NOW.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
I did find the Taubes book interesting but I came away from reading it thinking that fasting is similar to low carb in that you can reduce caloric consumption without much hunger. I'm wondering why you have gone down the path of experimenting with low carb. What has your experience been with fasting? Thanks.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Kathleen,

I believe you are referring to your quick review
of Good Calories Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes, published in 2007.
That is an excellent book, however, it is about 500 pages long
with more than 100 reference pages,
which was written geared primarily to medical professionals.
I’ve read it at least 5 times, and I still haven’t absorbed it all
because it is really hard. I have a doctorate in law,
with an extensive history in legal research, but I still found it to be difficult reading.
There was almost nothing about “fasting†in the book,
and the fact that you discovered a statement on that issue shows
how we tend to gravitate toward our individual interests.
This new book by Taubes, Why we get fat and what to do about it",
was just released last Tuesday. I got it on that day because I had pre-ordered it,
and I also bought it on my Kindle.
It was written geared to people like me…those who are not medical professionals.
It is 250 pages and is a far easier to read.
Although it isn't what I would call a quick read.
If you want more info on that after reading my post,
let me know and I’ll do my best to fill you in.

I am experimenting with Low-Carb because I have not yet found
a Way of Eating to maintain my weight-loss
that I enjoy enough to continuing doing for the rest of my life.
Low Carb is one of the few ways of eating that I have very little personal experience with.
As I’ve told you previously, my body desperately wants to regain its lost weight,
and maintenance takes constant vigilance.
I’m hoping that low-carb will help eliminate some of my food cravings,
as well as some of my hunger.
Like many other diets…as well as calorie counting…
a low-carb diet can fit well into the principles of No S.

You asked about my experience with fasting,
and I’ve shared some of that with you previously.
I see that you just bought Brad Pilons’s e-book, Eat Stop Eat.
I own that as well; have read it thoroughly several times;
and think it is probably the best book around that addresses Intermittent Fasting.
I suggest you read it carefully and thoroughly more than once.

Personally, I’ve spent a lot of time experimenting with Intermittent Fasting,
and much of it was specifically the 24 hr fasting method suggested by Brad Pilon.
I will probably do more of that in the future.
Fasting and Low-Carb are not mutually-exclusive,
and neither are Fasting and No S, or Low-Carb and No S.
A 24 hr fast is one way to further reduce insulin,
and many low-carb people use it for that purpose.

My primary purpose for Intermittent Fasting has been to reduce my calories
for one to three days a week, in order to drop my calorie averages.
For me, the primary difficulty with Eat Stop Eat, or any Intermittent Fast,
is not keeping my calories low on a fast day. I can do that.
On Fast days my practice is to eat dinner only, around 350 to 400 calories,
with no snacks after dinner.

However, on “normal†days, the days before and after an intermittent fast,
I do have great difficulty eating only normal amounts, and not compensating
by eating more food than my normal calorie allotment,
and sometimes those fasts will trigger binge behavior for me.
This might not be the case IF I were eating low-carb,
since it is the sugars --refined carbs, and starches—complex carbs
that trigger those cravings and binges.

Low-carb eating is different for everyone, and in his new book,
Taubes clarifies the reasons for this on page 204 and 205.

“The fewer carbohydrates we consume, the leaner we will be. This is clear. But there’s no guarantee that the leanest we can be will ever be as lean as we’d like. This is a reality to be faced. As I discussed, there are genetic variations in fatness and leanness that are independent of diet. Multiple hormones and enzymes affect our fat accumulation, and insulin happens to be the one hormone that we can consciously control through our dietary choices. Minimizing the carbohydrates we consume and eliminating the sugars will lower our insulin levels as low as is safe, but it won’t necessarily undo the effects of other hormones….

This means that there’s no one-size-fits-all prescription for the quantity of carbohydrates we can eat and still lose fat or remain lean. For some, staying lean or getting back to being lean might be a matter of merely avoiding sugars and eating the other carbohydrates in the diet, even the fattening ones, in moderation; pasta dinners once a week, say, instead of every other day. For others, moderation in carbohydrate consumption might not be sufficient, and far stricter adherence is necessary. And for some, weight will be lost only on a diet of virtually zero carbohydrates, and even this may not be sufficient to eliminate all our accumulated fat, or even most of it.

