Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The Other Michael · 07-12-2002, 08:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by NialScorva:
A former co-worker of mine is 6'4" or 5" and about 140 pounds. He wears sweaters and coats during the summer. The scary thing is he eats pretty much anything he wants to till he's full, and *never* excercises.

Shoot, I wear a coat almost every morning during the summer, but then I'm 3 blocks from the ocean in San Francisco.

It was 107+ in the California Central Valley today - and a balmy high 50s here at my house.

You might want to take a look at the exercise thread in this forum too as there is obviously going to be some cross-over between these two topics.

cheers,
Michael

NialScorva · 07-12-2002, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by The Other Michael:
Shoot, I wear a coat almost every morning during the summer, but then I'm 3 blocks from the ocean in San Francisco.

It was 107+ in the California Central Valley today - and a balmy high 50s here at my house.

Yeah, but we're in Washington, DC! It was in the low 90s with 70% humidity, and he was wearing a long sleeve shirt with sweater over it. I'm also the type that breaks out the short-sleeves when it hits 50 degrees.

Another general question: Has anyone ever gotten what someone I know called the "protien shakes"? Especially after a lot of muscle building excercise or after not being hungry enough to eat for a couple days (only in extremely hot weather when I go into hibernation), my hands will start shaking a bit. It goes away if I eat anything meat (luv the chicken). Anyone ever heard of this?

[ July 12, 2002: Message edited by: NialScorva ]

The Other Michael · 07-13-2002, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by NialScorva:
Another general question: Has anyone ever gotten what someone I know called the "protien shakes"? Especially after a lot of muscle building excercise or after not being hungry enough to eat for a couple days (only in extremely hot weather when I go into hibernation), my hands will start shaking a bit. It goes away if I eat anything meat (luv the chicken). Anyone ever heard of this?

They seem to be available at any health-food/GNC store, as well as various places on the net (often for less money). Look at the hussman site in the exercise thread - he discusses a lot of nutrition stuff from an exercise basis. As with any packaaged stuff it probably pays to read the label closely - a lot of "healthy" foods may be low fat but are still packed with sugar/salt.

Also, if you go to the <a href="http://www.bodyforlife.com" target="_blank">www.bodyforlife.com</a> site they have a communities page that links to a lot of different BfL Yahoo groups/etc, and alternative sources for the protein stuff is a pretty common question so you should be able to browse a couple of those and find a couple of 'net-based business that sell the shakes/bars.

In BfL they do say that you can do it all without supplements, shakes, bars. The shakes/bars seem to often be recommended as a convenience, something you can keep on hand when you need to eat and don't have a chance to fix something from scratch. They do appear to have extra 'stuff' in them for the dietary supplement side of their program.

The diet part of BfL shoots for six small meals equally spaced throughout the day, with both protein and carbs in each one. I think that would be a good way to go if for no other reason than it might reduce the urge to snack, and keep your blood sugar/insulin levels on a more even keel.

My sweetheart has been tested for hypoglycemia, and come up negative. But she's one of those people who if she starts getting pretty hungry from missing a meal can get REALLY cranky so there must be some other mechanism in the body that can contribute to feeling bad when you aren't eating right.

cheers,
Michael

Bokonon · 07-13-2002, 08:21 AM

I have nothing to contribute to this thread other than this:

I used to be clinically obese.

Then I became a vegetarian.

I gained weight.

Why?

More or less, I replaced meats with Cheeses. Bad idea.

So then I became a vegan.

I lost 40 lbs. That was 2 years ago. Since then, I've gained 10 lbs. back, but that can be attributed to the fact that I've never really exercised. When I go away to college (Berkeley), I suspect I'll get my body to a truly healthy weight rather quickly. All I need is exercise. I'll walk and bike everywhere.

As has been recommended here, the key to losing weight and keeping it off is simple: eat plenty of fruits and veggies, but make sure you eat enough carbs and proteins to avoid deficiencies. And of course, exercise helps. While I am no longer clinically obese, I am still overweight. Diet only goes so far.

