Kathleen and BrightAngel's Discussion on Why We Get Fat

[BrightAngel]

This is a PERSONAL THREAD
designed for a Discussion Between KATHLEEN and BRIGHT ANGEL
about "Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It" by Gary Taubes.
NOTE:
Comments from other members who have also read the book
or who have read the 19 Chapter Summaries posted here,
are welcome,

HOWEVER, Please respect the fact that this is a Personal Thread, NOT a General Thread,
which has been created specifically for a Discussion between these two above-named people
who want that Discussion to stay on Topic.

NOTE: Anyone who has not read the book, or these Summaries, and wishes to comment,
or anyone who wishes to make a public post about this Discussion that is off-topic,
is encouraged to start a new Thread in the General Discussion Area,
as that will be a more appropriate place for such comments.

[BrightAngel]

I'm reading Taubes' new book,
and one thing that it talks about is that you need to look at what you eat as causing overweight.
Well, fasting makes you not want to eat heavy foods.

Congratulations Kathleen on having a Successful Intermittent Fasting Day.

I'm so glad you received your copy of Gary Taubes' new book,
Why We Get Fat and What To Do About it.
What you think of the way he is handling the Concepts?

HI BrightAngel,
I have read the first three chapters, and so far I agree with his views that the current approaches don't work. I just finished the chapter on exercise, and it reminded me of the two week period when I went to the gym twice a day, let go of any calorie restriction, and gained 5 pounds! I probably won't be on the discussion board much until the end of January, but I will want to discuss the book with you then. Thanks for recommending it!
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

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?

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

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?

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.

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.

[Kathleen]

That's great! I think it would be good to invite other comments on the book as well. I'll be very busy the next few weeks until my job ends, but I hope to start the discussion within a few days. Thanks!
Kathleen

[connorcream]

I think it would be good to invite other comments on the book as well.

I would like to participate but not intrude. If that means only reading, that is fine. If that means posting, fine too. Let me know the boundaries so I can respect them.

My perspective is not only maintanence (and weight loss) but other health factors as well.

[BrightAngel]

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.

I would like to participate but not intrude.

Comments that follow the Guidelines set forth above are welcome.

[Kathleen]

Chapter 1: The Original Sin

"Over the years, this calories-in/calories-out paradigm of excess fat has proved to be remarkably resistant to any evidence to the contrary." (p.7)

"I' going to argue that this calories-in/calories-out paradigm of adiposity is nonsensical: that we don't get fat because we eat too much and move too little, and that we can't solve the problem or prevent it by consciously doing the opposite. This is the original sin, so to speak, and we're never going to solve our own weight problems... until we understand and correct it." (p. .

I disagree with the author here. I believe it is a matter of calories in and calories out but that direct control over calories leads to failure for most and miserable success for a few.

"Why are we fat?" page 12.

That is the question: Why are we fat? Why, since I was a child, has the rate of obesity exploded?

Here is my personal bias: I believe that direct control, what I call "portion control", has caused the explosion in the obesity rate.

Personally, BrightAngel, I'd love to have comments from others -- the more, the better. It does seem to me to be an important book, a book worth dissecting, perhaps chapter by chapter.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Personally, BrightAngel, I'd love to have comments from others -- the more, the better.
It does seem to me to be an important book, a book worth dissecting, perhaps chapter by chapter.

I think that discussing it chapter by chapter is a good idea,
and later today I will post a comment about chapter 1.

I think previous posts...which I have quoted below....
clearly show my position about comments from others in this Discussion Thread.

While Opinions are common for Everyone, Informed Opinions are not.
I welcome thoughtful, on-topic comments by people who have read the book.
But I'm not willing to waste my time here explaning the book's concepts to the uninformed,
or arguing the book's concepts with them.

Certainly each of us continues to be free to exchange additional comments
and opinions on this subject in other Threads,
but I remain adament in my position.

My participation here is conditional on our discussion remaining focused and informed.
If you are not interested in accepting that condition,
this Thread should be deleted.
We can then involve outselves in discussions
that have formats which are mutually agreeable to us.

Please read the following quotes.

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 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.

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 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.

[BrightAngel]

Pre-Chapter 1 - Author's Notes

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Something else of that is of interest within the book's Author's Notes
was recently discussed inside the General Thread.

However, a low carb regime for the whole world seems to pose a problem:
is a world-wide low carb diet possible with the current level of world population?

I think Taubes' comment within his Author's Notes to
Why We Get Fat and What To Do About It is on point here.
Taubes says

In the more than six decades since the end of the Second World War,
when this question of
what causes us to fatten---calories or carbohyrdates--has been argued,
it has often seemed like a religious issue rather than a scientific one.
So many different belief systems enter into the question of what constitutes a healthy diet
that the scientific question--why do we get fat?--has gotten lost along the way.

It's been overshadowed by ethical, moral, and socological considerations
that are valid in themselves and certainly worth discussing
but have nothing to do with the science itself
and arguably no place in a scientific inquiry.

[BrightAngel]

More on Author's Note

Good Calories Bad Calories was a lengthy book.
Dense with science, historical content and annotations.
Why We Get Fat and What to Do About It is shorter,
a book that doesn't require such an investment of time and effort.

Taubes says:

"I offer here the arguments
against the conventional wisdom
distilled down to their essence."

[BrightAngel]

Introduction - The Original Sin

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 1 - Why Were They Fat?

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
I really related to the story of malnourished children and overweight mothers. Still, you are an example of someone who has managed a lower weight through calorie restriction. The problem is that it makes you miserable, as you yourself admit. What makes me curious is why we would want to overeat and how we can get to the point that we don't want to overeat. It was nice that, last night, I didn't want to finish off that candy bar.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

I really related to the story of malnourished children and overweight mothers.
What makes me curious is why we would want to overeat
and how we can get to the point that we don't want to overeat.

Chapter 1 is filled with examples of times and places
where a large percentage of the population were Obese,
even though they were very poor and had no access to our present “Toxic Environment.â€

A great many of those Obese people were physically very active doing hard manual labor.
It was noted that there were instances in those populations, like in Brazil,
where while the majority of poor children were thin and malnourished,
as poor adults…and still malnourished…they became obese.

Taubes asks about the people he used as Examples….
â€Why were they fat?â€
They were physically very active,
and there was little food available to them.

The facts in those cases show that a simple explanation of….
“calories-in/calories-outâ€â€¦.doesn’t answer this question about those people.

Taubes noted that all of these Obese populations had something in common,
in that the majority of their nutrition came from carbohydrates.

You recently posted that your current opinion
is that the obesity epidemic was caused by "Portion Control".
The need for conscious "Portion Control" is based on the calories-in/calories-out Theory.
As you've read, Taubes refers to the
"flawed belief" in "calories-in/calories-out" as "the Original Sin".

However, “Portion Control†doesn’t appear to be the cause of obesity in these cases either.
There didn’t appear to be any such Rules within those populations,
other than the basic fact of dividing limited food between a number of people.

Here, you raise the ultimate questions,
“Why do we want to overeat?†and “How can we stop wanting to overeat?â€
Taubes has some theories about those questions,
which I hope we will discuss as we go through the book.
My life would certainly be easier if I didn’t want to overeat.
That desire is what attracts one toward the principles of Intuitive Eating…
with the premise of…."follow these Specific Behaviors and you won’t want to overeat",
Unfortunately, Intuitive Eating is merely “wishful thinkingâ€
for just about everyone, because those principles simply don’t work.
Later in the book, Taubes touches why this is so,
and I look forward to reaching that point in our discussion.

You are an example of someone who has managed a lower weight through calorie restriction.
The problem is that it makes you miserable, as you yourself admit.

I wouldn’t personally call myself “miserableâ€"
…which is defined as being in a pitiable state of distress or unhappiness.
I have made the deliberate choice….and continue to make it day-by-day, and hour-by-hour….
to limit my eating in order to reach and maintain a “normal" weight.
I choose to trade one personal satisfaction for another, and I accept the realities involved with that.
For me, it is the simple reality of cost vs. benefit,
and I am willing to “pay the price of limiting my food†for the “benefit of being smallâ€.
This personal willingness does not mean that I don’t find “paying the price†difficult.
Of course I’d like to get the SAME benefit for a lesser “priceâ€.

I would very much like to find a way to remain small,
AND avoid the hunger and craving for sweets and starches that I frequently endure.
Part of my DietHobby, is to investigate the existence of such a possibility.

This is why I’ve experimented with many different ways-of-eating,
including various types of Intermittent Fasting,…(even Intuitive Eating)…
and why I’ve very recently begun my own Low-Carb Experiment-of-One.
Will it work to give ME the same or better Benefits for less Cost?
I don’t know.

Taubes’ theories have convinced me to give it a try.
Would it be right for you?
I don’t know.
Would it be right for others?
I don’t know.
I'm working to keep an open-mind.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,

The price I paid for limiting my caloric consumption was too high a price to pay. It wasn't the day to day craving and misery. It was more feeling like I was always on the edge of a cliff, always just the puff of a feather away from being completely out of control. It completely dominated my life.

That's why I ruled out caloric restriction as a method of weight maintenance and then went exploring all sorts of theories, as I gained weight year after year. My version of The No S Diet actually resulted in a 20 pound weight loss, and that was a very good change from a 10 pound a year weight gain.

I still think about my weight several times per day but it is no where near the amount of time I used to spend. I'm also hopeful that, after several failed attempts at intermittent fasting, I will have my second success this Friday.

I admire you for doing what so few people manage to do, which is to make the conscious choice to restrict calories year after year.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

The Following Quote is Copied from 1/12/11 Kathleen's personal Thread.

