No S is SO-O-O much smarter than...

No Snacks, no sweets, no seconds. Except on Days that start with S. Too simple for you? Simple is why it works. Look here for questions, introductions, support, success stories.

Moderators: Soprano, automatedeating

Post Reply
oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

No S is SO-O-O much smarter than...

Post by oolala53 » Fri Feb 19, 2010 1:41 am

I thought it might be fun to have a thread where we could 1) rant about any other system we've tried or run across or 2) feel sorry for people who resort to tactics we know must be or will be painful in the long run.

This was prompted by browsing Sparkpeople.com where I am a member (and on a pretty inactive No S team there). I came across the Six Word Diet: Eat 100 Calories Every 90 Minutes. I visited the woman's site and it's morphed into Eat 100 Calories 12 Times a Day. OMG! Talk about permasnacking!

First of all, the "inventor' said she was so surprised that she was losing weight when she was eating so often. Good Lord, woman, if you eat only 1,200 calories a day, whether it's once or 12 times, you will lose weight. That is , unless you are very short and are really close to your body's natural set point. (By the way, read Eat Stop Eat if you still believe that frequent eating raises your metabolism by any amount that doesn't offset the inconvenience. But you don't HAVE to go 24 hours. The mini-fasts on No S have some impressive chemical results that may show why it's so effective at helping people be satisfied with a plate of food, even though that's not what prompted our down-to-earth leader.)

Second of all, I was thinking, "Why should someone who probably overeats consistently going to be able to limit herself/himself to 100 calories at a time?" If you can do that, why not meals? And I envisioned a lot of poor suckers trying and ending up stuck with wanting to eat 12 times a day but not just a few bites at a time...

Thirdly, I thought, "Geesh, what about your social life?" Yeah, she's a size 2 now, but is it worth being so skinny if you can't have a real meal with friends--or a date? Don't men make fun of women who go out and order only a salad? What if all she wants is three sips of his martini and a bite of steak?

And what about work? If I had to be free to eat my morsel every 1.5 hours... and gawd knows, I'm going to want to stop and enjoy it. I only get two bites at a time!

It just goes to prove the conclusion I've come to: if you feel desperate enough, and that can come from disgust, fear of health problems, pride, or whatever, but if you want it enough, you will make sacrifices. So the next question is what makes the most sense to implement in our lives as they are?

Well, you all know what that is in my book. No S allows for all the phases. I had already made a lot of changes to my meals and I do tend to have 'healthy" meals--because that's what i enjoy. But can I have a white-flour biscuit with my meal without feeling like I've sunk myself? Yes! (My big issue was all out bingeing on chocolate or cake, not eating a Big Mac and fries for lunch.) I still overeat junk on the weekends, but I can feel that subsiding, too. I really feel I'm on the road to having this be normal and thank goodness it is so sane.

Anyone else got a pet diet peeve?
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

Aquapixie
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:14 pm

Post by Aquapixie » Fri Feb 19, 2010 4:47 am

This is the craziest one I've ever seen. Okay, I admit it. I've thought of trying it. lol :)

The Five Bite Diet
http://www.celebritydietdoctor.com/the-five-bite-diet/

clarinetgal
Posts: 1709
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:16 am
Location: Western Washington State

Post by clarinetgal » Fri Feb 19, 2010 6:39 am

I'm reading a book right now by a certain exercise instructor whom I really like. Her overall premise is good (eat everything in moderation and don't worry about counting calories), but I noticed today on one of the pages that she has a list of 12 foods to avoid (which contradicsts her point about eating everything in moderation). The foods include things like beef, pork, white flour, sugar, etc... I can see why she would say that (all of the foods are either high in saturated fats or refined carbs), but I really do believe that you can eat anything, as long as you eat it in moderation. Plus, foods like beef and butter do have certain benefits.
Anyway, that's why I think No S is best, because you really don't deprive yourself of anything. You may have to wait a few days for it, but you never have to give up any foods.

clarinetgal
Posts: 1709
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:16 am
Location: Western Washington State

Post by clarinetgal » Sat Feb 20, 2010 7:38 am

I take back what I said about that book. I've read a lot more of it since yesterday, and she's actually quite No S-ish in her approach to food. One of the rules in her book is one plate and you're done. She's also very anti-seconds. I'm not finished with the book yet, but her way of eating seems to be a combo of Intuitive Eating and No S principles.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Feb 20, 2010 11:42 am

What's the book?
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

Cassie
Posts: 213
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: London

Post by Cassie » Sat Feb 20, 2010 3:25 pm

I think, looking back at my recent experiences with extreme low-carbing (see my separate post today. I'm not talking of moderate low-carbing which I'm sure works better, I'm talking of extreme first-2-weeks Atkins low-carbing): it doesn't work. Very sad. But very true.

Well yes it does work in the short run, to be more precise... But at some point you get sick of those eggs & meat & fish & whatever & crave for some bread. What then happens is (again, speaking from my own experience) your body doensn't know what to do with the carbs & the hard-lost weight piles back on.

I've actually just been 'burnt' by exactly this experience, first time on a 'proper' ultra strict diet in my life, so am returning to NoS with a sigh of relief & trying to build my hope back (its pretty lost at the moment).
Restarting NoS (after going back & forth over the last 4 years) in November 2013.

GOAL: to lose 10 kilos.
HAVE ACHIEVED SO FAR: 1.6 kilo

clarinetgal
Posts: 1709
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:16 am
Location: Western Washington State

Post by clarinetgal » Sat Feb 20, 2010 9:14 pm

Oolala, The book is Eat Smart, Walk Strong by Leslie Sansone. It's very good!

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sun Feb 21, 2010 12:46 am

From what I've seen of Leslie Sansone, I like her, too. She seems pretty down-to-earth.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

clarinetgal
Posts: 1709
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 4:16 am
Location: Western Washington State

Post by clarinetgal » Sun Feb 21, 2010 6:30 am

I've been doing her workouts off and on for about 13 years now. She's definitely one of my favorite exercise instructors.

User avatar
suz
Posts: 17
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:31 am
Location: Michigan

Accupressure

Post by suz » Mon Feb 22, 2010 4:50 pm

A good friend is doing this and I am trying to be supportive as she wants to lose a large amount of weight quickly in order to be an organ donor for a friend in need.

BUT...2 little beads behind the ear, rotating every 2 hours, very limited eating....fruits/veggies one day and milk or something the next. Then the cost of all the appts. Oh my, oh my, oh my.