Whichever group you fall into, though, if you’re not actively losing fat and yet want to be leaner still, the only viable option…is to eat still fewer carbohydrates, identify and avoid other foods that might stimulate significant insulin secretion…and have more patience. (Anecdotal evidence suggests that occasional or intermittent fasting for eighteen or twenty-four hours might work to break through these plateaus of weight loss, but this, too, has not been adequately tested) “

[Kathleen]

HI BrightAngel,
I'm glad you told me about your problem with binge eating in conjunction with intermittent fasting. I lost the No S habits when I tried to add intermittent fasting, and -- well -- here I am about 200 again. I had my own experience with low carb gong way back to The Scarsdale Diet in about 1976. My general approach, however, was low calorie. I may look into the new Taubes book, so thanks for telling me about it, but I want to try out the intermittent fasting approach. I'm also thinking I may try to have one diet per month and just stick with that for the month. For example, with my working, it's hard to walk 10,000 steps, but I can sure make the effort to reach 6,000. This new diet of the day wears as thin as does binge eating.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Happy New Year

I recently read Gary Taubes' new book
"Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It"
The concepts in this book may be helpful to many of our obese members,
when combined together with the basic structure of the No S Diet.

This could especially be the case for those
for whom "vanilla" No S has resulted in little or no personal weight-loss,
or for those who find that "S days gone wild" don't subside after a reasonable trial period.
Below is a link with exerpts from it.

Why We Get Fat: And What to Do About It - Google Books

[connorcream]

I recently read Gary Taubes' new book
"Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It"
The concepts in this book may be helpful to many of our obese members,
when combined together with the basic structure of the No S Diet.

This could especially be the case for those
for whom "vanilla" No S has resulted in little or no personal weight-loss,
or for those who find that "S days gone wild" don't subside after a reasonable trial period.

This could help with a wide range of health problems, obesity, being one of them. Thanks for the heads up on the book.

Happy New Year to you!

[BrightAngel]

This is a copy of a few relevant posts from the General Thread.

I've not read either of Taube's books
I think he's a prime example of how anything can be proved using research.

Taubes' is a controversial science journalist, not a diet guru.
He is famous because of his extremely accurate and thorough reporting
of the past 100 years of research in this area.

As you say, you have not read either of Taubes' books,
but merely read "comments" about them.
I do not believe that an unbiased person such as yourself,
who has your experience and intelligence,
would have that opinion after actually reading his books.

I haven't read comments -- I've read articles written by Gary Taubes.
And I know that any science writer or researcher worth his/her salt can make anything sound credible.

Taubes is not a Researcher, a science writer, or a scientist.
He is not involved in science or research, except as as an award winning journalist
who researches and writes about controversial science issues.

Except for the really famous article written by Taubes-"What if it's a Big Fat Lie",
Taubes is not well-known for his articles, but for his books.
These made him famous, and there have been many articles by others about him.
It sounds like you read articles by others about Taubes, who perhaps quoted him out-of-context.

The famous New York Times article, and the book Good Calories Bad Calories,
are his primary previous written contributions to the Health care area.
I understand that previous to that he wrote a controversial book on a Physics issue,
and then another on an Engineering issue.
He seems to be sensible, down-to-earth, and unbiased, which is unusual
in such a brilliant man. He has a Physics degree from Harvard,
an Engineering degree from Stanford, and a Journalism degree from Columbia.

Your prejudice against him surprises me.
I can only suppose it is due to your lack of accurate information,
especially since he is so greatly respected and admired
by many of the natural food diet gurus that you frequently quote here in the forum.
I suggest you keep an open mind until you've actually read his book.
If you were to invest $14 and actually read his latest one,
I would then be quite interested in your opinion.

As a scientist and writer myself, I can vouch for this.
I can make anything sound good/credible and give you a whole page of references to boot.
Doesn't make it True (with a capital T) though.
Fortunately, (or not) most people stick to writing what they believe to be true.
Then you have to decide if you believe them yourself.

As a retired Attorney with 25 years of trial experience,
I agree with your statement of how easy it is to make people believe your opinion.
This, however, isn't applicable or on point in the present case.

I believe that most people who have read Taubes books
would agree that this...although true... simply misses the entire point.

The point is not what Taube's personal opinions or conclusions are, BASED on his research of the area.
The point is the shocking, but true, state of the actual scientifc research in this area.

If you look at all the slim, healthy populations throughout the world, most of their diets are based on a combination of whole and refined grains and legumes with vegetables, fruits, meat and dairy added as available and affordable. (There are just a handful whose diets are meat based.) One could say that it's genetics, but when people from those places come to the US and start eating like Americans, they develop the same weight and health issues as Americans.

You know, on the topic of grain based diet of populations elsewhere in the world, I was also thinking about past populations. I believe the usual diet of a Roman Legionnaire was mostly grain(oats) with little meat or animal products? Any corrections or thoughts on this or other historical perspectives??

Both sides of the issues and questions stated above are discussed in detail
within the 500 pages of difficult reading in Taubes 2007 book, Good Calories Bad Calories.
which was written for the medical profession.
They are also discussed rather thoroughly in his new book,
Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It,
which is only 250 pages and was written for intelligent, average people.
If you are an open-minded person who is truly interested in both sides of those issues
you owe it to yourself to read Taubes' new book.
Without knowledge of the total picture, the validity of one's opinion is questionable.