BrightAngel,
I think Taubes does a good job of explaining why
severe restriction of carbs (which can be accomplished with fasting)
does not result in severe hunger.
I would almost describe fasting as restful.
Kathleen

Kathleen, are you referring to something in the Author's Notes, the Introduction, or Chapter 1?
Or, is this an opinion based on some other section or sections of the book?
Either is fine, and
I am interested to know more about how you think Taubes does that.

Do you want to add something more to our discussion of the sections up through Chapter 1,
or are you ready to move on to Chapter 2?
We can, also, always refer back to these sections
if we later think of additional comments we want to make about them.

NOTE to Other Forum Members:
Kathleen and I would now be interested in hearing comments from
any member who has read Taubes and therefore become familiar with his specific Concepts
which are contained in Author's Note, Introduction or Chapter 1 of "Why We Get Fat"
I think this discussion will be easier to follow, if each of you tries to limit your comments
to the concepts within the above-named sections that we are currently discussing.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
I'm just saying that fasting is one way to have a severe restriction of carbohydrates.
Kathleen

End of chapter 2:
"How is it possible to semi-starve ourselves for more than a short time?"

To me, that is an interesting question. Taubes seems to indicate that you should eat as much as you want while restricting carbs. I like the idea of intermittent fasting.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

End of chapter 2:
"How is it possible to semi-starve ourselves for more than a short time?"

To me, that is an interesting question.

Taubes seems to indicate that you should eat as much as you want while restricting carbs.

My personal answer to Taube's above-quoted question,
is that it is very hard to do...
.....but it IS possible by putting forth
continuous conscious Effort to keep your body from getting you to overeat.

However, just like with most pharmaceuticals, this has side effects,
and the MAJOR side effects are frequent hunger and almost continual cravings.
I've learned, for myself, that long-term weight-loss maintenance
requires learning to tolerate and live with these physical feelings.

An additional problem is that in my past 5 years of weight-loss maintenance
my body appears to keep adapting to use less and less calories,
I now maintain on 200 calories less than I ate while I was losing weight.
Even though I've been at the same weight for 5 years,
my physical hunger and cravings have not diminished.

This, of course, is one thing that motivates me to strongly consider Taubes' concepts.

I agree that, thus far, Taubes appears to indicate that with carb restriction,
one can eat as much of the remaining foods as one wants.
If this were the case,
one would only need to use portion control with the allowable carbs.

I'm just saying that fasting is one way to have a severe restriction of carbohydrates.
I like the idea of intermittent fasting.

It is true that during periods of totally abstaining from all food,
and drinking non-caloric beverages only,
one elminates carbohydrates....along with the elimination of protein and fat.

Over the past 5 years, I've frequently used Intermittent Fasting as a tool
to help me keep my calorie averages down.
For me, the main problem with it has been a tendency to overeat...and sometimes binge....
on the normal eating days, usually this is on high-calorie sweets and starches.

This, of course creates a Binge/Fast pattern,
which also causes an alternation of severe carb restriction and extreme carb eating.

Sometimes Intermittent fasting provides me with physically pleasing feelings,
Other times it causes the extra physical discomfort...
of extreme hunger alternated with stomach aches from overeating.

I know that many Low-carb people frequently use the tool of Intermittent fasting,
and they report having good success with it, along with little physical discomfort.

If my current Low-carb Experiment is successful,
I will probably see how Intermittent fasting works with it.

[Kathleen]

Things went smoothly for me until tonight. I think I may persist. It seems that I'm getting better and better at this, but tonight did not go well.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Things went smoothly for me until tonight.
I think I may persist.
It seems that I'm getting better and better at this,
but tonight did not go well.

There's no perfection in life.
We all just do the best we can.

[Kathleen]

Still -- it's disappointing.

[BrightAngel]

End of chapter 2:
"How is it possible to semi-starve ourselves for more than a short time?"

In Chapter 2, Taubes uses the pre-1970s medical term
---“semi-starvation†when he refers to “undereating†or dieting.

Kathleen, you commonly use the term “portion controlâ€
when you refer to “undereating†or “dietingâ€,
and when you use that term, I believe
you are also referring to the concept of “semi-starvationâ€.
I've been thinking more about this question as applied to me personally.
I think there can be little doubt
that my current, maintenance, eating-lifestyle is one of "semi-starvation".

My body wants me to eat far more than it can use,
which, of course, would result in weight-gain.
Since previously in my lifetime, I've regained more than 100 lbs more than once,
and 20 to 50 lbs more times that I can count,
I know this to be a True Personal Fact,
and according to the applicable Research
it is true for the majority of those who are "Reduced Obese".

In fact, I strongly identify with the subjects of that famous Keyes’ Starvation experiment.
The last part of that Study showed that when the semi-starved men were allowed
to again eat as they wished, they had insatiable appetites, yet never felt full.
Even five months later, some continued to have dysfunctional eating,
although many, after regaining their lost weight,
also regained some normalization of their eating.
So....how have I lived with this "semi-starvation" long-term -
- for more than the past six consecutive years,
and how do I plan to continue to live with it for the rest of my life?

I believe I have addressed much of that personal issue
inside my personal Check-In Thread,
and I’m not going to repeat it all here.
However, I’ve found it necessary to Accept my own eating Realities,
and to be personally Accountable to myself for what I eat.
I’ve chosen to treat “Dietingâ€, and the issues surrounding it as a Hobby,
finding enjoyment and personal fulfillment in dealing with the issues…
learning more about them, reading the latest diet books,
sharing experiences and ideas with others.
Throughout my lifetime I have always had Hobbies.
Some of these are ....building stained glass windows,
building and collecting miniatures, gardening, cooking, sewing,
Play station RPG games, and many others.
Dieting is another one of these Hobbies.

Now that I’ve retired from my law practice,
I have much more free time to spend on my Hobbies,
and so I’m currently doing that.
I will be talking more about Dieting as a Hobby
here on my personal thread,
and in fact, I recently bought a Domain –
DietHobby.com -- and I’m having a web-site built for it.

When it is up and running, I’m going to start Blogging there.
I expect that to be similar….but much more extensive…
than my posts here in the forum,
and I plan to frequently refer to the No S Diet, and Reinhard
as one of my favorite dieting methods.

Reading about new Concepts and trying them out,
is part of my ongoing Hobby.
It is part of my Lifestyle,
and it helps me live with “semi-starvation†long-term.
Of course….. if there is a way to maintain my current normal weight,
without the hunger and cravings of semi-starvation,
I want to know about it, and I want to make it part of my life.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 2

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
Your description of the semi-starved solution is very touching. It's a great sacrifice to feel like you never have enough. As I was reading it, I thought of the months and months of over the top S Day eating that I think may have been compensation for years of starving myself. I had to go through it. The question is whether there is a way to get to a normal weight with fasting. I don't know yet.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

BrightAngel,
Your description of the semi-starved solution is very touching.
It's a great sacrifice to feel like you never have enough.

As I was reading it, I thought of the months and months of over the top S Day eating
that I think may have been compensation for years of starving myself.
I had to go through it.

The question is whether there is a way to get to a normal weight with fasting.
I don't know yet.
Kathleen

Life is full of trade-offs.
After a lifetime of living with yo-yo obesity,
achieveing and maintaining a normal weight is worth the cost for me.

Is there a better way?
Intermittent Fasting may well have its place,
while, of course, it is simply another method of dieting, of semi-starvation.
Can weight-loss and maintenance goals be achieved without semi-starvation?
I don't know either.
That's why we're here discussing Taubes' book.

[BrightAngel]

NOTE to Other Forum Members:

We are interested in receiving comments from other members
who have also read Taubes and therefore become familiar with his specific Concepts
which are contained in the
Author's Note, Introduction, Chapter 1, 2 or 3
of "Why We Get Fat"

This request for a subject limitation is to make this discussion easier to follow.
Please join in if you have something on Topic that you'd like to share.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 3 – Exercise

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kathleen]

Hi BrightAngel,
Here's where my bias comes in, especially as the mother of elementary through high school kids. I think the difference between how I grew up and how they are growing up is that we had a lot of unstructured activity that was physical and social. Every night during the summer, for example, we had forty kids in our backyard playing kick the can. Now, our kids socialize by going on Facebook. Their physical activity is to participate in sports -- and how often do you do that? Our son is in swim team right now and is getting a lot of swimming time, but his time relaxing is going on Facebook, going on Runescape, texting... I can't remember the average number of texts that kids send per day, but it is incredible.

I tried myself exercise as the way to lose weight, and in two weeks of going to the gym two times per day, I gained five pounds. I don't think it works to have structured physical activity as a way to lose weight unless you plan to be a permanent participant in The Biggest Loser and devote two hours per day to hard physical exercise. I have read of people losing weight that way.

For me, it would be nice to have the laundry done. I don't have time to dedicate two hours per day to physical activity.

Having said that, I do think it's important to look at ways to build activity into your daily life. Back in the summer, I stayed home when my family went to celebrate the Fourth of July with my husband's relatives. I had wanted to take some time to focus on studying for a test of business analysis knowledge so that I could bring the test up as a qualification when I was jobhunting. As part of my prepartion, I made a number of notecards which took about 7 or 8 hours of tedious work. I sat at the computer and watched the taping of the Elena Kagan hearings while I did this. By the end of the day, I looked at my pedometer, and frankly I can't remember how few steps I took that day but it may have been under 1,000.

That's where I see the argument for physical activity as being both valid and important: it's important to build activity into day to day life. I think that there may be a positive impact on reduced appetite or changing what you desire to eat, but that's just my speculation. Physical activity is certainly important for health reasons even if it doesn't affect weight.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Physical activity is certainly important for health reasons even if it doesn't affect weight.
I do think it's important to look at ways to build activity into your daily life.