As someone who has lost 180 pounds and regained 140 of them, I KNOW that whatever I do next HAS to be something I can do for the REST of my life. So, today, my friends I am starting Day 1 of the No S diet. I have made a committment to put a "fence around the law" (trying to quote Reinhard, here) until Good Friday which will be the only time I will weigh myself after this morning. (This was supposed to be a lenten thing, but as usual, I am a late-comer)

BTW, oolala.....I am a newly joined member of the No S Spark Team! Maybe we could put a little "spark" in it and get it more active!!!!
I love food but want to change my relationship with it. Instead of the food controlling me, I want to be in charge!

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:36 pm

Aquapixie wrote:This is the craziest one I've ever seen. Okay, I admit it. I've thought of trying it. lol :)

The Five Bite Diet
http://www.celebritydietdoctor.com/the-five-bite-diet/
This guy is crazy. Not only does he look emaciated, but his advice is dangerous. You wouldn't be getting enough of anything, and I bet you would develop dangerous deficiencies. True, people who have gastric bypass eat tiny amounts like that, but they do it under medical supervision and take huge amounts of supplements. This diet is just anorexia.

Duckling
Posts: 42
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 4:33 pm

Post by Duckling » Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:39 pm

That bead turning thing sounds very very odd. And I will admit to also trying the whole 100 calories every 90 minutes thing. I actually once did something similar with 250 calories every 2.5 hours or so. It was nuts. And I once lost quite a bit of weight on Atkins.

But the craziest thing I've ever done was the lemonaide diet. For 10 days I ingested no solid food and instead subsisted on water, lemon juice, and maple syrup. Ick.

Its so nice to have found something sane! And sustainable. So, maybe no-S is S afterall!

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Tue Feb 23, 2010 12:27 am

RJLupin wrote: True, people who have gastric bypass eat tiny amounts like that,
but they do it under medical supervision and take huge amounts of supplements.
For what it is worth,
Nowadays,
Gastric bypasses have become very comman
and have become big business.
Therefore, now most surgical orginanizations use Nutritionists ect.
who believe that basic eating "rules" must be followed,
and who also demand and provide endless protein and vitamin supplements.

However, it wasn't always that way, nor does it have to be.
17 years ago, when I had my RNY,
I had ZERO medical supervision re my post surgical diet,
and I took NO supplements,
eating about 300-500 calories of whatever my body would tolerate
for the first 6 months after surgery..
Nevertheless, I was just fine, and so were all the other people who went through it at the time.
In fact, it was our "Success" that carved the path for the current surgical craze

Despite the Nutritionist's modern "Gospel"
....which is mostly based on training from textbooks and research provided by food companies.......
I know for a fact, both from Research and from my own experience,
that it is really quite true that an obese person's body needs almost no food,
and the body does quite well on a very small daily amount of protein.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

connorcream
Posts: 540
Joined: Sat May 03, 2008 9:57 pm
Location: San Antonio

Post by connorcream » Tue Feb 23, 2010 2:10 pm

BrightAngel wrote:[quote="BrightAngel"/]
I know for a fact, both from Research and from my own experience,
that it is really quite true that an obese person's body needs almost no food,
and the body does quite well on a very small daily amount of protein.[/color][/quote]

My mother is 80, limited mobility and obese. She is stuck with this old "gospel" way of eating. At some point, it does become too late to lose the weight. Very sad because she just keeps trying and trying but without the success she wants.
connorcream
5'8.5"
48 yrs
Started calorie counting
10/6/2009
start/current
192/mid 120's maintaining
Maintaining a year

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Wed Feb 24, 2010 2:01 am

BrightAngel wrote:
RJLupin wrote: True, people who have gastric bypass eat tiny amounts like that,
but they do it under medical supervision and take huge amounts of supplements.
For what it is worth,
Nowadays,
Gastric bypasses have become very comman
and have become big business.
Therefore, now most surgical orginanizations use Nutritionists ect.
who believe that basic eating "rules" must be followed,
and who also demand and provide endless protein and vitamin supplements.

However, it wasn't always that way, nor does it have to be.
17 years ago, when I had my RNY,
I had ZERO medical supervision re my post surgical diet,
and I took NO supplements,
eating about 300-500 calories of whatever my body would tolerate
for the first 6 months after surgery..
Nevertheless, I was just fine, and so were all the other people who went through it at the time.
In fact, it was our "Success" that carved the path for the current surgical craze

Despite the Nutritionist's modern "Gospel"
....which is mostly based on training from textbooks and research provided by food companies.......
I know for a fact, both from Research and from my own experience,
that it is really quite true that an obese person's body needs almost no food,
and the body does quite well on a very small daily amount of protein.
That might have been your experience but it's simply not true for most people. If you google it, you can find loads of people post-gastric bypass who sometimes develop severe nutritional deficiencies because of their limited food intake. Hair loss, anemia, skin disease, fatgue, and all kinds of other problems are very common. It's also not true that people need very little food or protein; protein is required for pretty much all functions in the body. With all due respect, I hope nobody would take it what you said as nutritional advice, especially post surgery, to disregard their doctor's supplement and protein recommendations.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:15 am

Woops, I didn't mean to get in the middle of this. Given how I didn't think I could stick to 3 meals a day, and now I have for so many days, who knows how low we can go? But, there is certainly a lot of evidence that people who eat a restricted diet end up going back to their old habits or even worse. Anyway, I still like No S because you can get more strict as you go, if you want. It still makes more sense to me to go gradually, and to even have options according to the time of year and conditions. But I guess not everyone has the luxury.
Last edited by oolala53 on Sat Feb 27, 2010 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:18 pm

RJLupin wrote: It's simply not true for most people.
It's also not true that (OBSESE) people need very little food or protein.
I hope nobody would take it what you said as nutritional advice,
especially post surgery, to disregard their doctor's supplement and protein recommendations.

I made my above-statement in response to your comments about
the validity of the position of the MD who has the 5 Bite Diet.
Although I don't care for him or his diet,
he IS correct in his position on the feeding habits of the majority of Gastric Bypass patients,
and in that way, makes a valid point.
We have each stated our opinion on this subject,
and we must agree to disagree.

My position is based upon my own personal experience;
upon my personal contacts with literally hundreds of other people in similiar situation;
and upon many years of extensive research of the issue,
both online and elsewhere.
Whether people choose to follow my example is not a concern to me.