To show you how important a book that I feel this is...
Although as part of my choice to treat dieting as a Hobby,
I read almost EVERYTHING published about dieting.
Some of these are good, some are not.
However, I have chosen to review only TWO books on Amazon.
One of them was the No S Diet, back in 2008.
The other is Taubes new book.

I have always been a calories-in-calories-out person,
and I am undecided about the unprocessed foods question...but beginning to lean toward natural foods.
However, my own experience,
put together with the details of the past 100 years of all dieting research,
has led me to my VERY RECENT experiment with low-carb eating.
At this point, I am totally undecided about its value to me.
After 6 months or so, I might have an opinion as to it's effectiveness,
now...I've just become open-minded enough to actually try to find out for myself.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
I'll be reading the book and then let's see if we can have a discussion about it. You've obviously given a lot of thought to this issue, and I have found your comments to me helpful -- although I tend to have a delayed reaction to them. I'll let you know what I think after reading the book. Thanks.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Kathleen,
I'll be looking forward to our future discussion.

[BrightAngel]

I have also read enough in the past
to see the truth in the insulin argument for some people.

It is my opinion that those who have never been obese
and have never had a bingeing disorder would not be interested in this argument,
and it probably doesn’t even apply to them.

I think that this is a very good point.

[BrightAngel]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWW1vpz1ybo

I loved this.
Although I'm familiar with the delayed gratification research,
I'd never seen this video.
Thanks for sharing it.

[BrightAngel]

In an effort to live a lifestyle free from an obsession with diets ....

This appears to be a common Theme among members here.
The majority of people just want the problem to go away.
They want to eat like "normal people" and be in the "normal" weight range.
They'd like to lose and maintain their weight without difficulty or much thought.

Some people who are only overweight, or just above the border of obesity, are able to do this.
Unfortunately, those who have lived with a lifetime of obesity
are unlikely to ever accomplish this...
even when the way of eating is as simple as the No S Diet.

I am one of those people with a history of morbid obesity,
who has lost a great deal of weight,
and I have maintained my weight near my goal for the past 5 years.
I have found it Beneficial to incorporate an obession with diets into my personal lifestyle,
to embrace the devil, and make dieting into an enjoyable Hobby.
With some effort, an "obsession with dieting"
can be changed from a "bad" thing, into a "good" thing.

[TexArk]

BA,
I thought you might be interested in these lectures...seem to be different from the ones in the lecture hall...they are in a home setting and have a Q and A session.

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/ims- ... aubes/8971

Update on my experiment of NoS Low Carb: First two days I have not been able to reach 1000 calories and am extremely satisfied. Of course I am getting zero exercise at the time. I will add more nuts or oil today to get calorie count up.

[BrightAngel]

http://livinlavidalowcarb.com/blog/ims- ... aubes/8971

Update on my experiment of NoS Low Carb:
First two days ...I ...am extremely satisfied.

I saw that Taubes' lecuture on YouTube when it first went up,
and I especially enjoyed the Q&A section.
However, I didn't have the easily accessible link you provided,
and I'm really happy to have it here on my Thread.

Congratulations on your successful eating behavior.
I feel certain you will see good results when you are able to weigh again.

[BrightAngel]

Monday, January 3, 2011:
On Sunday, a local Minneapolis Star Tribune columnist, Katherine Kersten, said:
"Honesty, generosity and self-restraint don't come naturally to human beings.
These traits are difficult to acquire,
and require suppression or rechannelling of base human instincts.
Only a society with a moral system based on claims of transcendent truth
can help its citizens overcome their selfish tendencies and successfully cultivate virtue."

I have been pursuing a method of eating that would allow me to eat as much as I wanted.
I have wanted to lose weight on a diet without portion control.
It was a noble venture to find a way to avoid
the misery I certainly experienced with coventional diets,
but now I realize that it was all a dream:
the key to successful weight loss is moderation,
and moderation means portion control.

Sometimes long-cherished beliefs are hard to let go,
and sometimes they are a relief when you let them go.
I've had a long break-up with this notion that portion control isn't necessary, either,
but I think the recovery is going to be much easier.

At Last !Way to Go!

[BrightAngel]

Breakthrough research revealed in this book (Carb Lover's Diet) shows ............

It is important to remember that there are a lot of rules
that have to followed for accurate scientific research,
and the results of that research are also often reported incorrectly.
Even then....
Science cannot prove what is true.
It can only prove what is NOT true.

Taubes' former book (2007), Good Calories Bad Calories,
which was written for medical professionals,
is a very detailed and hard read which
thoroughly covers the past 100 years of dieting research-all sides.

