Makes Too Much Sense

oliviamanda · Post by **oliviamanda** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:47 pm

I know that I've talked about this before, BUT it still baffles me that whenever I try to tell someone who is struggling with their weight and diet about No S, it's basically like I can't even finish mouthing the minimal amount of words that make up No S. As soon as I say "no snacks or sweets" they aren't listening anymore. Even if I try to bring it back up when the point of interest has quickly passed... it's for nothing. I feel like I have the secret (although it's very public knowledge) about how to lose weight without really restricting yourself or counting calories, etc. or even buying a book or supplements. And no one wants to know. And one of the people that I was sure was going to do it, quickly gave up. I guess you can say that No S is not for everyone. But it's so simple. It should be!

wosnes · Post by **wosnes** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:13 pm

I think that people want to think that in order to lose weight you HAVE to do something very restrictive and deprive yourself of the good stuff.

NoelFigart · Post by **NoelFigart** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:20 pm

Prostleyzing diets is a waste of time. Sure, No-S is sensible and it works. But if they love Weight Watchers or whatever, they love it.

People want magic and sunshine and rainbows. They think there will be Some Secret to the Universe that'll make everything all nice and fair and painless. Life doesn't work that way. Goodness knows I wish it did, but it doesn't.

But who knows, maybe the Magic Sunshine and Rainbows crowd has the right idea and in a few hundred thousand years we'll have exactly that if we keep thinking we should have it...

Nichole · Post by **Nichole** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:25 pm

That's like when I tell my sister "throw away all those Entenmenn's sweets and all those snacks, eat less than you burn, and you'll be good. Also try to eat more whole foods." But then she keeps on talking about different pills that have worked for others or the stupid Special K diet. So I don't give her advice anymore. When I lost 20 lbs last year she told me it was because I'm young, completely discounting my good work. It couldn't POSSIBLY be because I was eating much healthier food and exercising 5x a week, right? haha. I don't know, some people are illogical.

oliviamanda · Post by **oliviamanda** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:39 pm

I think people are so addicted to these S's that they cannot conceive of a daily world without them. Especially snacking. Even my relative is eating healthy all the way around cutting out this and that, but still is so proud she eats cut up fruit with cinnamon as a snack. Maybe that's better than other snacks, but the ritual of having to eat between meals is so engraved in our culture. It's impossible to be in an office where people are not constantly eating. You are almost an outsider if you don't do it, too.

ShannahR · Post by **ShannahR** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 3:48 pm

Olivia-
I can totally relate to your frustration. I was trying to tell my mom about No S but her response was "I have a big appetite" and she therefore can't go with out eating between meals, which I tried to tell her was the problem but to no avail. It was really frustrating because she basically told me she couldn't do No S because of this "appetite problem" which she supposedly can't control!

I haven't talked to her about it since (that was about 2 months ago) because I realized that she's completely unwilling to try it. I was kinda sad about that because her knees are getting bad and losing some weight would really help her. Maybe I'll try again in a couple of months.

NoelFigart · Post by **NoelFigart** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 4:01 pm

oliviamanda wrote:but the ritual of having to eat between meals is so engraved in our culture.

Yes, it is.

The problem is probably rather meta. We chucked out some very rigid systems that really were doing a lot of damage with a rather procrustean approach to human lives.

The thing is, systems can serve us, and that's not a very popular thing to hear right now.

RJLupin · Post by **RJLupin** » Wed Mar 24, 2010 5:25 pm

I think people want some sort of magic-fix diet, where they can continue to gorge on something (magic, "safe" foods) or else something so rigid and harsh that they can feel "good" following it. Common sense has gone the way of the Dodo as far as dieting is concerned. "Eat less and only at mealtimes" isn't as fun as "oh, if only you cut out carbs/fat/etc you can keep eating all you want and still be thin." Or, there's always the rigid type diets where you have to eat 12 times a day, no flour/sugar/butter/coffee (and they always seem to cut out foods simply because they taste good, and not for any real health reason) and take handfuls of vitamins.