I don't wish to enter an online argument on this issue, so
I will not be responding further on this topic.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Feb 26, 2010 2:58 pm

BrightAngel wrote: For what it is worth,
Nowadays,
Gastric bypasses have become very comman
and have become big business.
Therefore, now most surgical orginanizations use Nutritionists ect.
who believe that basic eating "rules" must be followed,
and who also demand and provide endless protein and vitamin supplements.

I'll agree with that. There are three medical centers here who do gastric bypass and they're each talking about having done 10,000-15,000 of the procedures. That scares me!
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

TunaFishKid
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Post by TunaFishKid » Fri Feb 26, 2010 3:36 pm

If you google it, you can find loads of people post-gastric bypass who sometimes develop severe nutritional deficiencies because of their limited food intake.
I googled "post gastric bypass nutritional deficiencies" and it seems that it does happen, but it's caused by an overgrowth of intestinal bacteria (prevents absorption of nutrients), which is a complication of the surgery. So it's really the surgery that's to blame, and not the diet. (Which would actually be a point in favor of the Five Bite Diet, lol.)
~ Laura ~

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Fri Feb 26, 2010 7:40 pm

TunaFishKid wrote:
If you google it, you can find loads of people post-gastric bypass who sometimes develop severe nutritional deficiencies because of their limited food intake.
I googled "post gastric bypass nutritional deficiencies" and it seems that it does happen, but it's caused by an overgrowth of intestinal bacteria (prevents absorption of nutrients), which is a complication of the surgery. So it's really the surgery that's to blame, and not the diet. (Which would actually be a point in favor of the Five Bite Diet, lol.)
Well, a lot of the gastric bypass operations deliberately cause "malabsorption" so that you don't really digest a lot of what you eat. The duodenal switch is especially notorious for this, and these people especially MUST take doses of vitamins lest they become severely deficient. Specifically, one needs the fat soluble ones like A, D, and K. Also, the B vitamins and calcium are important. It's not as though the surgery just makes you eat less, it alters the digestive tract in numerous ways. Google "gastic bypass vitamin deficiency" and you can learn more as well as read case reports of people who didn't follow their surgeons recommendations and became seriously ill.

User avatar
BrightAngel
Posts: 2093
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2008 4:22 pm
Location: Central California
Contact:

Post by BrightAngel » Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:28 pm

RJLupin wrote: a lot of the gastric bypass operations deliberately cause "malabsorption"
so that you don't really digest a lot of what you eat.
these people especially MUST take doses of vitamins lest they become severely deficient.
It's not as though the surgery just makes you eat less,
it alters the digestive tract in numerous ways.

I am posting on this Thread again
in order to clear up possible misunderstandings
due to common misinformation.
There are different kinds of gastric bypass surgeries.
Typically, the RNY. as well Banding and the other most common gastric bypass surgeries,
involve no shortening of the intestine, and therefore no malabsorption.

When there is malabsorption, people do not digest all of their food intake,
and therefore, do not get all of the food's nutritional (and caloric) value.
For example, with that side-effect, one could ingest 3 plates of food,
and get the calories (and benefits) of only 1 plate of food.
This procedure has proved to be rather unsafe long-term,
and at present is not the "normal" or "favored" Gastric Bypass surgery.

No malabsorption means that every calorie eaten is digested the same, both before and after surgery.
The WLS surgery simply makes the stomach smaller, so that it will hold less at a time.
This size forces one (for at least a 6 month to 1 year period) to eat less,
and therefore ingest less calories...
Normally, after the first few weeks after surgery,
one's stomach feels like they've just eaten Thanksgiving Dinner
after taking in approx 1/4 to 1/2 cup total.
It simply becomes physically impossible to eat anything more.

A Medical Instruction to limit eating to only 3 meals a day is the norm,
and "no snacks" and "no grazing" is the almost universal recommendation. ..
since this behavior can circumvent the purpose of the surgery - which is weight-loss.
Eating in this manner results in a common result of approximately 300 to 500 calories of food intake a day...
which is why morbidly obese people, immediately after WLS surgery,
lose tremendous amounts of weight very quickly.
BrightAngel - (Dr. Collins)
See: DietHobby. com

TunaFishKid
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Post by TunaFishKid » Fri Feb 26, 2010 10:24 pm

RJLupin wrote: Well, a lot of the gastric bypass operations deliberately cause "malabsorption" so that you don't really digest a lot of what you eat....It's not as though the surgery just makes you eat less, it alters the digestive tract in numerous ways....
I think you've lost the thread of the discussion. :) (Meant in a nice, and not snarky way.)

We're not arguing about the safety or validity of the surgery, but about whether or not a very small number of calories (ie., the traditional gastric bypass diet) is sufficient and safe. BrightAngel said that she believes it is, based on personal experience, and I have to agree with her there. (And we don't always see eye to eye. :wink: )

I wouldn't go on "The Five Bite Diet" myself, but if you look at it as a gastric bypass without the danger of surgery, it makes a little sense. Sometimes people need to get rid of a lot of dangerous extra weight as quickly as possible, and, as far as I can see, the surgery and possible complications are what cause problems for people, not the diet itself.
~ Laura ~

Southerngal45
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2010 1:19 pm

Post by Southerngal45 » Sun Feb 28, 2010 12:28 am

Oolala, I love this thread! Thanks for starting it!

Clarinetgal, I love the book "Eat Smart, Walk Strong" too! A friend sent it to me and it's fabulous!

Aquapixie, I watched the video about "The Five Bite Diet" and it is kind of appealing. If I hadn't heard of "The No S Diet" first, I might have been tempted myself!

Cassie, I have to agree with you wholeheartedly about Atkins "Induction Phase". I think I might have written about my experience in another post, but two weeks is all I can stand of it. The last time I tried it (for two weeks)..at the end of the week I had gotten a terrible stomach virus and looking at meat made me want to upchuck! I won't go into the gorey details if the virus, but suffice it to say, a little soup and a few bites of a sandwich were all I could stomach...I had lost 10 pounds in the two weeks on induction and gained 5 of those pounds back in only 2 days during the time I was sick. I decided then and there, that was it on Atkins for me! I wouldn't recommend it to anyone who wants to keep the weight off! Even if I hadn't got sick, I was ready to give it up again anyway..lol

I love the No S Diet..It is exactly the way I ate growing up and I am loving it!