The new book, Why We Get Fat and What to Do about it
restates a lot of that information
in a way that an intelligent average person can understand.
Reading it will provide a great deal of enlightenment
for anyone interested in the Reality surrounding weight issues.

[BrightAngel]

Commitment, you either have it or you don't,
and only you can decide if you do."

[BrightAngel]

One of the things I like best about Reinhard, (along with his Habit concept),
is his Acceptance of the Differences between each of us.

One of the things I like best about the No-S diet,
is the way it provides Structure together with Individual Flexibility.

No-s is, in a way, a lower-carb diet.
Sweets are carbs.
They're just easier to identify and more indisputably bad for you than other carbs.
They're the "low hanging fruit" of carbs.

So while I am not persuaded that the "carbness" of sweets
makes them worse than any other calories (to my mind,
it's all about the bigger picture behaviors they're associated with)
you're hedging your bets a little with no-s:
if they are in fact worse you are in fact eating less of them.

If you feel the need to add additional carb based restrictions to no-s,
you certainly can, it's an easy framework to hang additional rules onto.

Another relevant passage from the no-s diet book:
Page 167

...the No S Diet...is accommodating and unobtrustive enough
that you could combine it with another diet if you want to hedge your weight-loss bets,
want to take a systematic approach to specific nutritional issues...
People on No S...have reported combining it
with various types of low-carb plans,
the Shangri-La Diet, vegetarianism, and more.

[BrightAngel]

Here's something I recently found amusing.

A UK comedy show has a diet club character
who promotes the “Half-calories Dietâ€.

She takes a chocolate bar and holds it up
She cuts the bar in two and says:

“Now look, you can eat this now because it is half the calories.
And because it's half the calories you can eat twice as much.â€

[BrightAngel]

IT"S SO COOL...
I've been talking to everyone about Gary Taubes' new book,
Why We Get Fat And What to Do About it.
and how interesting its concepts are to me...
even though I've never been a "low-carb" person,
but have always been a calorie counter.
I even bought another copy as an audio book
because I like listening to them while I do other things.

Today I working on a picture puzzle while I listened to that cd,
when the mailman brought my new Reader's Digest.
WWGF was featured RIGHT THERE ON THE COVER,
and there was an excellent article about it inside.
It made me feel just like one of the "in-crowd"..

[BrightAngel]

I'm not sure becoming a grown up has a final destination.

My belief is that it doesn't,
and I'm doing my best to enjoy the ride.

[BrightAngel]

Posted on the General Thread,
and Copied here for Future Reference.

I found this recent broadcast on obesity interesting and informative,
and am interested in the individual reactions of those who hear it through.
For faster access, click "Popup".

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2011/jan/04/wh ... being-fat/

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
Ever hear the saying, "Even the devil can quote Scripture?" Well, I have now read the first part of the book (first 8 chapters), and I think it makes a compelling argument for why a portion control approach is a dead end. Those who can manage to stay in a semi starved state do stay lean but at the very high cost of being hungry all the time. I think I'll stop reading now until I'm home next month, but I did skim through the rest of the book. To me, taking a low carb approach means you'll have carb cravings that you can never satisfy, which is similar to having cravings from a portion control approach. I will be reading the rest of the book thoroughly but more to evaluate what can be applied to fating than what it says about a low carb approach, and as a result my reading will be very biased. Where would you like to have this discussion? Thanks.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

I have now read the first part of the book (first 8 chapters),
and I think it makes a compelling argument for why a portion control approach is a dead end.
Those who can manage to stay in a semi starved state do stay lean
but at the very high cost of being hungry all the time.

It IS a good argument against portion control (...in a Traditional balanced diet...).
This is one reason I so much wanted you to read it so we could discuss it.

I have been maintaining a very large weight-loss for many years,
and I've had to learn to tolerate having both hunger and carb cravings most of the time.
It has been worth the Effort to me,
however, I am always on the alert for a way to stay small AND reduce hunger.
I don't know whether or not this is it...but I'm giving it a try.

...stop reading now...until the end of the month, but I did skim through the rest of the book.
To me, taking a low carb approach means you'll have carb cravings that you can never satisfy,
which is similar to having cravings from a portion control approach.

There are strong cravings at first, but for me they have already been greatly reduced,
and I'm still at a very the early stage of my low-carb experiment.
I have observed that most people who adopt low-carb eating as a way-of-life,
are like long-time ex-smokers who experience cravings only occasionally,
unless they smoke again.
Then, they have to go through craving withdrawals again.

This is something I will want to discuss further with you
after you have read the book completely.

I will be reading the rest of the book thoroughly
but more to evaluate what can be applied to fasting than what it says about a low carb approach,
and as a result my reading will be very biased.