Honestly, I think a lot of it is denial. We don't want to hear that we're fat because we eat too much, we want to hear that we're fat because of some big conspiracy, some sort of "food intolerance," or some other ridiculous notion. The current fad for labeling obesity as a "disease" that can only be "cured" by gastric bypass has made things much worse, because it gives people the idea that they have no control over their lives or what goes into their mouth, and the only hope they have is to have some doctor operate on them.

marygrace · Post by **marygrace** » Wed Mar 24, 2010 6:56 pm

RJLupin wrote: Honestly, I think a lot of it is denial. We don't want to hear that we're fat because we eat too much, we want to hear that we're fat because of some big conspiracy, some sort of "food intolerance," or some other ridiculous notion. The current fad for labeling obesity as a "disease" that can only be "cured" by gastric bypass has made things much worse, because it gives people the idea that they have no control over their lives or what goes into their mouth, and the only hope they have is to have some doctor operate on them.

Personal responsibility has vanished from all realms of society--which is exactly why we've ended up with the situation you're describing.

hsmomof6 · Post by **hsmomof6** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 11:33 am

oliviamanda- You are so right! I posted on the 3 Fat Chicks Boards that I was going to try the No S diet and explained the rules. You would not believe the negative responses I got. There were all sorts of dire predictions about how I was going to binge on S days because I couldn't possibly be trusted to eat "normally." Bascally it came down to YOU CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT SNACKS! Really, history and current citizens of many, many other countries would beg to differ. No one was interested.

I had been on WW since January. That is a program to create obsession with food. You are forever counting, planning, and eating "food products." You search for low point foods. I ended up eating all sorts of fake and nutitionally worthless crap like no fat popcorn and fat free, artifically sweetened ice cream. I found myself avioding proteins like eggs and meat because they have higher point values.

OK - I've ranted long enough but suffice it to say that I don't understand why more people aren't interested either. It just makes too much sense!

wosnes · Post by **wosnes** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 12:25 pm

hsmomof6 wrote:oliviamanda- You are so right! I posted on the 3 Fat Chicks Boards that I was going to try the No S diet and explained the rules. You would not believe the negative responses I got. There were all sorts of dire predictions about how I was going to binge on S days because I couldn't possibly be trusted to eat "normally." Bascally it came down to YOU CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT SNACKS! Really, history and current citizens of many, many other countries would beg to differ. No one was interested.

I had been on WW since January. That is a program to create obsession with food. You are forever counting, planning, and eating "food products." You search for low point foods. I ended up eating all sorts of fake and nutitionally worthless crap like no fat popcorn and fat free, artifically sweetened ice cream. I found myself avioding proteins like eggs and meat because they have higher point values.

OK - I've ranted long enough but suffice it to say that I don't understand why more people aren't interested either. It just makes too much sense!

I don't think people here (in the U.S.) realize that most people around the world control their weight by having good eating habits and eating "food" instead of food-like products. If clothes get a little snug, they cut back. Probably 99% of the time, excess weight is due to eating too much, not some other problem. Yes, women gain it more quickly and lose it more slowly, but it's still because we eat too much!

In my reading I have found that people in other places often eat four meals daily, but usually 2-3 of them aren't big meals. The fourth meal is usually between lunch and dinner, is very light and eaten only because dinner is eaten very late compared to our normal dinnertime.

Most other programs create an obsession with food -- from Atkins to the Zone and nearly everything in between. The only difference are the foods to be consumed and the foods to be avoided.

Someone here once wrote that you shouldn't trust a diet program that sells food. That eliminates a LOT of them!

oliviamanda · Post by **oliviamanda** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:23 pm

hsmomof6, my sister signed up for weight watchers a few weeks ago and she is off it already. she was not enjoying it for the same reasons you described. BUT she is not about to do No S either. My whole family knows I do this and have done it for years with very positive results, but everyone wants to whine about their weight loss struggles.

I am convinced this country has a snack addiction! I don't want to totally bash weight watchers. I think that's it can be a great jump start for some people. It's just that you know you're not going to count points forever. And eating the low-fat snacks and desserts is only going to lead to the real thing eventually. Why not have the real things with No S? : ) It seems anyone I've known to do WW, Jenny Craig, NutriSystem, etc... they all lost at first and then it all came back and then some. Probably when they stopped doing it, so at least it seems like a committment that cannot be kept long-term.

marygrace · Post by **marygrace** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 1:51 pm

It seems anyone I've known to do WW, Jenny Craig, NutriSystem, etc... they all lost at first and then it all came back and then some. Probably when they stopped doing it, so at least it seems like a committment that cannot be kept long-term.