I agree with you here, and so does Taubes.
His issue isn't
whether exercise should be part of a healthy lifestyle, but

“whether it will help us maintain our weight if we’re lean,
or lose weight if we’re not.â€

I tried myself exercise as the way to lose weight,
and in two weeks of going to the gym two times per day,
I gained five pounds.
I don't think it works to have structured physical activity as a way to lose weight
unless you plan to be a permanent participant in The Biggest Loser
and devote two hours per day to hard physical exercise.
I have read of people losing weight that way.

My understanding is that the Biggest Losers devote from 6 to 8 hours a day
to heavy exercise, along with greatly reducing their calorie intake.
I’m certain that there is a massive inadvertent reduction of
their carbohydrate intake also, due to their severely restricted calories.
They certainly visibly increase their fitness, and they do lose weight.

During my lifetime, I have belonged to Gyms many times,
and participated in the activities they provide,
but I greatly prefer exercising at home.
I don’t have to travel that way,
and this type of exercise it is a better fit for my personal preferences.

A few years ago, I began to believe that:

Exercise is for Fitness; (not weight-loss)
Nutrition is for health; (not weight-loss)
Lower-Calorie Food Intake is the key for weight-loss/maintenance.
Currently, due to Taubes’ writings, I’m entertaining the possibility
that Nutrition, MIGHT be a issue in weight-loss after all.

Regarding the issue of exercise and weight-loss/maintenance
I came to same conclusion as Taubes due to my own experience and previous study.

I’ve done a great deal of study about the Scientific Research
on which the current Theories of weight-loss, calories, exercise etc. are based.
Due to my Research I am now going with the Theory that
no one really knows much about what happens
within the bodies of the healthy "formerly obese"
when they reach "normal" weight and
maintain a very large weight-loss for more than 5 years.
In other words, at this time I am an Experiment of One.

Within my own Experiment of One, I’ve experimented a great deal
with Low-Impact Exercise, and minor Strength Training.
My personal exercise equipment is set up in a corner of my family room
in front of an extra TV, VCR, and DVD player.—with long-corded headphones.
I have a treadmill, free-style Gazelle, and stationary bicycle,
resistance bands, small dumbbells, a stability ball, a step, a WII,
a polar wristband and chest band monitor, several pedometers, a BodyBugg,
along with an IPOD and numerous exercise DVDs and Videos.
All of this exercise equipment has been in regular use,
and is still ready for my use today, if I choose to use it.
During the past 6 years,
I’ve spent lengthy periods of time exercising 1 to 2 hours a day, 5 to 7 days a week;
short periods exercising from 4 to 5 hours a day 5 to 7 days a week;
short periods of time exercising 30 minutes a day 3 to 4 days a week;
and short periods of time where I did no exercise at all.
As part of this I did step-training and interval training.
I’ve spent long periods of time counting my daily steps,
and averaging above that 10,000 number.
I believe my record high for one day was a bit above 40,000 steps…
…and I don’t run or jog.

The point is,
My data indicates that….while this exercise did make my body “more fitâ€,
it did little to build muscle, and accomplished little or nothing for weight-loss.
The following information is one example of the personal data to which I refer.

At the beginning of 2009, I purchased a BodyBugg
which is allegedly the most accurate scientific measurement of individual energy
on the market today. Biggest Loser Contestants wear it.
I wore it continually 24/7 for 6 months.
I slept with it, and took it off only for the shower and spa.

As a result I learned a great deal about my own exercise energy expenditure,
...in that according to the "charts" etc. my personal exercise calorie burn is quite high.
According to those charts, based on calories-in/calories-out
I should have lost about 20 lbs during the 6 months ...
..combining my exercise with my food intake calories...

It simply did not happen.
My food intake records were extremely accurate,
My activity records were based on BodyBugg calculations,
but in actuality my weight stayed the same.
Those "extra earned exercise calories" did absolutely nothing to make me lose weight.

I bought the BodyBugg with Display Unit. It came with 6 months free online access,
and I used both the Display and the Online info.
I used it from the Beginning of February through July,
and then stopped using it for quite some time.
I replaced it with a new BodyBugg, then did a couple more experiments
for shorter time periods…two to three months.

While I was using it, I also made my own personal charts of the info,
and even though I’ve chosen not to renew my BodyBugg online access,
I have my total information stored on my computer.

Re food input, BodyBugg's online function has a food intake entry section
similar to DietPower – which is my ongoing computer food journaling tool,
but I found it extremely limited and chose to use it by simply
putting my DietPower daily calorie total into my online BodyBugg chart.

Just like DietPower, the BodyBugg uses the Harris/Benedict Formula for one's BMR,
or starting point. However, while DietPower assumes you are entering your food accurately
and drops your Metabolism rate when you don't lose weight as expected,
BodyBugg assumes you are NOT entering your food accurately.
It will not adjust your BASIC Metabolism Rate very much lower than Harris/Benedict
and basically tells you that you are cheating by eating too much
if your body doesn't follow the Harris/Benedict Formula.
The BodyBugg Coach kept telling me that BodyBugg shows that my Exercise Activity is GREAT
and that my FOOD records MUST be wrong,
that I MUST be cheating with food or making food recording errors.
However, I know that my DietPower daily food intake logging records
are as consistent and accurate as anyone's could possibly be.

What I found valuable about BodyBugg was the fact that
it measured my own body's ACTUAL activity rate and then translated that data
into calorie numbers….. (which were inaccurate for me personally
because they continued to be based on the Standard Harris/Benedict Formula) …
and I was then able to use my own math skills
to turn those BodyBugg personal numbers into a actual "activity factor percentages' numbers.

What I learned during that 6 months, was a confirmation
that my exercise pattern is a great deal of exercise for my own body,
and when translated shows that I have a very HIGH "activity factor percentage".
After that the formula breaks down.
My exercise and food intake together do not cause the "EXPECTED" weight-loss.
In other words, at my current NORMAL weight, exercise makes me "fit",
but does not result in related weight-loss.

I thought that BodyBugg would motivate me to exercise even more than I already did.
For the first five months it was motivating, but when I learned the truth about my Exercise,
it had the Reverse effect. I found the Actual Facts very discouraging,
and the for 3 months immediately following, (fall of 2009)
I began exercising less than I did in the 3 or 4 years BEFORE I got the BodyBugg.
My result was that I became less Fit, but didn’t weigh Heavier.

My muscle mass is NOT larger.
I think it must have something to do with my body's
being and holding at a NORMAL weight after a very large weight loss.

There is really no Current Scientific Knowledge about what or why this is happening in my body.
Would the same thing apply to others? I don't know. I can only share my own information.
Before I reached "Normal" weight,
the standard scientific rules calories-in/calories-out seemed to basically apply to me.
However, the longer I have maintained at this Normal weight,
the less those rules seem to apply.
My body seems to be breaking all the known "Scientific Rules"
in order to get me to regain weight.
Here at the end of my 5th year of Maintenance, I would like to believe that
someday, my body's process will
"Normalize" to be more like those who have never gained and lost weight,
and that my body's MR and calorie needs will stop dropping lower and lower....
no matter what I eat or how much exercise I do.
but I have little effort to support such a belief.
At this time, I do believe that Taubes is correct about exercise.
I am certain that while exercise works to make me fit, and provide other health benefits,
exercise does little or nothing to help me, personally, lose weight or maintain my weight-loss.

I think that… exercise…
may have a positive impact on reducing appetite
or changing what you desire to eat,
but that's just my speculation.

to Speculate…to take to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence.
to Guess ….to form an opinion of, from little or no evidence.

In my own experience, Kathleen, this is definitely not the case.
I am more hungry after exercise,
and after exercise I very much crave sweet and starchy foods.

For me, the only food-related benefits of exercise are…,
that it might make me avoid fattening foods to keep from wasting my hard work,
and that during the time that I’m busy doing exercise, I’m not eating.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,

It's great for me to speculate and then get your documented results. I will continue to speculate with the understanding that I trust you to be truthful even though the equipment was telling you were not! To a certain extent, I think it's funny: there's an arrogance on the part of the equipment manufacturer that there is knowledge of the human body that means scientifically that a certain type of food contains x calories, a certain type of exercise expends y calories, and adding all that up leads to z weight loss.

Here's my thought on what you are saying: I think that the human body is much more resilient than a lot of people give it credit, and you may have put your body into some sort of starvation mode so that it can survive with very few calories.

You take the tact of constant calorie restriction. I'm looking at intermittent fasting, so a fast day can end with a dinner of a cheeseburger.

I'm not sure exercise has much impact on weight loss, either, but I do know that even a little bit of walking -- I'm up to about 7,000 steps/day -- is invigorating. I have taken work breaks by going for walks rather than snacking.

I do keep with my speculation that there may be an impact on choice of foods, but it is nothing more than speculation. I also agree it probably doesn't have an impact on weight loss except to limit the amount of time you can eat.

Next chapter?

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

BrightAngel,
You take the tact of constant calorie restriction.
I'm looking at intermittent fasting,
so a fast day can end with a dinner of a cheeseburger.

Kathleen, Just for clarification...
My methods of calorie restriction frequently include the tactic of intermittent fasting.
For example, yesterday-Friday- I did a 24 hour fast (per EatStopEat),
by not eating anything after my 5 p.m. dinner on Thursday,
until I ate a 6 p.m. dinner on Friday.