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Mon Mar 01, 2010 3:30 pm

I was just thinking about this thread and one of the things I most like about No-S is that I can eat however and whatever I want. Shoot, if I wanted to do raw, I could do it on No-S.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

Gia
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:15 pm

Post by Gia » Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:33 am

Same as wosnes! I feel that this diet is so incredible because it allows you to follow it in any given situation. I just spent a weekend visiting family and in work meetings. i was still able to stick to the diet. Everyone eats lunch and dinner! And breakfast is in your hands to be sure you get. I also love how flexible the diet is in terms of getting you to focus on the big picture. I had a smoothie and half a bagel for breakfast, but didn't have to sit and beat myself up about my smoothie being "sweet" because it had a banana and my bagel being "sweet" because it had some honey on it. I just focus on the big things - snacks, REAL sweets and seconds and the rest takes care of itself.

I love the quote that goes, "if a glass of orange juice for breakfast or sugar in your tea are you biggest problems, then you don't really have a problem". Other diets teach you "good and bad food" but this diet teaches you to focus on the big picture - desserts, snacks, seconds. It works!

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Wed Mar 03, 2010 2:37 pm

Gia wrote:Same as wosnes! I feel that this diet is so incredible because it allows you to follow it in any given situation. I just spent a weekend visiting family and in work meetings. i was still able to stick to the diet. Everyone eats lunch and dinner! And breakfast is in your hands to be sure you get. I also love how flexible the diet is in terms of getting you to focus on the big picture. I had a smoothie and half a bagel for breakfast, but didn't have to sit and beat myself up about my smoothie being "sweet" because it had a banana and my bagel being "sweet" because it had some honey on it. I just focus on the big things - snacks, REAL sweets and seconds and the rest takes care of itself.

I love the quote that goes, "if a glass of orange juice for breakfast or sugar in your tea are you biggest problems, then you don't really have a problem". Other diets teach you "good and bad food" but this diet teaches you to focus on the big picture - desserts, snacks, seconds. It works!
I think this is the best thing about doing No S; it actually works in the real world. So many other diets force you to eat bizarre foods, or restrict quantities in weird ways. I go out to eat a lot with my friends, and on other diets it was always a headache. Imagine trying to eat low-carb, for example for the rest of your life. "I'll just have a plain chicken breast and some cheese" doesn't really work when you go to an Italian place. Likewise, who is REALLY going to order "one pound of cooked vegetables" when everyone else is having fried chicken? Inevitably, I would go off the diet, beat myself up about it, and then gorge on candy for a week because I had "cheated."

Not so on this plan. I go out to eat, have one plate of whatever I want, and that's the end of it. No guilt, no weird foods, no problem.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Mar 03, 2010 10:37 pm

I don't mean to criticize the field of therapy regarding eating disorders, specifically compulsive eaters, especially since I think I learned a lot about the difference between true hunger and just the desire to eat, but in the end, I think I got diverted for a long time believing that I had to somehow solve the problems I was getting distaught over before I could stop eating for emotional reasons. Or I thought I had to find something else as comforting to do to "take care of myself."

I participate on some boards on a diet site and I sometimes feel sorry for people who post, lamenting having eaten some brownies and coming up with all kinds of explanations for why they were upset and driven to eat. Or they'll eat way too much at a meal, and beat themselves up that they judged so poorly how much to eat. I've played that game; maybe it's part of the reason why I've been able to stick to No S, but really, it all seems so irrelevant now. It doesn't matter why I'm upset, if I am, or what is driving me to eat. I just don't eat until it's meal time. And if for some reason I have to delay a meal for an extra hour or two, it has nothing to do with whether I eat more or not. I don't. I don't seem to have any more or fewer problems, but I spend a lot less time stressing over whether to eat or not to eat. I also spend less time walking around in drugstores, markets, and other stores trying to talk myself out of chocolate bars, carmel popcorn, ice cream, and the like. I'm in that phase where it can be hard to understand all the dickering. When I hear others in a quandary, I'll think, just wait for lunch, or just eat what's on your plate, much like thin people say to those bemoaning their weight, "Just eat less." But you have to be ready to hear.
Last edited by oolala53 on Thu Mar 04, 2010 1:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:38 am

RJLupin wrote:
Gia wrote:Same as wosnes! I feel that this diet is so incredible because it allows you to follow it in any given situation. I just spent a weekend visiting family and in work meetings. i was still able to stick to the diet. Everyone eats lunch and dinner! And breakfast is in your hands to be sure you get. I also love how flexible the diet is in terms of getting you to focus on the big picture. I had a smoothie and half a bagel for breakfast, but didn't have to sit and beat myself up about my smoothie being "sweet" because it had a banana and my bagel being "sweet" because it had some honey on it. I just focus on the big things - snacks, REAL sweets and seconds and the rest takes care of itself.

I love the quote that goes, "if a glass of orange juice for breakfast or sugar in your tea are you biggest problems, then you don't really have a problem". Other diets teach you "good and bad food" but this diet teaches you to focus on the big picture - desserts, snacks, seconds. It works!
I think this is the best thing about doing No S; it actually works in the real world. So many other diets force you to eat bizarre foods, or restrict quantities in weird ways. I go out to eat a lot with my friends, and on other diets it was always a headache. Imagine trying to eat low-carb, for example for the rest of your life. "I'll just have a plain chicken breast and some cheese" doesn't really work when you go to an Italian place. Likewise, who is REALLY going to order "one pound of cooked vegetables" when everyone else is having fried chicken? Inevitably, I would go off the diet, beat myself up about it, and then gorge on candy for a week because I had "cheated."

Not so on this plan. I go out to eat, have one plate of whatever I want, and that's the end of it. No guilt, no weird foods, no problem.
I've just posted this somewhere else (maybe another post here? I don't remember), but it fits with what you wrote:

In Eating Well for Optimum Health Andrew Weil said that the Optimum Diet must:

1. Meet all needs for macronutrients and micronutrients.
2. Support health throughout life.
3. Provide the pleasure you expect from eating.
4. Promote social interaction and reinforce your personal and cultural identity.