I've seen this happen so many times. A couple years ago, I came home to find my mom throwing out all of the normal food in the fridge and pantry and re-stocking with Jenny Craig meals, because she and my stepdad were going on the program to lose weight. I remember one evening I was making some homemade falafel for myself and they were eating these tiny, pre-packaged frozen turkey burgers. I was frying the falafel, and my mom was watching me pour the oil in the pan (and pour, and pour... you know falafel has to be deep-fried). I could tell she was dying to have some, and I think made some comment to the line of "You're lucky you're young and you can eat things like that." Sure, I might have a bit of a metabolic advantage over my mom since I'm in my early 20's (and might not even yet have been 20 at that time) but I maintain my weight because I exercise and eat sensible portions of real food.

Anyways, she and my stepdad did lose some weight on Jenny Craig, but then we went on a two-week vacation to California. Of course, the diet went out the window and they gained weight back. Then later that fall they went on a week-long cruise and their program was disrupted again. Eventually they fell off the Jenny Craig wagon and are probably still trying to lose the weight. I've told my mom about NoS and I think she even read my copy of the book, but I guess it's too crazy for her.

kccc · Post by **kccc** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 2:22 pm

I've done WW, and it worked for me at the time, but I brought some prior experience to it. (Warning - long. And those of you who have been here a while have heard it before.)

My initial weight loss (just after college) was a straight low-calorie diet with basic exercise. A friend who was even heavier than me was participating in a research experiment, and recruited me into following her plan even though I wasn't part of the experiment. We ate a restricted-calorie diet, kept a food journal, and were required to have seven "exercise sessions" per week (defined as "20 minutes of anything that raises your pulse").

Previous low-cal diets hadn't worked. The addition of exercise, even at that level, made a huge difference. I am naturally an indoorsy type, hate competitive sports, etc., but I recall reaching a point where it was like a "switch" was turned in my body - where I began to recognize that exercise really felt good. I am grateful for that experience, which has informed my habits since...

In the course of doing this, I also learned a LOT about calories and a bit about nutrition. (I had bought "Laurel's Kitchen" about that time, and so I got at least a portion of my calories from "real food" while my friend just ate smaller quantities of junk. As a side note, she has since regained all her weight plus a distressing amount on top - life-threatening.) And I maintained for decades using a combo of diet/exercise. But I didn't enjoy my food as much before No-S, because I was always so focused on calories and "good/bad" thinking. My overall course has been toward more healthy eating, but with lapses - I liked sweets, and would fall into eating Snickers and other junk, until junk foods gradually become a larger and larger portion of my diet. Eventually, I would notice and take action. I still think of these patterns as "sugar addictions" that I periodically had to break. (With No-S, these cycles don't happen.)

I did WW later in life (mid-life metabolic slowdown + baby got me), but I brought to it a growing dislike for fake food. I think I bought one "food product" and decided I'd rather make grocery-store selections myself. With that mindset, WW worked relatively well. And I could see that a lot of people were learning what I consider basic nutritional info for the first time.

And it even worked a second time, when I gained most of the weigh back after reaching goal.

Though that round was harder and unhappier. Points drove me crazy - I was always engaged in mental bargaining with myself.

When my weight started to increase again, I found No-S. I can't tell you what a relief it is. My weight is stable - a little higher than I'd prefer, but not at the "got to get to WW levels" - and I get to truly enjoy what I eat. I make home-made sweets on S-days, that I never used to allow myself. They satisfy me more than a cartload of junk, and since I don't eat them non-stop, I don't fall into the sugar addiction pattern.

Eat food. Not too much. Mostly plants. Sweets/snacks on occasion are fine, as long as you keep them SPECIAL in terms of both frequency and quality. That's a combined re-phrasing of both Pollan and No-S - and it really works for me.

wosnes · Post by **wosnes** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 4:09 pm

While we make the decision to buy and consume snacks, Big Food and Fast Food have made it seem not only desirable, but normal.

marygrace · Post by **marygrace** » Fri Mar 26, 2010 5:58 pm

KCCC wrote:I was always engaged in mental bargaining with myself.

This describes my pre-NoS experienced exactly. It was really awful. Being free of that bargaining mindset is just as great a payoff of following NoS as being happy with my weight is.