I chose to do this 24 hr fast because on Wednesday and Thursday my calories were fairly high,
and I needed a low-calorie day to lower my weekly calorie average.
I've been doing this frequently for several years.
The difference between us,
is that I carefully moniter what I eat when I'm NOT fasting.
My Friday dinner was the same size as any normal evening dinner,
and I ate nothing after that.
Today, I feel especially hungry, but my goal is to not eat more than I do during any normal day.

This is not unusual behavior for me. It's just a-day-in-a-life.
Sometimes I do it once a week, sometimes 3 times a week, sometimes not at all.

Even though I'm currently involved in a low-carb experiment,
I'm still choosing to keep tracking my calories...
Maybe low-carb works, and maybe it doen't.
I'm trying it out,
but I'm not going to allow "faith in a personally unproven factor"
cause me to gain weight.

Next chapter?

Yes, on to chapter 4, Twenty calories a day.

NOTE TO OTHER FORUM MEMBERS Please feel free to enter the discussion
to talk about any of the points we have previously discussed.

[Kathleen]

Very interesting. How often do you follow the Eat Stop Eat approach? It sounds like it's not scheduled. Do you know how often you've done it in the last year? I'd be curious to know.

Chapter 4 seems a little silly to me, and I think that's the point. It again points to the calories in/calories out approach as being silly.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Very interesting. How often do you follow the Eat Stop Eat approach? It sounds like it's not scheduled. Do you know how often you've done it in the last year? I'd be curious to know.

As I give you this information, remember I am only 5'0" tall,
over 60 years old, and a "reduced obese" sedentary person.
My records show that to maintain my current weight
my daily average calories must be around 1050 calories.

Look at the chart I recently posted on my Thread to see my actual
daily averages year-by-year.
I'm not one of those "average women who burns 2000 calories a day",
nor have I ever been.

On those very-low-calorie days I would have used a variety of "intermittent fasting" techniques.
These would be QOD, JUDDD, Fast-5, EatStopEat, or a combination of one or more of these.

The primary difference is that with QOD, JUDDD-
you eat a total of about 500 calories. (for me this varies between 300 & 700 depending..)
Although people commonly refer to these intermittent eating plans,
"intermittent fasts". These aren't always a fast, because the individual
chooses whether to distribute the food throughout the day or eat one meal.

Fast-5 allows eating within a 5 hour window, fasting outside that window,
and EatStopEat is no eating from after dinner one day
until dinner 24 hours later the following day.
It would appear that one would only get the "insulin reduction" benefit
with the long fasts such as the 19 hr Fast-5 or the 24 hr EatStopEat.

A quick look at a 2010 Spreadsheet, showed 120 very-low-calorie days (800 calories or less).
This was easy information for me to get, because I have all less-than-800-calorie-days highlighted in pink.

365 days in a year, 120 of them some type of "Intermittent Fast" days,
means that in 2010 I averaged two and one-third "fasting" days per week.
This sounds like a lot of days, but remember the "normal" calorie average
I need to maintain my current weight is a bit less than 1100.
Therefore, when I have days higher than 1100, I need to balance them
with lower calorie days.
These are sometimes a bit lower (nearly 800)
or a lot lower (around 300)

This is.....of course.....all under the calories-in/calories-out theory,
which is what I've been operating under for my entire life.

Chapter 4 seems a little silly to me,
and I think that's the point.
It again points to the calories in/calories out approach as being silly.

I agree, and it shouldn't take much time.
I have something written out that I'm going to post soon.

[Kathleen]

How many days of 24 hour fasts in 2010, meaning no calories at all in 24 hours? I look on the 800 calorie approach as same old same old portion control but fasting as completely different. Thanks.
Kathy

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 4 -- Twenty Calories a Day

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

How many days of 24 hour fasts in 2010,
meaning no calories at all in 24 hours?
I look on the 800 calorie approach as same old same old portion control
but fasting as completely different.
Thanks.

My guess is probably about a third to a half
of the very-low-calorie days,
which would be between 40 and 60 days in 2010.

That would probably average out to around 1 per week,
although I tended to do one specific method at a time,
more like the same plan two or three days a week for awhile,
and then a different one for awhile, and then skip a week,
then back to the other one, etc.

This is all I can tell you,
because I can't give you any better info without a detailed,
and very time-consuming search of my records.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 5 Location of Body Fat

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
This chapter reminded me of the Rockefeller University study of leptin definciency and how excited the scientists were and -- what did they find -- one girl in England and two cousins in India (as I recall) who benefited from leptin definciency. I think it's better to stick with the norm. There are plenty of run of the mill obese people who don't have any sort of abnormal fat distribution, and I'm one of them.. Oh for the days of my 24 inch waist! I still have some dresses from when I was single.

I'd rather just go on to the next chapter.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

I think it's better to stick with the norm.
There are plenty of run of the mill obese people
who don't have any sort of abnormal fat distribution,
and I'm one of them.. Oh for the days of my 24 inch waist!
I still have some dresses from when I was single.

I'd rather just go on to the next chapter.

It sounds like you are content
with the way your fat is distributed on your own body,
you would just like to have less of it.
That is exactly the way I felt when I was fat as well.
I like my personal body shape, I like my small waist and larger hips.
I never wanted to be tall and willowy, or have big breasts and small hips.
I just wanted to keep my same basic hourglass shape….without the fat,
and preferably get my bottom half to be able to wear the same size as my top half…
This is something, by the way…that I have achieved
...and that I work to maintain.

I think Taubes point is that genetics plays a large part
in how much Fat we have, and the places where our Fat is distributed.
Also that hormones play a large part in where and when Fat is
distributed on males and females at puberty.

This IS the norm for everyone.

Taubes also discusses the fact that there are diseases and treatments of diseases
that also influence how much fat one has and where it is distributed on one’s body.

When you say “run of the mill obese people
who don’t have any sort of abnormal fat distributionâ€
I’m not sure what you mean.
Doesn’t everyone who is covered with layers and layers of fat
have abnormal fat distribution…???
certainly they don’t have just a “normal†amount of fat.

Pretty much all morbidly obese people ---like on the Biggest Loser --
look similar, when they are that fat.
But what I’ve observed is that fat people do carry their weight in different places,
for example some fat women have almost skinny legs and arms
with barrel chests and shoulders; some have enormous round bellies
with smaller chests and hips,
and some have large breasts and small hips, and others have large hips and small breasts,
Others have a giant hourglass shape, some top heavy, and some bottom heavy.

All of these body types can be very fat,
but with fat distributed differently on their bodies.
The way this fat is distributed is due to their genetics.

I think Taubes is trying to get us to think about the fact that fat accumulation
is influenced by more factors than just what we eat and how much we exercise.

I’ve got something written up on the next chapter, and I’ll post it in the morning.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
Yes, I agree that fat distribution can be very different. I was the hourglass figure that became the hourglass obese. I would be a pear more than an apple. Taubes, however, focused on examples that were not within the norm -- like the woman who looked to be of normal weight above her waist only.

Fat distribution is more genetic, but I think that fat accumulation may be more a matter of our eating habits. Focusing on calories can make a person feel like they are starving all the time. Is there an alternate?

I may be blessed with an hourglass figure but I'd like it skinnier! I think fat distribution can change with exercise, but the focus needs to be more on how to lose weight.

Personally, I think this chapter was more of a filler for his book. Interesting but not very relevant. I don't think my body is out of the norm. I think what got screwed up were my eating habits because my Dad hounded me to lose weight when I was a teen and I got into some bad calorie counting habits that led to binge eating.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

Personally, I think this chapter was more of a filler for his book.
Interesting but not very relevant.
I don't think my body is out of the norm.

I can't say whether or not YOUR body is out of the norm.

I can say that MINE is.
I'm not out of the norm in the way my fat is distributed on my body.
but I'm out of the norm in that fat accumulates on me
far more easily than on many other people.

I disagree about the relevance of this chapter.
I think that getting people to Think about the Different Ways
that body fat is influenced and accumulated in specific places on the body,
because of Genetics, Puberty, and certain Diseases
is an excellent Foundation that could help people to BEGIN
Accepting the POSSIBILITY that there might be
another way to look at Why we get fat all over our body.
That there could be a different...or maybe additional...
reason that we accumulate fat more easily than other people.

Anyway, that's what the chapter did for me personally.

I'm going to post the next two chapters back-to-back
because they are Part 1 and Part 2 of the same issue.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 6 Thermodynamics for Dummies Part 1

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 7 Thermodynamics for Dummies Part 2

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,

I think I hit a wall in what I can do. I'm so tired I told my husband I'm just going to stay in bed all day. It's less than two week suntil I'm done with my job, and I think I need to set aside the discussion for now. It's not that it's not important. In fact, I think it is more important than anything else I am doing. Work will end, and then I can focus on this discussion.

I will comment on the fat distribution, however. I do think physical activity affects shape, and it's not all genetics. Fat accumulation has some degree of choice to it, since caloric restriction can alter the amount of fat accumulation. Fat distribution seems to be more genetic.

I will try my best to reveal my biases, and I think that my biases tend to originate in one or two countervailing facts. For example, the fact that fat accumulation has occurred so suddenly in the last 30 years leads me to believe the obesity epidemic should not be attributed to genetics.

I'll enjoy resuming this discussion in two weeks when I can devote the time to it that it deserves..

Kathleen

[TexArk]

THOUGHTS ON THE FIRST FEW CHAPTERS OF WWGF

1. His argument against the conventional wisdom of calories in calories out is convincing because of all the failure of this method of weight control. Good Calories Bad Calories has extensive research over the past 150 yr. to document all the attempts to control by semi starvation diets (I love that name!) The post from the engineer that BA put on her check in tells it all. All calories are not stored and used the same and the energy expended is affected by various functions of the body. I also find interesting personally seeing people who work at trying to gain weight and they are no more successful than those trying to lose!