I don't see how anyone could possibly think Atkins is healthy in the slightest. Eat all the meat and dairy you want, but don't you dare touch that English Muffin? Please.

Dr Rick · 07-13-2002, 11:04 AM

<a href="http://www.consumerreports.org" target="_blank">Consumer Reports</a> published an article in its June 2002 issue titled The Truth About Dieting. Included were the results of a mail-in survey by almost 8000 respondents that self-reported the successful loss of 10% or more of their individual starting weights and subsequent maintence of those losses for one year or longer and expert commentary on a variety of dieting issues.

Some excerpts:

What it takes to lose weight:

Quote:

Weight loss is no mystery. You have to take in fewer calories than your body burns. "The trick is to help people not feel hungry all the time while they're doing that," says Barbara Rolls, Ph.D., a professor of nutrition at Pennsylvania State University in University Park. Until recently, however, medical researchers mostly aimed at developing diets to achieve medical goals--lowering cholesterol and blood pressure, for example. "We're beginning to say that may not be so great if you won't stay on the diet and you won't be happy," says Adam Drewnowski, Ph.D., director of the nutritional sciences program at the University of Washington in Seattle...

...To an extent, the supersuccessful and unsuccessful dieters used similar weight-loss strategies. They reduced portion sizes, ate more fruits and vegetables, cut back on fat, and avoided sweets and junk food. So why did some succeed while others failed? Persistence. More than half of the supersuccesses said they applied those strategies to their diets every day, and another 30 percent did so a few times a week. By contrast, only 20 percent of the failures used the strategies every day, and 35 percent a few times a week.

"Regardless of what people do for dieting and exercise, the longer they do it, the more successful they are," says Robert Jeffery, Ph.D., a professor of epidemiology at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis. "It's not what people do, it's how consistent they are about it. You don't have to be 100 percent, but you have to be better than 10 percent."

The glycemic idex:

Quote:

The body's use of carbohydrates seems to be key to success. Carbohydrates are the staple of everyday diets, and as much as 55 to 60 percent of the traditional low-fat reducing diet. In the digestive process, carbs break down into glucose (sugar) molecules, which are then sent into the bloodstream. In response to the upsurge in blood sugar, the pancreas secretes the hormone insulin, without which cells can't take up glucose to use as energy. But fast-acting carbohydrates such as sugar, refined flour, white rice, pasta, and potatoes have a high "glycemic index"--that is, they turn into blood glucose much more quickly than carbohydrates in high-fiber foods such as fruits, vegetables, legumes, and whole grains. The abrupt infusion of blood sugar from fast-acting carbohydrates unleashes a surge of insulin so great that it overshoots the metabolic mark and drives blood-sugar levels lower than normal. Low blood sugar makes us feel hungry, so we reach for another high-glycemic-index carbohydrate--starting the whole cycle all over again.

David Ludwig, M.D., director of the obesity program at Children's Hospital Boston, and other researchers have begun studying weight-loss diets designed to curb appetite by smoothing out the wild gyrations of blood sugar and insulin that occur on diets of high-glycemic-index carbohydrates. In one study, Ludwig put a group of overweight children on a standard low-fat diet and a comparison group on a low-glycemic diet. The low-glycemic dieters were instructed to combine protein, healthful fat, and low-glycemic carbohydrates like fruits, vegetables, legumes, and whole grains at each meal. After four months, children on the low-glycemic diet had lost an average of 4.5 pounds, while the kids on the low-fat diet had gained 2.9 pounds.

Low-glycemic meals seem to curb hunger in adults, too, according to a recent study of a dozen overweight men by scientists from Laval University in Quebec. On their own, the men consumed 25 percent fewer calories on a low-glycemic diet than on a standard low-fat diet. Moreover, their triglyceride levels improved. More than half our five-year successes who tried "eating fewer carbohydrates like bread and potatoes" also said it helped them lose weight and keep it off.