Starla · Post by **Starla** » Sun Mar 28, 2010 1:18 pm

^^marygrace, I agree that the mental change of No S may be its biggest reward.

As for the original topic, I'm not sure that No S is a particulary hard sell. I think it's useless to talk to someone about any diet until they're ready to hear it. In my own case, my mother told me about No S, but only after I asked. I had noticed her losing weight, but it was months before I actually asked her how she was doing it. I think if she had been preaching No S at me during those months it would have completely turned me off the diet, not because the diet was wrong but because I didn't want to hear about any diet.

I went out to breakfast yesterday with a group of friends, some of whom I haven't seen since New Year's Day. Everyone commented on my weight loss; no one asked about how I was doing it. I'll be happy to talk about it if they ever ask, until then I think it would be just a waste of breath.

RJLupin · Post by **RJLupin** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:30 am

hsmomof6 wrote:oliviamanda- You are so right! I posted on the 3 Fat Chicks Boards that I was going to try the No S diet and explained the rules. You would not believe the negative responses I got. There were all sorts of dire predictions about how I was going to binge on S days because I couldn't possibly be trusted to eat "normally." Bascally it came down to YOU CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT SNACKS! Really, history and current citizens of many, many other countries would beg to differ. No one was interested.

I had been on WW since January. That is a program to create obsession with food. You are forever counting, planning, and eating "food products." You search for low point foods. I ended up eating all sorts of fake and nutitionally worthless crap like no fat popcorn and fat free, artifically sweetened ice cream. I found myself avioding proteins like eggs and meat because they have higher point values.

OK - I've ranted long enough but suffice it to say that I don't understand why more people aren't interested either. It just makes too much sense!

I would believe the negative responses. I posted something about No S on another board, and some guys was like "Oh, that will work....you'll just put massive amounts of food on your plate, and eat huge amounts at restaurants. Great idea!" I had to point out to him, "most people have some common sense." People have this ridiculous idea that you're either stuffing your face, OR trying to starve on some rigid "diet." The idea that one might actually eat normal meals and moderate portions seems to be foreign to most people. Also, people have so much invested in following the nonsensical and contradictory rules that their different diet gurus prescribe, the idea that one might lose weight eating normal food and with little effort can even cause anger.

The snack obsession is especially weird to me. As I have pointed out before, hunger has come to be treated as a dangerous (if not fatal) disease that must be prevented at all costs, even if it means a constant intake of food. People act as though they have no control, that they simply MUST eat something. Instead of realizing that mild hunger a few hours before a meal simply means you'll need to eat a nice dinner, instead people freak out and eat some sort of "snack" that inevitably makes them hungrier than before. If you're constantly eating (even so-called "healthy" snacks) then you'll condition yourself to be constantly hungry. Not a good way to maintain weight.

I've heard all the excuses; I have used most of them myself. "I can't lose weight if I eat too many carbs; I have no control over my eating; I really don't eat that much, I just have a slow metabolism." None of them are true. The reason I gained weight is because I ate too much. True, there are various emotional factors that go in to that, but when when it comes down to it, I have the power to decide: not my friends, not "hunger" and not that chocolate cake in the fridge.

It wasn't until I stopped snacking that I realized how much I was truly eating. Just cutting out snacks would probably cause most people to lose a lot of weight.

NoelFigart · Post by **NoelFigart** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 9:37 am

RJLupin wrote:The snack obsession is especially weird to me. As I have pointed out before, hunger has come to be treated as a dangerous (if not fatal) disease that must be prevented at all costs, even if it means a constant intake of food.

Well, hunger IS fatal, eventually. That's what makes the constant grazing SUCH an easy sell. It ties into a deep-seated biological fear.

marygrace · Post by **marygrace** » Mon Mar 29, 2010 12:48 pm

NoelFigart wrote:
RJLupin wrote:The snack obsession is especially weird to me. As I have pointed out before, hunger has come to be treated as a dangerous (if not fatal) disease that must be prevented at all costs, even if it means a constant intake of food.
Well, hunger IS fatal, eventually. That's what makes the constant grazing SUCH an easy sell. It ties into a deep-seated biological fear.

This is true. When I first started with NoS, I was literally afraid of not having my snacks. I don't think I ever actually took the time to think about WHY I was so afraid (consciously, at least, I didn't think I would die of starvation), but the idea of no snacks was originally pretty unsettling.