2. The history of poor nations and cultural groups showing the obesity epidemic after carbohydrates (especially sugar and unrefined carbs) is obvious. A personal anecdote: my husband grew up in the fifties in Arizona among many Native Americans. Most of his elementary class was either Native American or Mexican American. He has told me many times of seeing these children as early as babies drinking soda from a soda bottle with a nipple on it! No wonder that by the time they are young adults they are diabetic.


3. I loved reading of the exercise experiments where overweight men were trained for 18 months to run a marathon and still did not become lean…actually lost very little weight also. I also found instructive the runners who had to add more and miles to their regime each decade of life to stay the same weight. Whether the lean exercise more or exercise makes them lean may not be able to be proven, but these are interesting studies. Another personal story: My husband is 6’2†and was always very lean…150-160 lbs. in college and military. I first noticed him in college because he ran everywhere. This was way before the jogging craze. That was just his mode of transportation. Why walk…so slow. His mother told me he had always been that way as a little boy. Run not walk. Also we were all so relieved when cordless phones became available…we had to have really long coiled cords to keep him from pulling the phone out of the wall because he moved so much.


4. On the subject of where fat is deposited on the body: Think of all the gimmicks that have been promoted and all the exercise gurus that say they can help you to spot reduce certain areas. The genetics of where we like to collect fat is obvious and exercise is not going to redistribute any of this. I have two bodies—small boned upper half and a good sized bottom half. I actually have more trouble finding clothes when I am lean. The waist is small and I cannot get pants and skirts to match. Also I think especially young girls need to realize that there are many acceptable body types and it is fruitless to strive to be a certain size. I would never be a 4 or 6 even if you tried to fit my skeleton! In Good Calories Bad Calories Taubes tells of a skin graft for a young girl who was a burn victim. She was overweight and they took skin from her abdomen and grafted to her hand. She then had a FAT hand!

[BrightAngel]

I think I need to set aside the discussion for now.
It's not that it's not important.
In fact, I think it is more important than anything else I am doing.
Work will end, and then I can focus on this discussion.

I'll enjoy resuming this discussion in two weeks
when I can devote the time to it that it deserves.

Kathleen, I understand that you "have a lot on your plate" right now.
.......(Couldn't resist using that phrase here in the No S forum )........

I understand that it is hard for you to find the time and energy to
discuss these issues right now.
I look forward to you resuming the discussion in a couple of weeks.
In the meantime, I'm sort of "on a roll" here -
and at this particular time I have the extra time and energy
available to me for the intense writing and posting
that is required to clearly state the book's issues,
Chapter by Chapter.
So, I think I'll just keep on doing that through the book,
and posting on the individual chapters.
Then in a couple of weeks...when you get the time...
the two of us can go through these chapters and discuss them together.
Both of us have agreed that we will wecome comments
from informed people who are interested in the subject.
So, in the meantime, perhaps other readers will comment
on issues in the book.
Those posts will be here when you have time to review them,
and you can respond and discuss them in a few weeks
after your temporary job ends.

[BrightAngel]

TexArk,

Thanks for posting your well-thought-out comments.
which are a welcome addition to the Discussion.
It is clear that you have an excellent grasp of Taubes’ issues,
In fact, I couldn’t even find anything in your comments to dispute.

The post from the engineer that BA put on her check in tells it all.
All calories are not stored and used the same
and the energy expended is affected by various functions of the body.

For easy reference, I am copying that engineer’s post here.

I'm not a nutritionist or a biochemist, but I am a chemical engineer by degree
and I've done plenty of mass/energy balances in my life.

The deficit does matter,
but most people seem to think the equation should be:

change in fat storage = calories eaten - calories used by body.

It is probably a lot more complicated than that, more like:

change in fat = calories eaten + calories released from fat storage
+ calories pulled from protein matter in the body - calories expended by cells
- calories added to fat storage - calories added to protein matter in body

and I'm sure I'm leaving some things out.

We don't have a lot of control over most of those things
on the right side of the equation,
even though we'd like to think so.

They're driven by genetics and hormones
and regulatory systems in our bodies,
which even biochemists and nutritionists don't fully understand,
probably because it can differ so widely from person to person.

The one thing I can control
is what kind of substances I put into my mouth.

For me, keeping carbs low seems to help
with several of those pieces of the equation,
so I know I'll have to continue with this way of life,
if I want to lose to a reasonable weight and maintain it.

****
(July 2010) Start: 296 lbs
(January 2011) Current: 248 lbs
Goal 175 lbs

Yes, Yes, Yes.
Very True.

**
Start 236 lbs
Current 128 lbs

.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 8 – Head Cases

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

The author's note, Introduction and these 8 chapters
make up the first section of Why We Get Fat And What To Do About It.
That section was entitled Book 1/Biology, Not Physics.


Those No S Members who are familiar with Taubes' concepts
as set forth in this Discussion, and who wish to Comment,
Please do so.


The next section consists of 11 more chapters,
which is entitled Book II/ Adiposity 101.

[Kathleen]

That sounds good, BrightAngel. It's 3 PM, and I just got up. Tom took the kids to the Science Museum. I'm just plain wiped out. I read the first 8 chapters thoroughly but did not thoroughly read after the first part. I'd rather take the time to really thoroughly review it and comment on it.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

That sounds good, BrightAngel.
I read the first 8 chapters thoroughly
but did not thoroughly read after the first part.
I'd rather take the time to really thoroughly review it and comment on it.

I like the sound of the plan.
I'll go ahead and brief the book chapter by chapter,
making a few comments as I go.
You'll thoroughly read the rest of the book,
and read my briefed chapters and comments.
Then ---after your job ends and as you find the time---
we'll do an in-depth discussion of the issues that are presented.
Meanwhile, people who want to comment here
can do so, and their input will add to our discussion as well.

[Kathleen]

I managed to drive myself to exhaustion, and I've been in my nightgown all day. Tom took the kids at about 1, and it's now about 6. They'll be home soon. I would guess you remember Blueskigh's who stopped posting at the beginning of 2009. She went to eating twice per day from three times per day. Now, as I have been reading in The Diet Alternate, this woman found that having only breakfast and dinner allows her to experience both hunger and fullness. This is back to the idea of intermittent fasting vs. potion control, and intermittent fasting ties back to Taubes and the recommendation of carb restriction. I know I'm on the discussion board for Taube's book and it's a stretch to be bringing this up here, but here it goes: What I think is that intermittent fasting is an extension of The No S Diet book which is fasting between meals. The idea is that you restrict timing on when you eat as a way to lower the total amount consumed. What I think about Taubes -- and yes, I'm revealing biases before even doing a thorough reading of the second part of the book (but I promise I will do that!) -- is that carb restriction is an extension of portion control. You still are left with not begin satisfied because you cannot eat what you want. Instead, you restrict on a type of food.

Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

I have been reading in The Diet Alternate,
This is back to the idea of intermittent fasting vs. potion control,
and intermittent fasting ties back to Taubes
and the recommendation of carb restriction.

I know I'm on the discussion board for Taube's book
and it's a stretch to be bringing this up here, but here it goes:

What I think is that intermittent fasting is an extension of The No S Diet book
which is fasting between meals.
The idea is that you restrict timing on when you eat
as a way to lower the total amount consumed.

What I think about Taubes –
--and yes, I'm revealing biases before even
doing a thorough reading of the second part of the book
(but I promise I will do that!) --
-- is that carb restriction is an extension of portion control.
You still are left with not being satisfied
because you cannot eat what you want.
Instead, you restrict on a type of food.

I am familiar with The Diet Alternate,
and think it has some interesting concepts.
If you wish, Someday, we can talk more about that specific book,
but first, I would like us to finish discussing this one.

I believe I understand your thinking here.
The concept of Fasting is actually a time period between meals.
That actual period of time can deviate.
It could be merely the few hours between breakfast and lunch..
all the way up to….long periods like in Biblical times.

The No S principle calls for “fasting between meals†on weekdays
….(except for the way it allows caloric liquids)….
The Eat Stop Eat 24 hr fast concept is fasting 24 hrs, such as
after dinner on one day, until dinner the following day, occasionally,
from 1 to 3 days a week combined with alternative normal eating days.
According to Pilon (EatStopEat) and Taubes,
either zero food or a carb restriction will lower insulin levels.
When insulin levels are low, fat stores can be released.

Each of these plans have instructions in addition to fasting.

No S, says to have only 1 plate of food at a meal and no sweets.

Eat Stop Eat says the days before and after fasting
need to be normal, moderate-eating days.

The low-carb concept says one can eat as much protein and fat
as your hunger requires, along with a small amount of carbs
such as those that are in leafy and low-GI veggies,
and that some people do well by eating more carbs than others.

Of the three plans,
it appears to me that the first two require
a form of portion control of all food, while the low-carb concept
requires only portion control for carbs, and unlimited
access to the rest.

I want to point out that none of those plans is mutually-exclusive.
That is…a person could combine No S principles, with EatStopEat principles
AND low-carb principles. …if they chose to do so.

Personally, that is similar to what I’m doing right now,
although I include calorie counting as well.
I am well-aware that some might find this difficult-to-impossible,
but it has worked pretty well for me to date.
I will be better able to discuss the issue of personal satisfaction re low-carb-eating,
AFTER I have experimented with it a bit longer.

My advice is to suspend judgment on the potential good and bad aspects
of Taubes’ concepts, and just work to learn and understand them.
Maybe they will be helpful to you, maybe not.
But knowledge can be good, just in itself alone.