Exercice:

Quote:

Our survey also showed what you already suspected: Keeping weight off requires regular and fairly rigorous exercise. Eight out of 10 of our successful losers who tried exercising three or more times a week listed it as their No. 1 strategy. And while most chose walking as the path to long-term weight-loss success, an eyebrow-raising 29 percent added weight lifting to their regime.

...While it seems that successful dieters can take many paths to reach that longed-for ideal--or at least lower--weight, most used the same tactic to stay there: exercise. Indeed, regular exercise was the No. 1 successful weight-loss maintenance strategy, cited by 81 percent of the long-term maintainers who tried it. Sixty-three percent of five-year maintainers exercised at least three days a week, compared with only 29 percent of those who failed to lose any weight at all. In second place, at 74 percent, was the related strategy of increasing physical activity in daily routines--using stairs instead of the elevator, for example.

Our results track closely with those of the National Weight Control Registry, a voluntary database of more than 3,000 people who have lost at least 30 pounds and kept it off for at least a year. Just 9 percent of the registry members maintain their weight without exercise; about 17 percent of our long-term maintainers said they did not exercise.

Does it help to have "help"?:

Quote:

What explains the success of our winning losers? To find out, we compared responses of the 4,056 superstars in our sample--the ones who'd kept their weight off for five years or more--with those of the 3,877 self-admitted failures--people who had tried to lose weight but had shed none at all.

The strongest finding that emerges from the responses, other than the necessity for exercise, is that when it comes to losing weight, one size definitely does not fit all. Eighty-three percent of the successful losers said they lost weight entirely on their own.

That overturns the long-held conviction that to lose weight, you have to enroll in an expensive program, buy special food, or follow the regimen of a particular diet guru. Indeed, just 14 percent of our superlosers had ever signed up with Weight Watchers, Jenny Craig, or other commercial diet programs, while 26 percent of our failures had done so. Eighty-eight percent of our superlosers shunned meal replacements such as Slim Fast. And a mere 6 percent of the successes used dietary supplements or nonprescription weight-loss aids such as Metabolife or Dexatrim. If anything made a difference for them, it was one-on-one counseling from a professional such as a psychologist or nutritionist. Although less than 10 percent of all our 8,000 successes used one, they ranked it second in effectiveness after "my own diet and exercise regimen."

The Atkins Diet:

Quote:

As recently as last year, an expert panel of nutritionists convened by the American Heart Association condemned it as ineffective and very possibly a health hazard. Yet ...of the 10 best-selling diet authors we asked about in our questionnaire, Atkins stood out from the rest. Eighteen percent of all the dieters said they'd read one of his books. That was more than four times as many as had read any of the others. And 34 percent said that his advice helped them to lose weight and keep it off.

Although the original version of the Atkins diet has been around since the 1970s, "Atkins has overpromoted it without data, and doctors have criticized it without data," says Gary Foster, Ph.D., clinical director of the weight- and eating-disorders program at the University of Pennsylvania.

To fill that gap, Foster and collaborators at the University of Colorado Health Science Center and at the Washington University School of Medicine rounded up 42 overweight volunteers. They sent half of them home with instructions to follow the diet in the Atkins book. That meant they were allowed to eat as much protein and fat as they wanted, including steaks, butter, cheese, eggs, and oils, but absolutely no carbohydrates other than a few cups of salad greens or the equivalent each day. The second group followed a standard low-fat, low-calorie, high-carbohydrate diet.

After 12 weeks, 7 of the original 21 low-fat dieters had quit, while only 2 of the Atkins group had dropped out. Moreover, the Atkins dieters had already lost an average of nearly 19 pounds, compared with an average loss of just 7 1/2 pounds for the low-fat dieters.

Atkins' harshest critics say that the program is dangerous; eating all that animal fat and cholesterol is bound to do dreadful things to your cardiovascular system, they argue. So the researchers measured the study subjects' "good" and "bad" cholesterol levels as well as their triglycerides (another indicator of heart-disease risk: the lower, the better). The findings, which have been presented at scientific meetings but not yet published, were mixed. Blood levels of both good and bad cholesterol went up in the Atkins group and down in the low-fat group. Triglycerides dropped more in the Atkins group than in the group on the low-fat regimen.