In other words, in addition to providing the nutrients you need, it's got to work in your life. That is where many other diets fail. You may be able to adapt and make them work in the short term, albeit with some difficulty, but they won't work "for life." A few people can make them work for life, but not many.
Last edited by wosnes on Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

TunaFishKid
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Post by TunaFishKid » Fri Mar 05, 2010 2:15 pm

Gia wrote: I love the quote that goes, "if a glass of orange juice for breakfast or sugar in your tea are you biggest problems, then you don't really have a problem".
That was actually sort of the turning point in my switching to No S from years of lowcarbing on and off (more off than on, of course!). I was agonizing over not being able to have a glass of OJ at breakfast (and for me that means one of those little 4 oz. juice glasses) and a sugar cube in my tea. And then I realized that those little things were NOT why I got fat, it was more like the coffee cake at 10am, the chocolate bar at 3pm, and the second and third helpings of anything at dinnertime!

I'm afraid No S isn't more popular simply because it's not exciting enough. That Five Bite Diet guy promises you'll lose something like thirty pounds in just three or four weeks :shock: by eating Snickers bars, while Reinhard says "eat like your mother told you and in a year or so you'll be slimmer than you are now."
~ Laura ~

Starla
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 4:55 pm

Post by Starla » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:01 pm

oolala53 wrote: It doesn't matter why I'm upset, if I am, or what is driving me to eat. I just don't eat until it's meal time. And if for some reason I have to delay a meal for an extra hour or two, it has nothing to do with whether I eat more or not. I don't. I don't seem to have any more or fewer problems, but I spend a lot less time stressing over whether to eat or not to eat. I also spend less time walking around in drugstores, markets, and other stores trying to talk myself out of chocolate bars, carmel popcorn, ice cream, and the like. I'm in that phase where it can be hard to understand all the dickering. When I hear others in a quandary, I'll think, just wait for lunch, or just eat what's on your plate, much like thin people say to those bemoaning their weight, "Just eat less." But you have to be ready to hear.
Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes to every single word. Although I DO think I may be better at dealing with problems, since, you know, I actually think about them instead of stuffing my face.

As for the original topic of this thread, No S is sooo much better than.....Dexatrim and starvation, which is how I previously got down to my lowest weight of 119 pounds. I wanted to be 115 pounds, so I decided to fast for a weekend (this after weeks of eating around 500 calories a day). I started Friday, and on Sunday morning I woke up feeling "funny." I lay in bed and watched my chest shake with every heartbeat, and I knew I was in trouble. I lived across the street from a little store, and I made it there, bought some donuts, and ate them. That was probably the first step towards gaining over 100 pounds. When I hear someone say that fat people have no will power I always think "You have no idea what you're talking about." I had enough willpower to almost kill myself; what I was missing was the sense God gave an insect.

Now with No S, the sense/willpower ratio is reversed, and I'm eating in a healthy, satisfying way that I can continue for the rest of my life. And at this point it takes very little willpower.

TunaFishKid
Posts: 250
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 10:20 pm
Location: Long Island, NY

Post by TunaFishKid » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:15 pm

Starla wrote:When I hear someone say that fat people have no will power I always think "You have no idea what you're talking about." I had enough willpower to almost kill myself; what I was missing was the sense God gave an insect.

Now with No S, the sense/willpower ratio is reversed, and I'm eating in a healthy, satisfying way that I can continue for the rest of my life. And at this point it takes very little willpower.
You're exactly right! That's brilliant.
~ Laura ~

Aquapixie
Posts: 55
Joined: Tue Jan 19, 2010 2:14 pm

Post by Aquapixie » Fri Mar 05, 2010 5:02 pm

You're so right Starla!! Well put.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Mar 06, 2010 1:57 am

I don't know how you guys do that highlight thing. All the formatting buttons dont work for me.

"I'm afraid No S isn't more popular simply because it's not exciting enough. That Five Bite Diet guy promises you'll lose something like thirty pounds in just three or four weeks by eating Snickers bars, while Reinhard says 'eat like your mother told you and in a year or so you'll be slimmer than you are now.'"

Yes, isn't it sad? People are in a rush to get to a weight, thinking they will stay at that weight. It's just not how the body usually works. I finally accepted it this year and I think that's one of the reasons I've been able to stick to it. I know I'm kind of in a holding pattern size-wise right now, and a few thoughts of wavering have occurred to me, but I remember that one of my naturally slim friends who had put on some weight lost 20 lbs. over the course of a year by cutting out fast food. That was her worst transgression. No S attacks most people's worst transgressions. So, by next New Year's...
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Wed Mar 10, 2010 1:00 am

Another diet/anti-binge evil is sugar. I'm on a board on which some members often say, "I can't eat sugar/chocolate/gummi bears/you-name-it without eating the whole bag." I used to say that and think it. Now I know it's not a matter of "can't." Most of them are trying to eat 5-6 meals a day and are often "going over" their calories because they can't adhere to the narrow food choices if you're going to eat so often. They're also saying eating often keeps them from bingeing. It didn't me. I'm very sure that having more space between my meals has contributed to my not bingeing. Somehow it seems getting hungry also contributes to greater appreciation of satiety without getting stuffed.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

Cassie
Posts: 213
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2009 4:17 pm
Location: London

Post by Cassie » Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:56 am

Eating often also doesn't work for me, Oolala. In fact, it increased my appetite hugely. My problem has always been excessive snacking & I really do think that of all the NoS rules the 'no snacking' one is the most important..
Restarting NoS (after going back & forth over the last 4 years) in November 2013.

GOAL: to lose 10 kilos.
HAVE ACHIEVED SO FAR: 1.6 kilo

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:05 pm

I think eating too frequently does increase the appetite, and only reinforces the habit of constantly snacking. I, too, used to think that if I had one sugary treat, I couldn't stop eating them. Not so anymore. Now that I have stopped snacking, and only have the occasional treat on the weekend, I no longer have the desire to gorge on sweets.

Gia
Posts: 41
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 11:15 pm

Post by Gia » Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:16 am

Just had a breakthrough related to this topic. I was looking for a product on Amazon UK and yet ANOTHER diet book popped up. My old self surfaced and kind of spiked up in interest... ooo.... wow! Another way to lose weight! But then as I started reviewing the sample pages I realized it was the same old talk ever.

I think other diet books and programs fall into these categories:

1) RADICALS - books and diets that advocate for crazy completely unsustainable changes in order to loose large amounts of weight. 5 bite diet, 500 calories per day diet, cabbage soup diet etc.

2) MIDRANGE - these tend to have some notion of healthier eating and exercise, but fall into the trap of providing forbidden foods, prescribing calorie counts, eliminating carbs/fats or something else that makes then very hard to follow for a lifetime.