[Kathleen]

BrightAngel,
I agree that knowledge is good in and of itself. I want to approach Taube's work but don't think I can suspect my bias. The best I can do is recognize it. It will be interesting to discuss the book with you.
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

...don't think I can suspect my bias.
The best I can do is recognize it.

It will be interesting to discuss the book with you.

I think you meant the word "suspend" (looks like a typo to me)
and I'll bet you will be better at Suspending your Bias than you expect.
Recognizing one's own Bias is the First Step toward Suspending it.

[Kathleen]

Yes. I meant suspend. Ill try...
Kathleen

[BrightAngel]

ANOTHER NOTE about Making Comments on this Thread.

I recently received a PM from a member with an interest in posting
an appropriate comment on this Thread, but hesitated to do so
because he had not yet read the book. I appreciate his thoughfulness.
As I told him, On-topic Comments,
which don't change the focus of the discussion are welcome here.
What I'm hoping to avoid is ignorant and argumentative
comments from the Uninformed.
I think that ALL of us probably have a definite BIAS
toward calories-in/calories-out....including me.
I'm just working very hard to have an open-mind on the subject,
and I'd like to hear input from others who are willing to do the same.

It's fine for People who are informed on a subject to disagree,
but it gets tiresome to try to explain ideas to those
who aren't even interested in learning about them.

BTW....If you haven't commented because
you haven't started reading the book because you haven't got a copy,
I learned that you can get an online copy instantly at Google books
for a bit under $14.....HINT HINT HINT...
I think I posted that link recently in my personal Thread.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 9 The Laws of Adiposity (Adiposity means Fat)

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Another NOTE about COMMENTS.

My plan is to continue briefing these Chapters one by one,
until the end of the book.

Kathleen has little time for Discussion until next month when her job ends.
So, our joint plan is to retun to the individual chapters
and comment on them in sequence at that time.

Comments, from those who have read the chapters
that we've covered so far, are Welcome here at any time.

Taubes starts with the Basics and then progresses forward.
I think that many readers are like me,
in that they are primarily interested in the practical application
of Taubes concepts ....the part of his book on
What We Can Do About It,
more than they are in Why We Get Fat.

However, I am aware that learning concepts requires building knowledge upon knowledge,
and that I do need to have a grasp on the Basic Foundation of a Concept
before I can form any kind of knowledgeable opinion about it.
So, I think patience is required here for me, as well as for others.

I believe that when we finish with the Basics,
go through the Implications,
and get into the Application
there is the possibility for a very interesting Discussion
between many informed readers.

[connorcream]

Many of the females in those studies are very, very thin
but also, some of them are not.
I’m seen plump cheeks, large (natural) breasts,
rounded tummies, large thighs…
and in fact…they appear to be “overweight†.

I have seen this same thing, especially at Indian restaurants. The women or either obese or slender except around their middle. Knowing their diets were plant based, I used to find this odd. The exact opposite of what I should be seeing.

[connorcream]

My plan is to continue briefing these Chapters one by one,
until the end of the book

What a resource you are. Thank you taking up this important task. I for one deeply appreciate it.

[connorcream]

We had a party at the house this weekend, 2 women came up to me and asked what I had "done". I found out later, a third was too shy to ask. This is a question I still get ferquently. DS, also mentioned me to a friend's mother who needed some help. I thought it would have died down by now.

My answer has morped from calorie reduction, to calorie reduction focused on carbs, which is so easy to do with computer food journaling. I found out early in my wl process, carbs were easy calories to cut. Then I realized that it was easier (no cravings) and other positive side effects occured. Quicker wl, no hunger, no hip discomfort (again one side only). I watched for slower metabolism when the opposite occured evidenced by my horse riding and morning exercise routines.

Unlike some low carb sites, I do not think it is either/or but rather and/both. I have found that I can eat more calories (not unlimted) if the carb content is low. More interesting to me is the ancillary side effects. My rosacea is gone, unless I am reflecting on it, I do not think about. A family member called me yesterday about this, she has rosacea as well, she had seen my skin recently and discussed her problem and what I would suggest. In addition to the IPL treatments, I told it is carb driven. Could it be because I weigh less- at first I thought so, but then OVERTIME- I have observed how my skin does when a meal is higher carb and I get redder quicker than when I don't. DH mentioned how beautiful my skin was 2 days ago. The tech at my last visit in Nov was stunned. She brought out my first visit pix and my current pix. She too was very interested in MY story.

I find it very fascinating how different people react to carbs. DS has Crohn's, DH has a tendency to have gingivitis both conditions I am not a bit plagued by. DH is the poster boy of oral hygenine. DH is also developing a belly, something he has never had to contend with ever in his life (48 yrs). He is more interested in this carb thing than he used to- both for the healing of our son as well as his own insulin resistance manifestations. My sleep is fantastic. Again, it could be lower weight, however, when I indulge in a carby meal, my sleep is disturbed.

On the other hand, I have always had fantastic blood pressure numbers, cholesterol numbers, etc.. In fact, I would use these great numbers as a way of fooling myself. I would think, I must not be THAT unhealthy, my blood pressure is great. The isle of denial has many ports of call.

I also find losing "bump up" weight is easier when it is low cal/carb. This is a work in progress. I did not know how my body would react, was it too far gone, too insulin resistant. Only time would tell. There is a point of no return. I am hoping DS has not reached that point himself.

I find myself merging the two books, so I apologize for not staying strictly on topic. I found Taubes (and the other authors I have read) more credible when weight loss is mentioned somewhat last rather than first. Strange but true. I do think this is Metabolic Syndrome.

The family has been part of a rare and unique alcohol reasearch study starting from our graduate school days at UCSD. I have seen over the past 25 years with this work how alcohol affects different people differently. It isn't strictly a gluttony & sloth problem. The fact I am not a drunk, is because I my body sends negative messages to me to quit drinking. I could act smug and superior and think I have better self control when the reality is that if I drink to much, my skin gets red, I feel poorly, I sleep poorly, then I am tired the next day, and being buzzy isn't such a great feeling either. And all of these reactions occur with 1-2 glasses of alcohol. I also know my alcohol tolerance increases when I am drinking more. Then I want more. To me this is parallel to carbs in how different body's react and how the more one drinks, the higher the threshold is needed to get the same positive choice.

This study makes me realize what a burden halth agencies have in giving reccomendations to the public. However, I appreciate my ability to have our own family experiment. What, if like alcoholics, my physical reactions would be positive. Then I would want to drink more and it would be more of a struggle not to. And alcoholic damage too reaches a point of no return. Case in point is my FIL who has Ataxia from drinking. He has stopped drinking but the Attaxia is still progressing.

I need to run but wanted to get a few thoughts down.

BA, you are a God send in many, many ways!

[BrightAngel]

Connorcream, Thanks for the kind words.

And, Thanks for sharing your experiences here.
It is enlightening for us to read the comments of someone
who is informed on the subject at hand, and who is
successful in their personal weight-loss and maintenance as well.

[connorcream]

I wanted to add one more postive reaction to lowering my carbs- I do not get sick or have allergies as much. Cedar fever is in full swing in my fair city and I am not participating:-) I have a closet full of steroid sprays, haven't used them in over a year. Used flu medicine only once and it was of short duration ealy in the wl journey.

Could this be correlation? Perhaps, but over a long enough period of time, when the rest of the family & friends are getting the flu, then I will be able to tell. I wish I had better records of these ancillary problems from before, then I would be able to judge better. As it is, I am going from memory.

All of these factors added up makes me very willing to keep my carbs lower (<100 gm). If it was just for wl or maintanence, probably not over time.

Sorry about the many typos of the previous post. Geeze. If I edited it, then it would still by on my desk top....

Heading to the symphony with kids. Will think more about this. Last night, went to a private screening. Running late (theatre was on the other side of town, rush hour traffic) zipped through theatre w/o any shortness of breath or lack of speed). Fit nicely in my seat. Many, many blessings to being a lower weight. I thank the dear Lord constantly for being where I am now.

[BrightAngel]

My answer has morped from calorie reduction,
to calorie reduction focused on carbs,
which is so easy to do with computer food journaling.

I found out early in my weight-loss process, carbs were easy calories to cut.
Then I realized that it was easier (no cravings) and other positive side effects occured.

I do not think it is either/or but rather and/both.
I have found that I can eat more calories (not unlimted) if the carb content is low.

More interesting to me is the ancillary side (Health) effects.

I, also, find your health side-effects interesting.

At this point, I, personally, also believe
that calories are still an important factor, even when restricting carbs.

One of the things I hope to find out in my current Experiment,
is whether or not I can maintain my weight while eating more calories,
IF I keep a lower carb count than my body is used to.

During the past 2 years I've learned...again and again...
that I cannot PERSONALLY maintain my current weight
without keeping my daily average calories between 1000 and 1100
.....while eating a "balanced" diet,
even when my daily carbs are low due to calorie-restriction,
and only total between 80 and 100 grams.

This has not been due to purposeful low-carb eating,
This rather-low-carb-average happened for the simple reason that
after getting my daily protein requirement and the fat that seems to be in everything,
there weren't enough calories left in my "balanced" food budget to have more carbs.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 10 History about “Lipohpilia†(love of fat)

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Any new comments before I continue?

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 11 - Primer on the Regulation of Fat

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Please Note that even though this book has concepts
from Good Calories Bad Calories that have been
"dumbed down" for intelligent average people,
sometimes I think the balance that Taubes has had to strike
still puts his biochemical information a bit above me.
Here, I am merely trying to summarize and briefly share his Concepts
in order to have a general and slightly informed discussion about them.
I am not actually able to present Taubes writings in a
thorough way, and I hope that people who read my summary
and are interested in learning more about his reasoning
will carefully read and re-read his book for themselves.