"If I had to say whether the Atkins diet is good or bad, I'd say I still don't know," Foster says. He is now analyzing an additional 12 weeks of study results, and the research group is also organizing a second study involving many more people.

Our verdict: If your overall health, as assessed by a recent medical exam, is good; if your LDL ("bad") cholesterol level is in the low-coronary-risk range (less than 100 milligrams per deciliter); and if your kidneys are in good shape (digesting lots of protein may be hard on them), we doubt you'll harm yourself by using the Atkins diet for 12 weeks to jump-start a weight-loss attempt. (Be sure to include the daily multivitamin Atkins specifies.) But we don't think it should be your first choice as a reducing diet. Unless further studies establish its long-term safety, we can't endorse staying on the Atkins diet for the many months you'd need to lose a significant amount of weight. Furthermore, the diet can be deficient in the fiber that abounds in fruits and whole-grain carbohydrates; they should be a part of any sustainable, long-term eating plan.

Rick

The Other Michael · 07-13-2002, 02:18 PM

Hi Bokonon and Rick,

It really makes sense that exercise is the real key to weight loss. Any number of sources will point out that more lean muscle generally means a higher rate of metabolism around the clock, so the more muscle you build, the more excess calories get consumed.

And it does appear that weight training is probably the most effective way of building that lean muscle mass.

On the diet studies it would have been interesting to see before/after lean/fat ratios. I suspect that a significant portion of the losses of those who were doing diet alone was probably muscle (since that is heavier it makes more of a difference size for size), and they may well have ended up having to diet even more as they dropped the muscle tissue.

While we have PhysEd in schools, it doesn't seem to me they really do a good job of encouraging healthy bodies in the kids (at least not in the 60s when I was having to deal with it). If you were sports oriented you were fine, but those of us who would rather stay in at recess and read were more often heaped with ridicule and scorn (since we weren't any good at the sports) than we were really encouraged to find an activity that we could enjoy.

cheers,
Michael

Bill · 07-13-2002, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by simian:
Here's my take on the diet thing: eat a balanced diet (some of everything). If you want to lose weight, make sure the calorie intake is less than calories used.

Yeah, except that my body rebels at the thought of fewer calories.

This over-simplistic view of dieting has been responsible for millions of miserable people because it fails to consider the fact that the body establishes a "set point" for body weight and will struggle mightily to maintain that "set point" regardless of what you eat (or fail to eat). This is why reducing your calorie intake makes you ravenously hungry, and why most people who manage to complete a diet will gain back most (if not all or more) of the lost weight within a few months (or a couple of years) of completing the diet.

I've been fat since puberty. Eight years in the Navy, eating way too much in the way of carbohydrates (sugar and grains), made me even more grossly fat. But my weight has remained virtually stable for nearly 30 years, almost without regard to what I eat (or fail to eat). Given this situation, I've long ago decided to stop depriving myself of food I enjoy. I'm at the weight my body demands that I be at, and until they develop a cure for the "set point" syndrome, I will not be able to lose weight permanently.

For what its worth, the Atkins diet is the only diet that I was ever able to successfully use to lose weight and keep it off. However, like virtually all diet plans, it too only works if you stick to it "for life." Two years after losing my way all the way down to 180 on the Atkins diet, and getting off the diet due to fear over the many possible health consequences (most of which are way overblown, IMHO), two years later I was back over 250 again, and I've never been under 250 since.

I await the next advance from medical science which will allow me to adjust my body's "set point" for a more healthy weight. Until that arrives, I will just have to live with being overweight because the alternatives are all worse.

== Bill

The Other Michael · 07-13-2002, 07:49 PM

Hi Bill,

What you need to do is boost your calorie expenditure if you don't want to reduce what you want to eat.

Have you been active or sedentary all this time? If the latter, and you've had a steady weight, then it would seem that almost any additional exercise is going to burn more calories than you have been, and that should help the weight to come off.