I am very sorry to hear that.
I had hoped you would read the entire book with an open-minded approach.
Skimming a book with a biased or closed-minded approach is almost worse than not reading at all,
because it makes one THINK they know everything about the Subject
without actually absorbing the Knowledge which is necessary to understand it.

Both No S, AND Low-Carb blend very well with Intermittent Fasting,
and in fact I know that many obese people find each of these Eating Structures
extremely helpful to help them use Intermittent Fasting for weight-control,
while avoiding the binge-fast cycle that fasting often produces.

If my current low-carb trial proves successful,
I plan to experiment with this combination later.
I've been told that Eat Stop Eat works exceptionally well in a Low-Carb lifestyle.

Where would you like to have this discussion?

I don't want to get into a discussion on the General Thread,
because I don't want to see comments
from anyone who has not ACTUALLY READ the book.

Otherwise, anywhere is Acceptable to me...But I just had a Thought..
Since both of us read each other's Threads daily...
One way would be...
On your Thread, you could quote something you want to discuss,
and then make a lengthy comment of your thoughts.

Then I could quote you on my Thread and make my comments about that,
and you could quote me on your Thread and make your comments about that. etc. etc.

That way my comments would mostly be on MY Thread,
and your comments would mostly be on YOUR Thread.

Another way would be to Personal Message back and forth.
Or we could e-mail each other.
Although, I think that many of the Forum members would be interested in reading our discussion,
and it could be Thought Provoking and Helpful to some.
What is your preference?

[Kathleen]

Hi BrightAngel,
Recognizing and acknowledging I have a bias is better than not recognizing it. I will attempt to be open-minded but my sister in law's low carb cheesecake cured me of ever being willing to try low carb! How about a discussion on the general form instead of one of our threads? I'd like to go through this chapter by chapter.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Recognizing and acknowledging I have a bias is better than not recognizing it.

Very True.

my sister in law's low carb cheesecake cured me of ever being willing to try low carb

Amusing....but your sister-in-law's poor cooking skills
actually have little to do with a low-carb lifestyle.

How about a discussion on the general forum instead of one of our threads?
I'd like to go through this chapter by chapter.

While I think going through it chapter by chapter would be great.
I don't want to do it in the General Discussion Forum.
The General Forum is open to comments by EVERYONE.
Anyone who has an opinion...no matter how uninformed...can chime in,
and despite the Subject Heading, those Threads tend to go far off topic.
This would be very distracting
and make it extremely difficult for the two of us have a discussion.

I just had another idea....
We could start a new additional Check-In Thread for the two of us together,
and call it something like
Kathleen and Bright Angel's Discussion of Why We Get Fat.
What do you think about that?

[TexArk]

I wanted to chime in here to report my experience this week. I have stayed well under 1200 calories with no hunger or cravings and actually had to add calories at the end of the day so as not to be too low. My carbs have stayed between 60 and 100. I am following the guidelines I set for myself on my checkin. I just count the carbs as they show up on Diet Power. I don't think these are effective carbs..not sure. As you know I can't weigh yet (maybe next Tuesday) but I feel thinner! I am still in wheelchair so no exercise except a little weight lifting.

I have worked my way through the first 17 chapters on Good Calories Bad Calories and watched many of the lectures posted on internet. I wanted to read through the science before the short version. I am not a trained scientist, but a university critical reading and thinking teacher by profession. I have been reading nutrition research for years, however, and I find Taubes easy for a lay person to understand. I want my husband to read this and he does have a science background and would not go for the "condensed version." I will read it next though to see if it is something that I could share with others which would be easier than the tome.

I see the logic and the reasoning in what I have been reading and I am seeing evidence (albeit short term) for me. I would like to join you and Kathleen in your discussion, and I firmly agree that it should not be held on the main discussion board. There is too much groundwork that has to be laid to try to respond to comments from those who have not studied his writings. Also, people who have tried some of the low carb diets in the past may consider themselves experts when they still don't know the science behind the diet. I certainly do not want to get in an exchange with those who are not open minded or resent this discussion.

My concern for my diet right now is that I don't get too low in calories so I am adding extra good fat to keep it up. How crazy is that?

[Over43]

I would like to see this discussion. Personally I think Gary Taubes is brilliant. Glaciers move faster than I did getting through Good Carbs, Bad Carbs, but it was worth it. I have not read the second book yet, but plan on it.

[BrightAngel]

I have worked my way through the first 17 chapters on Good Calories Bad Calories
and watched many of the lectures posted on internet.
I wanted to read through the science before the short version.
I am not a trained scientist, but a university critical reading and thinking teacher by profession.
I have been reading nutrition research for years, however,
and I find Taubes easy for a lay person to understand.