I had the fantasy that Taubes might somehow stumble across
my attempt to present his Concepts here online,
and be totally annoyed...however, if this very unlikely event occurred
I believe he would see my good intentions.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 12 – Why I Get Fat and You Don’t (or Vice Versa)

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 13 – What We Can Do

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[connorcream]

Bauer said that fat tissue in obesity is like malignant tumors….
Quote:
“In those who are predisposed to grow obese,
fat tissue is driven to grow, to expand with fat,
and it will accomplish this goal, just as the tumor does,
with little concern about what the rest of the body might be doing.

The abnormal…fat loving…tissue seizes on food-stuffs,
even in the case of undernutrition…
It maintains its stock, and may increase it
independent of the requirements of the organism.
A sort of anarchy exists; the fat tissue lives for itself
and does not fit into the precisely regulated
management of the whole organismâ€

I have been thinking about the reduced fat/obese person. We know fat cells divide when they get too large and when/if the person slims down those cells do not disappear, just shrink. Would not it stand to reason that these numerous cells want to do what all cells want to do- live and grow- and find a way to do so? So the dismal maintanence rates commonly quoted and observed must take this sad reality into account in terms of expectations and counseling.

So far, for my body, I do not have urges that cannot be managed. It is not any more difficult for me to avoid a food choice than over spending money. I think about it, assess the cost/benefit then move on. However, being aware that overtime this might not be as easy is present before me. I think with daily weighing and recording of food, I will detect trends will small before growing too large.

I remember all to well, how much wiggle room, clothes fit has:-(

[connorcream]

This is the “binge†behavior that I’ve had to deal with my entire life,
and it comes from a very physical feeling, which is often totally unrelated
to any positive or negative emotional issues I might be having.

I have never experienced this with foods that are primarily protein and fat,
only with foods that contain a lot of sugar and/or starch.
For me, personally, even dense whole grain bread,
white and sweet potatoes, corn, as well as cooked dry beans
tend to set this “binge mechanism†off in me.
I tend to crave those foods, and have eaten massive amounts of them.

I have had this exact same experience. As have my kids, grandkids, neighbors, etc... I have people in and out of my house regularly. Never is there a run on protein and fats like there is carbs and especially certain carb combinations- crunchy & salty, fat & salty. I don't get another big helping of protein, but I did get another slice of chocolate cake. I could "afford" it (127.2#) so I ate it but I did marvel at this reaction. I stopped without eating any more carby stuff that day. Choc cake hasn't made it to my forever no foods. But it might one day.

The kids, however, gobbled down the chocolates and cake when no one was looking. They are trim and active and can "afford" it weight wise. I am looking at this behavior very differently than before. I must keep this stuff out of my house except on special S days.

[connorcream]

I am not actually able to present Taubes writings in a
thorough way, and I hope that people who read my summary
and are interested in learning more about his reasoning
will carefully read and re-read his book for themselves.

I have given this task to DH. He kept asking me pointed technical questions as the house is becoming less carb driven. Several unsolicted confirmations from other medical doctors have confirmed this approach, however, as people as me what I did, I need to explain with greater clarity.

I think he would find Taubes like himself, extremely analytical. He does not like the conclusions drawn, so avoids the material. even the non controversial bio chemical mechanisms.

[connorcream]

Taubes says that each successive generation may find
it harder to under this problem.

I think this points to the traditional carb based populations tending towards obesity problems like we do. A pediatric bariatric hospital in Tokyo, is sad. Or some of the pictures of older genereations looking lean (though not all) as compared to today.

We know babies of smokers or drug users have a higher probabilty of having medical problems. High does of insulin could adversely effect the developing baby and was something we watched with DD expecting grandbaby#2. Though DD would crave a Krispy Kreme Donut look before another piece of chicken.

[connorcream]

He compares this with cigarettes.
Quote:
“Not every longtime smoker gets lung cancer.
Only one in six men will, and one in nine women.
But for those who do get lung cancer,
cigarette smoke is …the most common cause.

In a world without cigarettes,
lung cancer would be a rare disease, as it once was.
In a world without carbohydrate-rich diets,
obesity would be a rare condition as well.â€

I was stunned with how low a percentage of men got lung cancer. I thought of George Burns who smoked a cigar everyday until he died in his 90's. With the way it is demonized, I thought the figures had to be over 50%.

It took decades to get Americans to give up their smokes using a variety of advertising campaigns. We watch older movies, the casualness which actors/actresses smoke in all situations is always stunning to us. One movie had a doctor smoking while doing surgery. Can you imagine that today? I have a variety of beautiful glass antique party trays with an indented partion for a high ball and a lip for holding a cigarette. Our favorite guessing game with guests, is asking them what this lip was used for. Not one, ourselves included, could guess. The common answer is holding carrots or celery sticks:-)

Losing weight will not be enough, IMHO, to get people to reduce the sugar and carbs. We, by and large, have no more control with it than the kids do. It will take the same multi pronged approach that smoking took to get people to scale it back. Just suggesting people to look at the data gets squeals of protests from otherwise rational, sane people.

[connorcream]

Bauer said that fat tissue in obesity is like malignant tumors….
Quote:
“In those who are predisposed to grow obese,
fat tissue is driven to grow, to expand with fat,
and it will accomplish this goal, just as the tumor does,
with little concern about what the rest of the body might be doing.

The abnormal…fat loving…tissue seizes on food-stuffs,
even in the case of undernutrition…
It maintains its stock, and may increase it
independent of the requirements of the organism.
A sort of anarchy exists; the fat tissue lives for itself
and does not fit into the precisely regulated
management of the whole organismâ€

I have been thinking about the reduced fat/obese person. We know fat cells divide when they get too large and when/if the person slims down those cells do not disappear, just shrink. Would not it stand to reason that these numerous cells want to do what all cells want to do- live and grow- and find a way to do so? So the dismal maintanence rates commonly quoted and observed must take this sad reality into account in terms of expectations and counseling.

So far, for my body, I do not have urges that cannot be managed. It is not any more difficult for me to avoid a food choice than over spending money. I think about it, assess the cost/benefit then move on. However, being aware that overtime this might not be as easy is present before me. I think with daily weighing and recording of food, I will detect trends while small before growing too large.

I remember all to well, how much wiggle room, clothes fit has:-(

[BrightAngel]

Connorcream, Thank you for your insightful comments.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 14 – Injustice Collecting

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 15 – Why Diets Succeed and Fail

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

I think Chapter 15 is one of the most interesting ones.
Any comments before I go on?

[TexArk]

I have found this to be true in my experience also. The diets I have lost on in the past were indeed low carb even though they were not labeled as such.

The original WW diet of the early 70s was very limited in carbs: no more than 2 slices of bread daily and not at the same meal and not if another acceptable carb was eaten (very small portion of potato, rice, pasta). Most carbs were not "legal" such as tortillas, sugar, any baked goods, and cereal was limited to a few times a week. Legumes were very limited as well as peas and carrots. Fruit was limited to 3 a day and only one apple, pear, or banana....mostly berries. The unsustainable part of the diet was the extreme low fat...1T daily. Eggs were limited to 4 a week, and cheese was also restricted. Skim milk products were required.

This diet came at the end of the era where everyone understood that starches needed to be limited to control weight (my mother and grandmother would never serve bread and potatoes at the same meal) but also at the beginning of the scare over saturated fat and heart disease. Gradually succeeding versions of WW allowed more carbs but were still very calorie restricted which probably still limited carbs though not as much as before.

[Graham]

.This diet came at the end of the era where everyone understood that starches needed to be limited to control weight (my mother and grandmother would never serve bread and potatoes at the same meal) but also at the beginning of the scare over saturated fat and heart disease.

Forgive a contrarian point - but this puzzles me - if "everyone understood" about starches being the problem, and it was the correct approach, and it worked, how did the "dietary saturated fat is the problem" idea start and grow and eventually become the dominant idea? There is something missing here, does Taubes explain it somewhere? I just can't make sense of it.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 16 – History on the Fattening Carbohydrate

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

The original WW diet of the early 70s came at the end of the era
where everyone understood that starches needed to be limited to control weight
(my mother and grandmother would never serve bread and potatoes at the same meal)
but also at the beginning of the scare over saturated fat and heart disease.

Gradually succeeding versions of WW allowed more carbs but were still very calorie restricted
which probably still limited carbs though not as much as before.

TexArk, Those are excellent points,
and I had not previously made that connection.

In the early 1970s when I first joined Weight Watchers,
that WAS the case.
The severely restricted sugars and starches just seemed appropriate,
because...of course...I knew it had to be that way.

As a child, my mother refused to serve bread with dinner (except on special occasions)
if we had another starch like potatoes or pasta,
and I remember her saying to me again and again
that eating corn and potatoes together (which was one of my favorites)
was "the same as eating two pieces of bread".

What I remember was a new concept from WW in the early 70s,
was that I could only have protein during a normal mealtime (3 a day),
and never within a snack, and fat or fatty protein was seriously limited.
That was the start of water-pack tuna
I wasn't too surprised that I had to remove the skin and fat, but..
only around 2 oz of cheese a week, and only 2 or 3 eggs a week,
that was harsh.

Any Snacks had to be carbs...
(like vegetables or a very small amount of fruit)

[BrightAngel]

This diet came at the end of the era
where everyone understood that starches needed to be limited to control weight
(my mother and grandmother would never serve bread and potatoes at the same meal)
but also at the beginning of the scare over saturated fat and heart disease.