It won't come off quickly unless you do a lot of exercise, but it should tend to come off.

cheers,
Michael

Cipher Girl · 07-13-2002, 09:38 PM

Hi Everybody

I'm not in the medical field, so you'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge in medical matters. The diet that seems to work for me is call "Neanderthin" or the "Caveman". It is based on the book of the same name by Ray Audette. I read the book a couple of years ago. I have rheumatoid arthritis and suffer from hypoglycemia which will probably turn into adult onset diabetes as has happened to several members in my immediate family.

These are the same problems that the author in the book faced.

I am only moderately overweight (I weigh 135 and should be around 115). I read the book which has a very good chapter in on the nutrition of early man and hunter gatherers such as Eskimos. Humans have not really changed in the last 50,000 years. But our diet has changed dramatically.

The book recommends a diet heavy in lean meat or grass fed animals, supplanted with flax oil for the omega-6 fatty acids. Also the diet is heavy in seafood, vegtables, fresh fruit, and nuts. What the book recommends avoiding is grains, beans, and sugars, all which need to be processed before they can be consumed. Also most processed foods should be avoided. Basically anything which has to be processed before it can be rendered editable should be avoided.

Since being on the diet, I've lost about a pound a week until I stabalized arount 125. I also started walking some (no heavy exercise.) Unfortunately, I've been off of the diet somewhat and have slowly gained the weight back. I've just gone back on the diet and can feel the difference.

The most incredible thing that happed however was the fact that my arthritis was reduced. The swelling and redness in my fingers were gone and I could get up out of a chair without needing any support. I found that the grain that I especially needed to avoid was wheat. Since avoiding wheat, my joints no longer swell, I have no problems going up stairs or getting out of a chair. I also don't have intestinal pain and cramps any more. I don't avoid all grains since I eat a small bit of rice or corn as a small snack or side dish.

I also found that I was not hungry all of the time. I can easily go without having to have snack all of the time and getting shakey hands and tunnel vision. My blood sugar seems to remain more steady. Also my choleresterol levels have remained below 185. My younger sister on the other hand eats salads and weighs less but has a choleresterol level in the mid 350's. She takes choleresterol lowering drugs.

There is a mailing list at St Johns University where several anthropologists and biologist are trying out the diet. I don't have the address handy but a web search can get you there if anyone is interested.

Bree · 07-14-2002, 08:04 AM

Do you happen to recall why the book said the diet worked? What does it trick your body into doing?

Also - anyone ever tried Weight Watchers, or know anything about it? I tried it last year and (alas) gained weight on it - about 9 pounds all together. I also passed out a lot - the doctor said I probably wasn't getting enough calories, but again, I gained weight.

Maybe I should move to a country where fat is beautiful!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-13-2002, 08:21 AM	#54
Bokonon Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Left of the Mississippi Posts: 138	I have nothing to contribute to this thread other than this: I used to be clinically obese. Then I became a vegetarian. I gained weight. Why? More or less, I replaced meats with Cheeses. Bad idea. So then I became a vegan. I lost 40 lbs. That was 2 years ago. Since then, I've gained 10 lbs. back, but that can be attributed to the fact that I've never really exercised. When I go away to college (Berkeley), I suspect I'll get my body to a truly healthy weight rather quickly. All I need is exercise. I'll walk and bike everywhere. As has been recommended here, the key to losing weight and keeping it off is simple: eat plenty of fruits and veggies, but make sure you eat enough carbs and proteins to avoid deficiencies. And of course, exercise helps. While I am no longer clinically obese, I am still overweight. Diet only goes so far. I don't see how anyone could possibly think Atkins is healthy in the slightest. Eat all the meat and dairy you want, but don't you dare touch that English Muffin? Please.