3) GENERAL PRINCIPLE - these types of plans are so broad and general that they don't help much. They swing to the opposite end of the spectrum with epitaphs like: "Eat when you're hungry, stop when you're full" "Learn to trust your body's hunger, not your mind". Sometimes they can be scientific too "You're fat because your calories are in excess, and this is how glucose is metabolized..."

While the last group is probably the least harmful, it is also the least practical because it doesn't offer any concrete plan that you can work from. 3 meals a day is a clear and concise rule that requires minimal thinking and quickly becomes a routine. No S is soooo much better! :)

RJLupin
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2010 5:19 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by RJLupin » Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:21 am

Gia wrote:Just had a breakthrough related to this topic. I was looking for a product on Amazon UK and yet ANOTHER diet book popped up. My old self surfaced and kind of spiked up in interest... ooo.... wow! Another way to lose weight! But then as I started reviewing the sample pages I realized it was the same old talk ever.

I think other diet books and programs fall into these categories:

1) RADICALS - books and diets that advocate for crazy completely unsustainable changes in order to loose large amounts of weight. 5 bite diet, 500 calories per day diet, cabbage soup diet etc.

2) MIDRANGE - these tend to have some notion of healthier eating and exercise, but fall into the trap of providing forbidden foods, prescribing calorie counts, eliminating carbs/fats or something else that makes then very hard to follow for a lifetime.

3) GENERAL PRINCIPLE - these types of plans are so broad and general that they don't help much. They swing to the opposite end of the spectrum with epitaphs like: "Eat when you're hungry, stop when you're full" "Learn to trust your body's hunger, not your mind". Sometimes they can be scientific too "You're fat because your calories are in excess, and this is how glucose is metabolized..."

While the last group is probably the least harmful, it is also the least practical because it doesn't offer any concrete plan that you can work from. 3 meals a day is a clear and concise rule that requires minimal thinking and quickly becomes a routine. No S is soooo much better! :)
I honestly think No S is the only thing I have ever tried (and I have tried them all) that is realistic and that I can stick with. I've done those Number Ones ("no carbs! eat nothing but carbs! I did Medifast, and had another diet that demanded I eat two pounds of raw veggies a day.) I've done the Number Twos (counting calories gets old after a week, and counting carbs is even worse....I can't stand low carb.) I tried Number 3 and got even fatter (if I ate when I felt like it, or until I felt "full" I might never stop.)

With No S, there is nothing to memorize. Nothing to count. No special foods, no magic potions, no diet meals.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Mar 13, 2010 8:43 pm

I know another one I feel a bit resentful of. The whole Jorge Cruise series. Eating every three hours, etc. Of course, he has his success stories, as do most. But when you look at his program, it's basically just low calories. But it's every day of the week. And the shlock about having a mini-bag of M & M's being enough. Watch out for those after 6 months of eating 1400 calories a day! I see those people back on Sparkpeople all the time. Wishing they could "get back into it."

I guess the other thing is that he's always promoting health, but his pretty picture is strewn throughout the one book of his I bought. Which I gave away. So he talks health but it's appearance that sells. Oh, I'm not saying he hasn't done some people some good. I just don't like the semi-sensationalism of it.

Funny thing is, I did a count and found that I do eat about 1400-1500 calories on N days, but only because those are the meals I like, and because I know I'll be a little decadent on the weekend. I'm not holding back during the week-I just purposely try to eat a little denser in smaller amounts on S days just to mix it up. If after 6 or 12 months, that seems silly, I'll change. But it will come from within.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Mar 19, 2010 12:09 pm

I like to read supportive lit while I'm adopting new habits so I was looking for something as a companion to No S. The Denim Diet came highly recommended as a non-calorie-counting traditional plan. Yeah, there was no 2-week plan of meals presented, but it was mostly about eating from a list of approved foods. I couldn't believe the reviews had made it sound so new. Hmmmph.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

wosnes
Posts: 4168
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:38 pm
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA

Post by wosnes » Fri Mar 19, 2010 3:22 pm

TunaFishKid wrote:
That was actually sort of the turning point in my switching to No S from years of lowcarbing on and off (more off than on, of course!). I was agonizing over not being able to have a glass of OJ at breakfast (and for me that means one of those little 4 oz. juice glasses) and a sugar cube in my tea. And then I realized that those little things were NOT why I got fat, it was more like the coffee cake at 10am, the chocolate bar at 3pm, and the second and third helpings of anything at dinnertime!
Recently I read that it's not the occasional feast or over-indulgence that causes us to gain weight, it's the daily consumption of just a little more than we need.

It made me think of budget: we're supposed to spend less than we earn. Maybe diet-wise the idea should be to eat a little less than we need.

Jorge Cruise has come out with yet another diet plan. It's aimed at reducing belly fat by reducing sugar. But it's ALL sugars -- including those in fruits and vegetables. I'm sure it works, but it's nonsense.
"That which we persist in doing becomes easier for us to do. Not that the nature of the thing itself has changed but our power to do it is increased." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson

"You are what you eat -- so don't be Fast, Easy, Cheap or Fake."

finallyfull
Posts: 354
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 6:10 pm

Post by finallyfull » Fri Mar 19, 2010 4:13 pm

Oolala53 said

"Somehow it seems getting hungry also contributes to greater appreciation of satiety without getting stuffed." --

I think this is more important than at first glance. I definitely have a feeling of satisfaction that I never had (or never noticed) before because I was such a stranger to hunger. I love the feeling I have of being full but not stuffed, and it is such a good feeling that it's helping me stick to this new habit of no snacks. I honestly don't think I really felt "satiety" before. I was either concentrating on holding myself back from having more, or having more. Now I just think "boy, that was good, I really feel good." But the good feeling is COMPARED to feeling hungry before the meal. No yin, no yang. Now I have balance and peace. And jeans that fit.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

chocolate milk diet

Post by oolala53 » Mon May 17, 2010 11:22 pm

Sounds like the chocolate milk diet on the previous thread belongs here.

Chocolate milk before and after a work out? There goes the calorie burn, at least of my workouts.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

Too solid flesh
Posts: 639
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Post by Too solid flesh » Thu Sep 09, 2010 5:11 pm

There are some good fictitious diets in the poem The crunch in Simon Armitage's new collection, Seeing stars
I tried the Nine Plums a Day Diet, the
Pine Needle Diet, then the Eat Your Way to
Health and Happiness with Pencil Shavings
and Talc Plan, then ate nothing but road salt
and hen feathers for more than a month...
Be kind, for everybody you meet is fighting a hard battle.