I see the logic and the reasoning in what I have been reading
and I am seeing evidence (albeit short term) for me.
I would like to join you and Kathleen in your discussion

I firmly agree that it should not be held on the main discussion board.
There is too much groundwork that has to be laid
to try to respond to comments from those who have not studied his writings.
Also, people who have tried some of the low carb diets in the past
may consider themselves experts
when they still don't know the science behind the diet.
I certainly do not want to get in an exchange with those
who are not open minded or resent this discussion.

TexArk, Thanks for your comment,
and I would very much enjoy discussing with you
the concepts in Good Calories Bad Calories as well as
Why We Get Fat and What to Do About it by Gary Taubes.
The best way for the two of us to do that, however,
is probably not inside a Discussion between Kathleen and me about the topic.

While I welcome the additional participation by unbiased people,
I am hoping for a Dialogue primarily between two people...
peppered by occasional on-point comments from others
who have also read the entire recent book,
and are therefore, informed on the exact issues,
and who are also willing to discuss this in a general and interesting way
while maintaining a courteous manner.

I am certain that you would do this,
and I hope that you will feel free to be such a participant.
If you would like a more in-depth or personal discussion on the Topic,
please PM me to see how we could arrange this.

[BrightAngel]

I would like to see this discussion. Personally I think Gary Taubes is brilliant.
Glaciers move faster than I did getting through Good Carbs, Bad Carbs, but it was worth it.
I have not read the second book yet, but plan on it.

Thanks for your comment.
I agree with your assessment .

He is Brilliant...and well-educated.
Taubes has a degree in physics from Harvard.
A master’s in aerospace engineering from Stanford
and a Journalism degree from Columbia.
EACH of those schools
is considered the Pinnacle of each specific area of study.

[TexArk]

I understand your rationale. I will follow your discussion with Kathleen with interest. You are correct. I would like to see a focused discussion between you two. If I have a question concerning some of the concepts discussed I will pm you.

[BrightAngel]

Re-posted below.

[BrightAngel]

I just read this review by a Biochemist of Taubes' new book,
Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It.

In 2008, Gary Taubes' GCBC changed my life for the better.
I'm raving about his new book WWGF.
If you can't slog through GCBC, read WWGF because it might just save your sanity.

If you haven't taken a course in chemical thermodynamics and aren't sure he's correct, let me add –
he's right and no laws of thermo were harmed in his hypothesis.

But he's smart and educated enough for you to be safe in trusting the accuracy of his statements.
"Only need to count calories and move more"- buzz words and jingo phrases
......(especially when incomplete and misconstrued because of the complex subject matter)......
are dangerous things.
`Calories' (as they are currently misrepresented in the context of human nutrition) do not count.

I'm a biochemist and I teach thermo. I'm a parent (cook for my family).
I also eat and I'm thankful I'm a voracious reader and I found Taubes.

Keep in mind our bodies are much more than a simple mono-functional furnace –
which only burns fuel to produce heat. We need to eat for fuel, heat, insulation,
and what is always neglected in these discussions- constantly supplying raw materials.
We eat for all these reasons, for our 100 trillion cells that `turnover' at various rates,
but also for our 1000 trillion prokaryote symbiotic passengers that turnover all the time.
Cholesterol is never used for fuel- only for raw material.

And since these discussions seem to only ever mention fuel calories, this is crucial.
Cholesterol is so important to our structure and function
and for us to thrive that most cells can make it. Drugging it down might not be a good thing.
Restricting dietary fat and protein calories for energy to make cholesterol
(low calorie, semi-starvation diets)
or decreasing animal fat and protein components, raw materials,
to build it, or acquire it, and then blaming it for heart disease -might just be incorrect.
And there quite simply is no requirement in human nutrition for dietary carbohydrate.
Ingested carbohydrate is only used for fuel.

Don't you think that the body is a little more complex than a furnace?
So the simplistic directive –
do not eat much fat because it supplies 9 calories/gram
and it will make you fatter than if you eat carbohydrate, 4 calories/gram-
could be problematic.
Could it be that eating sugar, grains and carbohydrate is what's causing the trouble?

Read everything Taubes writes. It might save your life.

[BrightAngel]

The above-mentioned Discussion has started on a Separate Thread.
Any forum member who has read Taubes' book,
Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It,
and is willing to follow the Guidelines for Discussion
that are specified in the first posts on the page 1 of Thread
is welcome to make comments.

Anyone who is familiar with Taubes' concepts
but hasn't yet read the book
can easily get it from Amazon
either hardback within a few days, or instantly on Kindle.
Also from most bookstores,
or even as an e-book for your computer or Ipad from Google
I know Kindle is about $10 and Google is about $14,
and you can get electronic copies instantly.
The Links are easy to find, I've posted some of them already

Personally I encourage you to do this, rather than wait for a library copy
...which could take a very long time...
and you will also probably want to re-read it several times.
It isn't a difficult read, and probably will take less than a weekend.