07-13-2002, 02:18 PM	#56
The Other Michael Honorary Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In the fog of San Francisco Posts: 12,631	Hi Bokonon and Rick, It really makes sense that exercise is the real key to weight loss. Any number of sources will point out that more lean muscle generally means a higher rate of metabolism around the clock, so the more muscle you build, the more excess calories get consumed. And it does appear that weight training is probably the most effective way of building that lean muscle mass. On the diet studies it would have been interesting to see before/after lean/fat ratios. I suspect that a significant portion of the losses of those who were doing diet alone was probably muscle (since that is heavier it makes more of a difference size for size), and they may well have ended up having to diet even more as they dropped the muscle tissue. While we have PhysEd in schools, it doesn't seem to me they really do a good job of encouraging healthy bodies in the kids (at least not in the 60s when I was having to deal with it). If you were sports oriented you were fine, but those of us who would rather stay in at recess and read were more often heaped with ridicule and scorn (since we weren't any good at the sports) than we were really encouraged to find an activity that we could enjoy. cheers, Michael

07-13-2002, 07:49 PM	#58
The Other Michael Honorary Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: In the fog of San Francisco Posts: 12,631	Hi Bill, What you need to do is boost your calorie expenditure if you don't want to reduce what you want to eat. Have you been active or sedentary all this time? If the latter, and you've had a steady weight, then it would seem that almost any additional exercise is going to burn more calories than you have been, and that should help the weight to come off. It won't come off quickly unless you do a lot of exercise, but it should tend to come off. cheers, Michael

07-13-2002, 09:38 PM	#59
Cipher Girl Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Sunny Southern California Posts: 657	Hi Everybody I'm not in the medical field, so you'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge in medical matters. The diet that seems to work for me is call "Neanderthin" or the "Caveman". It is based on the book of the same name by Ray Audette. I read the book a couple of years ago. I have rheumatoid arthritis and suffer from hypoglycemia which will probably turn into adult onset diabetes as has happened to several members in my immediate family. These are the same problems that the author in the book faced. I am only moderately overweight (I weigh 135 and should be around 115). I read the book which has a very good chapter in on the nutrition of early man and hunter gatherers such as Eskimos. Humans have not really changed in the last 50,000 years. But our diet has changed dramatically. The book recommends a diet heavy in lean meat or grass fed animals, supplanted with flax oil for the omega-6 fatty acids. Also the diet is heavy in seafood, vegtables, fresh fruit, and nuts. What the book recommends avoiding is grains, beans, and sugars, all which need to be processed before they can be consumed. Also most processed foods should be avoided. Basically anything which has to be processed before it can be rendered editable should be avoided. Since being on the diet, I've lost about a pound a week until I stabalized arount 125. I also started walking some (no heavy exercise.) Unfortunately, I've been off of the diet somewhat and have slowly gained the weight back. I've just gone back on the diet and can feel the difference. The most incredible thing that happed however was the fact that my arthritis was reduced. The swelling and redness in my fingers were gone and I could get up out of a chair without needing any support. I found that the grain that I especially needed to avoid was wheat. Since avoiding wheat, my joints no longer swell, I have no problems going up stairs or getting out of a chair. I also don't have intestinal pain and cramps any more. I don't avoid all grains since I eat a small bit of rice or corn as a small snack or side dish. I also found that I was not hungry all of the time. I can easily go without having to have snack all of the time and getting shakey hands and tunnel vision. My blood sugar seems to remain more steady. Also my choleresterol levels have remained below 185. My younger sister on the other hand eats salads and weighs less but has a choleresterol level in the mid 350's. She takes choleresterol lowering drugs. There is a mailing list at St Johns University where several anthropologists and biologist are trying out the diet. I don't have the address handy but a web search can get you there if anyone is interested.

07-14-2002, 08:04 AM	#60
Bree Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Twin Cities, USA Posts: 3,197	Do you happen to recall why the book said the diet worked? What does it trick your body into doing? Also - anyone ever tried Weight Watchers, or know anything about it? I tried it last year and (alas) gained weight on it - about 9 pounds all together. I also passed out a lot - the doctor said I probably wasn't getting enough calories, but again, I gained weight. Maybe I should move to a country where fat is beautiful!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.