User avatar
DaveMc
Posts: 390
Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 12:28 pm

Post by DaveMc » Thu Sep 09, 2010 9:19 pm

wosnes wrote:Recently I read that it's not the occasional feast or over-indulgence that causes us to gain weight, it's the daily consumption of just a little more than we need.
That makes a lot of sense. It reminds me of one of my favourite stats: based on the conversion rate of 3500 calories to 1 pound of fat (it's probably a bit more complicated than that, but it's not completely without basis), people like to point out that eating 100 extra calories a day will make you gain ten pounds a year. It's scary because of how puny the amount involved is: that's a *banana*, for heaven's sake!

What I prefer to point out, though, is that the very same logic says that if you average 100 calories *less* every day, you'll *lose* ten pounds in a year. Same fact, but now it's hopeful for the same reason it used to be scary, because of the tiny amounts involved: eat one less banana a day, lose ten pounds a year! (Or do 100 calories worth of exercise: harder, but not impossible.)

(I don't actually count calories, myself, but they are interesting to think about sometimes.)

Sorry, what were we talking about? :)

User avatar
machelle
Posts: 27
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 10:52 pm

Post by machelle » Thu Sep 09, 2010 11:56 pm

This is such a great thread. I have tried Atkins, Weight Watchers, counting calories, and just basically starvation. How is No S different for me than other diets I have tried? Well, since I concentrate more on eating three meals rather than calorie counting, point counting, or foods I should or shouldn't eat, I feel less hungry than I ever have. I am already dropping weight. My approach to food is a much *much* more healthy mindset. I am satisfied with a whole lot less food. No abject hunger or feelings of deprivation. Cravings for certain things are nonexistent. No S RULES!!
8/31/10 Start.
Starting weight: 134.5
Current weight: 132.5
~~ Goal: 115 ~~

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Fri Sep 10, 2010 12:02 am

We were talking about No S is so much smarter than...

So your point is connected, DaveMc, if you think about cutting out the banana (if it's a snack), or the extra 1/2 cup of potatoes, (if it's seconds), rather than 100 calories. I think a lot of us find that we are able to do without several of those things a day, after we've been at it awhile, even though we didn't start out planning to cut several hundred calories a day. So for many of us, this is smarter than that.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

User avatar
Lorelei
Posts: 29
Joined: Fri Jun 11, 2010 12:36 am
Location: Connecticut

Post by Lorelei » Sat Sep 11, 2010 3:14 pm

My mom and I (also a No S-er) were just talking about this. She has a friend who has been a longtime Weight Watchers member. She's lost, she's regained, and lost again - countless times. I lost 50 pounds on WW myself, and managed to maintain (by agonizingly counting points and calories and sucking all the enjoyment out of cooking and eating). I accidentally happened upon No S this spring, and for the first time in 6 1/2 years, I am maintaining my weight and enjoying food, cooking, and dining out again. Anyhow, this friend constantly asks my mom how I am doing (since I lost the weight on WW and she is all about the program). My mom told her about No S, and how much we are both liking it. Her reply: "Well I don't know how long that sort of thing could last." Really??? I'll tell you what - I can see myself following No S for the rest of my life. It fits in with the natural rhythms of work, family time, and holidays. It allows me to try any kind of food I want (especially when traveling). It allows me to experiment with cooking, and not freak out if I make a substitution or add an additional ingredient. It allows me to eat out with friends and not let a "spur of the moment" lunch invitation "mess up" my calorie or point budget. These are all things I could NOT do on WW. No S is incredibly liberating and I love it! I must sign off now. Time for "S Day Dim Sum" with my hubby.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Sat Sep 11, 2010 9:03 pm

I wonder how long your mom's friend thinks counting calories has lasted in history? I think that partly comes also from the mentality that you have to keep snacking so that you won't get so hungry that you pig out or have your metabolism drop, both just beliefs that don't end up being accurate. One is within our control and one is just not true, or the effects of it are negligible. If you're going to snack, you do have to be a lot more vigilant about what you eat, since it 's so much more likely that you WILL eat more than you need for the day.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

ruby
Posts: 12
Joined: Sat Dec 19, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: onatrio canada

emotional eating

Post by ruby » Tue Sep 14, 2010 2:25 am

I have found the no s diet got rid of my emotional eating. I was surprised how fast it happened. No snacks allowed and that was it. I now feel cheated on S days if I do snack and I am not hungry for my next meal. I have recently found using a smaller plate helps me from overdoing the portions.

oolala53
Posts: 9789
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:46 am
Location: San Diego, CA USA

Post by oolala53 » Tue Oct 18, 2011 10:42 pm

Okay, this is more than a year later and I am still the one keeping this going, but hey, I'm still having a few problems, though I only gained back 3 of the 22 pounds I had lost and maintained. I bamboozled myself into reading a book called Let's Do Lunch, written by a guy who LOST 230 lbs. coming up with what I would call a cockamamie program that he stumbled on by basically shifting to unprocessed foods and a load of other, less wise, limitations, IMHO. In my defense, I looked at it mostly because he didn't advocate calorie counting or measuring, and eating lots of regular food.

He has the craziest beliefs, some of which are backed by science and others that are pure wives' tales, sorry for the gender discrimination. The cover claims that you can eat all the carbs you want, etc. and of course the truth is so much different. Basically, you give up desserts, flour products, and most processed sugar foods, dairy... the list goes on. Wasn't that what a lot of diets told you to do in the first place? Plus, he has you eating ONLY fruit for breakfast and dinner, with one big meal in the middle of the day. Interesting, huh? Three meals a day eventually. He says not to eat much in the morning so you get good and hungry for lunch. What a concept! Though he says at first you can eat all day long if you're hungry and that sticking to unprocessed foods will keep decreasing your appetite. Who knows.

Or you can exchange and eat your big meal at night. No chocolate, no coffee, basically no anything that he doesn't have a yen for. He really believes that eating a lot of fruit and a few other starches are the reason he doesn't want sweets-- not that he just powered through and gave them up, and the craving went away because he quit eating them and ate enough food to make dense foods less desirable.

Now he's shocked after several years to find that he can eat a serving of potatoes at lunch sometimes instead of peas, beans, and corn, which he was convinced are what caused him to lose his cravings, and not gain weight. (Not to mention that two of those are fiber-rich, low glycemic foods. ) Wow, you mean limiting yourself to the plain version of foods and to only one meal a day means you'll be thin? Surprise! I'm flabbergasted that he has more reviews on Amazon than Reinhard. And people did it! I guess it was that promise that they could eat however much they wanted all day. Or maybe a lot of people really can't be trusted with too much variety. Then again, I'm not svelte yet, either!