[BrightAngel]

For those of you interested,
I am now at the beginning of Day 15 of a low-carb experiment,
so I've now completed two weeks.
I'm calling my Plan VLC-2011 (for very-low-carb, year 2011).

My plan is to do my best to maintain the same eating Habits that I've established,
including tracking all my food in my DietPower food journal,
while working to keep
my net carbs at, or less than, 30 per day,
and my daily calorie average similar to my past year's amount.

This is not a plan I can recommend to anyone.
I don't even know how it will work in my own body.
I'd like to do this experiment for a 6 month period,
but if my weight climbs...or there are other unforeseen side-effects,
I will terminate it early.

Years ago, my DietPower journal became an enjoyable Habit for me,
and it easily tracks my carbs, fats, proteins and calories etc.
I also log in my daily scale weight and DietPower graphs it for me,
which enables me see whether my weight is trending up or down over time.

So....
Thus far, I am enjoying the novelty of eating a new way.
I'm not following a specific low-carb plan - like Atkins or Protein Power etc.,
I'm just restricting my carb intake,
and trying to keep my protein and fat intake around the same number of grams..
which results in a fat percentage Ratio about double the protein Ratio,
because protein is 4 calories a gram and fat is 9 calories a gram.
Allegedly, my minimum protein requirement is between 20 grams (WHO) and 36 grams (US RDA).
I usually take in between 50 and 100 grams.

I am aware of the Atkins "carb ladder", which puts foods in about 10 categories,
but I am not choosing to follow it, rung by rung etc.
The theory is that each of our bodies is different in the way it tolerates carbs,
and that some people need more restrictions than others.
I found it Interesting that Sugar and Refined Grains are NOT on that ladder at all...
meaning they are off-limits to everyone, always.
Makes sense to me.
I have been avoiding sugar and refined starch,
and I have also been mostly avoiding complex carbs
including whole grains, dry cooked beans, and starchy veggies like corn, potatoes etc,
because these have a really high carb count....
AND I've found that eating a small amount of them
causes me to crave much more of them,
plus it seems to start up a craving in me for foods with sugar and refined starch as well.

I found that after the first week, my cravings
for sugar and starchy foods has been greatly reduced.
They still exist, but are not as severe.
Right now, they are sort of an occasional thought..."um, that would taste good"...
instead of an incessant yammer..."GET ME THAT".
I still want it, but mostly I don't feel like I HAVE to have it.
which is a change.

My morning weight is mostly staying inside the 116 lb range.
This is good.
It is also somewhat different, because on a "normal-balanced" diet,
my morning weight bounces around a great deal from day to day,
and my norm is to easily bounce within a 5 to 8 lb range during any one month.
I have many different measures of Success in this Low-Carb Experiment.
However, Failure would be an upward weight-trend,
and/or Hunger and Cravings greater than I experience while eating a "normal-balanced" diet.
So....in that I am not currently experiencing Failure...thus far, it is a Success.
My quote for today is:

"A person who never made a mistake
never tried anything new."
.........................Albert Einstein

[BrightAngel]

Here is a recent Boston Globe article that I found interesting.

Eat less, move more’’ has been the exhortation
of countless physicians trying to encourage their patients to lose weight.
Alas, if it were only so simple.
The health benefits of not being overweight include reducing the risks
of diabetes, high blood pressure, and heart disease.
There are also aesthetic, social, and practical benefits to staying slim,
as anyone who has recently flown on a commercial airline can confirm.
And yet, more than two-thirds of adult Americans are either overweight
or obese, most struggling in vain to lose weight.

This advice is based on the premise that weight gain (or loss)
is all about the balance between calories in and calories out:
Excess energy is stored as fat, which is then burned when extra energy is required.
But, as Gary Taubes points out in this well-researched and thoughtful book,
what we eat and how it affects our metabolism may matter more than how much we eat.

Describing what he calls “the 20-calorie paradox,’’
he points out that for a lean 25- year-old to gain 50 pounds by the time he is 50,
all that is needed is to consume exactly 20 calories more that he burns per day, every day.
This is “less than a single bite of a . . . hamburger or croissant.
Less than 2 ounces of [soft drink] or the typical beer.
Less than three potato chips.’’
If calories in-calories out was all there was to it,
“you [would] need only to rein yourself in by this amount
— undereat by 20 calories a day — to undo it.’’
Or, perhaps, to exercise more.
Except that increased physical activity doesn’t always seem to result in weight loss.

Examining the effects of estrogen, cortisol, growth hormone,
and especially insulin on weight gain, Taubes suggests that
the way our carbohydrate-laden diet influences the secretion of and sensitivity to insulin
is likely the main cause of fat production and storage.