Forgive a contrarian point - but this puzzles me -
if "everyone understood" about starches being the problem,
and it was the correct approach, and it worked,
how did the "dietary saturated fat is the problem" idea start and grow
and eventually become the dominant idea?

There is something missing here,
does Taubes explain it somewhere?
I just can't make sense of it.

Graham,
Taubes talks in great detail about that issue,
both in this book, and in his prior Good Calories Bad Calories.
The next couple of chapters deals with this issue,

Of course here, I'm only summarizing,
so I'll just be covering the basic issues and concepts,
not all the underlying research details that Taubes recites so carefully
in his books.

Stick around.

[BrightAngel]

Of course here, I'm only summarizing,
so I'll just be covering the basic issues and concepts,
not all the underlying research details that Taubes recites so carefully
in his books.

Here seems to be a good place to say a bit more on this.

Taubes is a highly respected science journalist,
and what he is really famous for is his thorough research of the history
of the issues, and his precise and accurate reporting of his research.

His educational background makes him exceptionally qualified to do this.
He has a physics degree from Harvard University;
a masters in aerospace engineering from Sanford University;
and a masters in journalism from Columbia University.

These are the top universities in those areas, and I know that
Stanford School of Engineering is for the super-geniuses.

In his previous book, Good Calories Bad Calories, (2007)
Taubes exhaustively researched and cited two centuries worth of research in nutrition.
He came to the conclusion that none of those recommendations is supported by science,
because the fundamental theory on which they're based is wrong.

Why We Get Fat (2011) is an updated summary of that earlier work,
but is much quicker and easier to read, with some significant points clarified.

Why We Get Fat contains the some of same basic information
as Good Calorie, Bad Calories but is written for non technical readers.

Taubes lays out his evidence, and his argument, with compelling precision.
You are not expected to take (nor should you take) anything he says on faith.
It is very well written, with a very good balance
of enough technical science to be informative,
but not so much that a reasonably attentive reader would get bogged down.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 17 – Meat or Plants?

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[TexArk]

I also have trouble buying into the necessity of twenty first century humans to become hunter gatherers and that in the last ten thousand years we have not evolved to handle grains. It seems obvious that man did just fine with agriculture. The problem seems to have come after the Industrial Revolution and the mass production and over refining of food. And the SUGAR is obviously a problem as Taubes shows in studies of "modern" primitive societies as sugar was added to their diet. You add into the equation all the over processed, over preserved and very available year round foods we have today and it seems obvious that our bodies just can't handle the onslaught. And just as there are those who are lactose intolerant, there is a wide range of tolerance for grains.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 18 – Nature of a Healthy Diet


This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

There is one chapter left,

Chapter 19 - Following Through
in which Taubes ties all of the previous chapters together;
and the Appendix which is a sample low-carb diet.

I have not yet prepared this, so it won't be posted today.

Thanks to those who have already posted comments on the previous chapters.
I look forward to seeing more of these.

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 19 – Following Through


This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Chapter 19 Comments....


This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[BrightAngel]

Appendix

This Chapter Summary and comments has moved
to BookTalk, at www.DietHobby.com

[Kevin]

Bright Angel, you writing is entertaining, poetic, visually charming, and a very valuable edition to this forum.

I will be interested to see what Taub's recommended diet is. I suspect that he over-simplified some ideas to make them easier to understand. Things he sets up as paradoxes (i.e., the low-fat/low-carb dichotomy, which isn't a dichotomy as those foods are really not at opposite ends of the same spectrum) feel a little intellectually dishonest, almost tautological in nature. I sense that you felt the same way.

If the diet he ends up recommending is low-glycemic-index carbs (barley and other "primitive" grains, beans, protein enriched pastas and breads - meaning those made with whole wheat and bean flours - peanuts and other legumes) and excludes white flour and refined grains, sugar, HFCS, too much fruit, then I think he will be making a healthy recommendation.

I hope it also excludes processed meats and high fat meats, too, and includes vegetables of all types.

It seems to me that if you avoid refined/processed/salted/dried/evaporated foods of all type, you'd probably be eating a sensible diet, relatively low on the glycemic index, one that would not overstimulate insulin production, and one that would help you maintain a healthy weight.

[BrightAngel]

Your writing is entertaining, poetic, visually charming,
and a very valuable edition to this forum.

Kevin, Thank you for your kind words.

In Chapter 19 Taubes clearly tells us
he is merely including a typical low-carb diet here,
and that there are many other books available with low-carb diets.
Also, I've presented only a Summary of the diet,
not the entire 7 pages.

His basic position is that if you are carbohydrate-sensitive,
you should limit or avoid sugar and refined carbs.
Whether or not you avoid or include other carbohydrates
is a matter of individual sensitivity.

Taubes states and restates the concept that
it is not a one-size-fits-all world,
and carbohydrate-restriction for any individual
is basically trial and error.

Re Taubes' writings....
...remember, I merely did a summary here.
Although I did my best,
my representation of his concepts isn't that thorough.
Don't make any judgments until you've read this 2011 book,
and his previous book, Good Calories Bad Calories (2007)

[connorcream]

BA-
Thank you for your wonderful summaries. Thoughts is a bit of a jumbled order-

1. I agree with Lutz, there can be a point of no return. 72 grams is a starting much like calorie calculators which are notoriously inaccurate but none the less a place to start. It does not take much time to notice if the calorie levels need adjusting with accurate food journals.

2. I agree about cal counts vs carb being the determining factor. I think for me it is and/both. I am addicted to sugar and fresh tortillas, I like my desserts, and would like to find the balance between carbs/cal for me. It doesn't take anymore effort to track both than it does for one. I weighed in at 124.8# on Friday, lower than my lowest weight I am comfortable with so I enjoyed my weekend with DH- chilaquilles, tortillas (1) w/honey (1/2tbs), tiramisu for dessert at supper. The only grains I ate were the fresh tortillas. I like the post you made a while back from the chemist about mass/energy equation. A lot of extra variables that need to be included including those we do not even know about. Calorie counting provides me with my boundaries, the portion control I need. Where the calories come from matters a great deal. The fewer grains & starches I eat, the more calories and opprtunites for desserts I have. I have a variety of berries daily, and often a baked apple for dessert. So far, I am able to tolerate the fruits. Calorie counting keeps the fruit servings in check.

3. I am highly attuned to Metabolic Syndrome diseases. So again, unlike calorie counting in and of itself, this suggests a fundemental path to treating these sad disorders.

4. I agree, that one does not need to except everything of Taubes, of Sisson, or Lutz, or any othe author for that matter. Only though accurate trial and error will one determine an appropriate course.

5. Even though I enjoy and can tolerate my desserts, I keep an eye on the cravings pull. I dislike being a slave to anything- including disorded food desires. There could very well come a time that the pull back and internal struggle from eating something sweet just is not worth it anymore. Why keep subjecting myself to the turmoil when the food in question is not good for me.

[Graham]

Well done BA! You have done sterling work, doing a great service to all interested readers.

Now, a couple of comments:

First I would disagree with futility of using exercise to achieve weight-loss. Personally, I have lost weight using exercise alone - that is to say, leaving my diet unchanged, eating what I wanted when I wanted but increasing aerobic exercise to a level of about 5 to 6 hours of fairly strenuous effort weekly. I have done this successfully twice - once in my late 40's and again in my late 50's. If circumstances were more convenient, I believe I might be able to do it again and may make some effort in that direction over the summer. (I should say my dietary choices have been influenced by Prof. John Yudkin's "This Slimming Business" - a classic low-carb diet which I read when I was 18 )

Secondly - the two slimmest people I know are a couple who are fans of raw food (following the books of Victoria Boutenko). They were fairly skinny before that - had been macrobiotic, then loosened up on that but always keen on wholesome foods, then got really skinny by shifting to less grains and more raw foods, claiming to also feel more energetic. They aren't entirely into raw food, but they do have their "Green Smoothies" daily. I mention them just to point out a heavy reliance on animal products may not be essential for weight-loss or well-being. Not a diet I'm personally drawn to - it would be a last resort for me.

[BrightAngel]

Connorcream and Graham
Thank you for your comments, and your for kind words.

NOTE
Re Invitation for Comments

I’ve been thinking that since Kathleen has had to postpone her part in our discussion,
….and I’ve put the summaries of all 19 Chapters up ahead of time,
perhaps

the people who have read ALL of the 19 chapter summaries posted here,
might be informed enough to join into this discussion,
even if they haven’t yet read the actual book.

Anyway, I'm willing to try that out and see how it works.
So....Any Comments?

[Graham]

Interesting invitation - "to join in the discussion" - but what to say? I am not familiar enough with this complex subject matter to be confident about having an opinion on it. What I do know, trawling cyber-space, is that Gary Taubes has his critics, who explain themselves with even more recondite prose than he uses. I am so out of my depth I've no idea who is right, or how much it matters - the only critiques I read were by people who were still low-carbing, they just didn't agree that all Taubes' science was sound.

I really like this about his work - that it lifts a lot of blame off people. I never did like Reinhard's admonition "Don't be an idiot" If Taubes is right, the issue isn't idiocy, or a lack of self-discipline so much as carbs actually being addictive in their action on susceptible people. A question might be - are carb handling issues the only cause of excess weight?

If Taubes is right, it will mean a lot of us can be much more effective in dealing with our weight issues, perhaps succeeding more and suffering less. I have certainly been influenced by what I've read on this thread, it coincided with a growing conviction that heavy starch meals just messed me up and I am moving towards a lower carb intake. It is fun to experiment with that, and hopefully find my way to a yet more peaceful place with food, beyond what No S has already brought me.