I'm finding that I am so darned grateful that I don't believe I have to be so restricted that it has gotten me back into green days. Hurray for my flour tortilla at lunch! For milky coffee when I want! For melted cheese on my veggies last nightI Yes, I can do this.
Count plates, not calories. 10 years "during"
Age 67
SBMI Jan/10-30.8
1/12-26.8
3/13-24.9 +/- 8-lb. 3 yrs
9/17 22.8 (but more fluctuation)
3/18 22.2
2 yrs flux
6/21 22

There is no S better than Vanilla No S.

SpiritSong
Posts: 506
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 1:56 pm

Post by SpiritSong » Wed Oct 19, 2011 11:17 pm

clarinetgal wrote:Oolala, The book is Eat Smart, Walk Strong by Leslie Sansone. It's very good!
I enjoyed this old thread today, and as I shopped the used book sale at BetterWorldBooks.com, I picked up this Leslie Sansone book (plus the other one she wrote about walking away the pounds).

3-0-7 girl
Posts: 122
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 5:44 pm
Location: USA

Post by 3-0-7 girl » Sat Oct 22, 2011 6:30 pm

I really like this thread too and would like to see more added to it.

Myself I think NO S is soooo much better than eat from a stomach growl only and quit when your full. As many of you know I've stated before that I beat my brains out for years trying to get that nailed down and never had more than a few days at a time of success.

With NO S I can make my 3 meals all pretty small, or big, or vegetarian or low carb or include all food groups or have fast food when I want to or have 10 bites a meal or anything I want it to be. This way as long as I stick to the 3 a day if I try 10 bites a meal for a few days and dedcide that sucks I can go to regular meals the next day and never look back. I won't be binge eating or gaining weight either. I will still be on my program!!

With NO S as long as I go with 3 meals, no snacks, no seconds, my little bit of dessert daily, there is nothing to *restart* or *get back on track* with if I eat low carb today and high carb tomorrow and vegan Monday LOLOLOL.

:D :D :D :D :D :D
3-0-7 girl

Behold, I set before you this day a blessing and a curse; A blessing, if ye obey the commandments of the LORD your God, which I command you this day: And a curse, if ye will not obey the commandments of the LORD your God… (Dt. 11:26-28.)

User avatar
~hf
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:28 pm
Location: Ca

Post by ~hf » Tue Oct 25, 2011 8:42 am

No S is waaaaaayyy smarter than any other diet I have ever tried...

*Super low fat diet of the 90's via Susan Powter
*McDougall diet, super low fat to fat free, low to no salt, vegan diet yuck!
*Atkins, worked great for about 2 weeks till I snapped and went carb crazy
*One Change by Readers Digest, this one actually wasn't that bad. Although based on calories it also uses general portion sizes, normal food and specific eating patterns (3 meals and 2 snacks) so I used the portion guide to plan my eating and ignored the calorie counting. I lost a lot of weight on this plan but I think that was due in part to the fact that I was nursing a new baby. I'd do that one again though if I needed to.
*Vegan, but not low fat this time. It just isn't for me.
*HCG, yes I did this one too. I lost 29 pounds in 47 days. It was the worst diet by far of all the diets I have tried. Even worse than the McDougall diet, which was really bad.
*4 Hour Body, I did this one for about a month and while it was ok and I started losing weight, it didn't fit in well with the family or eating away from home.
*Paleo/primal, while I like this woe a lot and saw major health and energy improvements while eating this way, I struggled because there was not an outlet or day off. By taking a cheat day on this one I could easily undo an entire week or 2 weeks of progress, from 1 day off! Then it would take a week to recover and begin to lose again...so by taking 1 day off each week to eat toast or bake cookies with the kids I made no progress.

In the middle of all these attempts I had a successful run with No S (2008 via the Woman's World article) where I lost weight and gained control over my eating habits. I was derailed and instead of just getting back on the wagon I got desperate and hopped from one fad to another looking for a quick fix, sigh. I'm so glad I'm back.

Heidi

User avatar
Over43
Posts: 1772
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 9:15 pm
Location: The Mountains

Post by Over43 » Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:12 am

Diets, like exercise, or an antibiotic, are only as effective as the person using it. (You have to use it.) Although, I do seem to always gravitate back to No S after trying something else for a few days. I guess that explains a bit about me. :lol:
April 4, 2016 197

Bacon is the gateway meat. - Anthony Bourdain
You pale in comparison to Fox Mulder. - The Smoking Man

I made myself be hungry, then I would get hungrier. - Frank Zane Mr. Olympia '77, '78, '79

User avatar
~hf
Posts: 144
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 6:28 pm
Location: Ca

Post by ~hf » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:52 pm

Over43 wrote:Diets, like exercise, or an antibiotic, are only as effective as the person using it. (You have to use it.) Although, I do seem to always gravitate back to No S after trying something else for a few days. I guess that explains a bit about me. :lol:
I agree 100%. Most diet plans will work, while you do them. It's the sticking to them that is often hard. I know that's my issue. ;-)

Heidi

ellgee
Posts: 80
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2010 3:38 pm
Location: Texas

Post by ellgee » Wed Oct 26, 2011 2:43 am

So true!!!! None of the diets I have ever been on and there have been MANY have stuck. I end up going on a wild deprivation binge and end up worse off than where I started. I call this my dieting ADD.
Laura

snapdragon
Posts: 701
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 5:43 pm
Location: midwest

Post by snapdragon » Thu Oct 27, 2011 1:38 pm

This is a good thread to motivate!!! I have not been true to no s this week but not doing badly either, time to get on track though.

About a year and a half ago I worked with a personal trainer a cute 22 year old. She was good as a trainer, and came up with good workouts and was motivating but she wanted me to record everything I ate and she would just pick it apart.
"plain cheerios in skim milk is not a good breakfast" honestly unless I ate plain chicken, salmon or unseasoned steamed veggies nothing was acceptable. I have done weight watchers and Atkins like most of us but having a 22 year old personal trainer criticize everything I ate was the worse!
She also insisted I ate every hour and a half like OHLALA's original post.
It was so stressful I just stopped bringing in my notebook.
Starting weight 185
Healthy BMI 139
Willingness without action is fantasy

Post Reply