Much of what Taubes writes makes intuitive sense.
It is known, for example, that insufficient sleep is associated with being
overweight and obesity, which are caused in part by changes in two
hormones that govern hunger and satiety, ghrelin and leptin.
Taubes writes that while we accept that children eat more
when going through growth spurts (which are hormonally driven),
we are quick to assume that overweight people are that way
because of overeating and not that they may be overeating
because they are growing (in this case out instead of up).

And this connects with one of the most important messages of the book:
that while the popular perception is that fat people are somehow weak or deficient in character,
they may in fact have a heightened sensitivity to the effects of our modern diet
and to the resultant rapid and frequent swings in blood sugar levels
and insulin that lead to increased adiposity.
Some of this may be acquired, but much of it is likely genetic.
And while one can try to modify diet to counterbalance genetic susceptibilities,
judging a person based upon inherited traits
that have nothing to do with “strength of character’’ is both unfair and unhelpful.

So should we all live on steak, eggs, and romaine lettuce, forswearing everything else?
This seems extreme and even potentially dangerous,
especially for children and pregnant women, among others.
However, reconsidering how our diet affects our bodies,
how we might modify it to be healthier,
and being less harsh with those who struggle with their weight
are all worthy goals.
Taubes has done us a great service by bringing these issues to the table.

http://www.boston.com/ae/books/articles ... e_get_fat/

[BrightAngel]

For future reference, I'm copying this post from the General Thread.

I know that if it comes to food,
addiction is more a matter of psychology than physiology,
but... nothing is impossible

I find this statement interesting.
Are those cravings for sweets and starches REALLY a problem of the mind,
rather than of the body?

I, myself, have spent a lifetime considering this issue a psychological one.
My personal experience with this involves about 20 years of Therapy
to overcome that problem,....to no avail.
With professional help, I've dug into my psyche on the "whys";
I've taught myself most of the "hows"...in fact...
I've learned and incorporated most of the recommended Behavior Modifications.
Numerous "mindful" eating behaviors have become Habits for me.

For many, many years, my pattern has been not to label foods,
"good" or "bad",
but to allow myself to have a little of anything I want, including the occasional sugar-laden dessert.

Those techniques, including the No S restriction of sweets on N days,
have helped me resist the cravings,
but they have NOT reduced or eliminated the cravings.

How do you combat N-day cravings when they hit you like a ton of bricks? Ignore them, try to substitute?

What are your views about possible sugar addiction
(which has not yet been confirmed by science,
though a word "dependency" is often used in this context)?

I recall from the No S book, that Reinhard, personally, doesn't find the term "addiction" helpful,
and he tends to avoid using it for various reasons.

At this particular moment, I have finally reached the point where I am willing to seriously consider
the possibility that these cravings are physical, rather than psychological.
I've begun to think that new way, due to my exposure to Good Calories Bad Calories (2007) by Gary Taubes,
and his recently released book, Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It.

Perhaps many of us DO have a physical intolerance for certain food substances....
Perhaps the physical tolerance for them varies between individual,
just like some people have bodies that are allergic to peanuts...
and to varying degrees....,
maybe there is something to the Theory about Insulin and Carbohydrates too.
I don't know.

I DO know that psychological treatment won't resolve a physical problem.
All the therapy in the world won't let those with a severe peanut allergy, eat peanuts without side-effects.

I've recently begun a personal experiment
to see what a lengthy Low-Carb commitment will do in my body.
I am especially interested to see whether or not
a total elimination of sugar and refined grains,
and a serious restriction of whole grains, starchy vegetables, and fruit
will eliminate or greatly reduce these cravings in my own body.
This is a day-by-day experiment...and at this point....I don't even know how long I'll be able to stick with it.

To free myself from the grip of my sugar dependency,
I've been toying with the idea of replacing sugar-laden desserts
with their healthier equivalents (sweetened with honey, xylitol, maple syrup).
"Natural" sweeteners seem to agree with my physiology much better than simple sugar,
as they do not provoke overwhelming cravings.
I'd like to treat those things like regular S-day indulgences,
to be enjoyed on special occassions and in moderation... if it's at all possible

That sounds like a reasonable plan for you, since you appear
to have personal knowledge that those sugars "do not provoke overwhelming cravings".

Each of us does the best we can with our own experiences.
The same things don't work for everyone.

In my own body, it makes no difference whether it is white sugar,
or "natural" sweeteners. MY body treats them all the same way.
I am learning that...right now... this even seems to be true for me
with regards to starches.
In fact, recently I learned that within 24 hours after having half a cup of Lentils
...(complex natural carbs)... for lunch, all of my sugar cravings returned.
And....I've carefully examined my surrounding circumstances...mental state....etc,
and feel fairly certain that this instance was not due to a psychological issue.

Life goes on.
We all do what we can.
I'm now living as a normal weight person,
and I'm willing to keep doing whatever it takes to make that a long-term status.