New Book (reading is important)
 

I'm currently reading the PDF draft of the book at this site:

http://perfecthealthdiet.com/

You'll see it on the page there. The authors advocate a high fat, low carb
diet. They claim that 100g of carbs is about right for most people, with 50
being around right for weight loss and 150 approximately right for weight
gain (pregnancy and muscle gain). Curiously, they are ok with rice & tubers
but not with cereal grains and legumes. Poopoo on Veggie oils, too. They
are not for overeating protein, either. According to them, anything will
become toxic in the body at large enough dosage. They tend to think in
terms of calories from the various macronutrients rather than grams.
Different, but ok.

Anyway, I'm on page 47 of 246 of the draft PDF. The print version should be
out soon. You get that free of additional charge if you buy the PDF.

And course, I don't know these authors from beans. Lots of references given
in the PDF that you can click to bring up. Lots of you long-timers will be
very familiar with this stuff, but this book might be good for those on the
fence who would never consider a book by Atkins. I think their angle is a
refreshing read, though.

PS. I happened to go in a Cracker Barrel this morning. They still have low
carb labeled meals on their menu. I found that surprising!

New Book (reading is important)
 

Roger Zoul wrote:

I'm currently reading the PDF draft of the book at this site:

http://perfecthealthdiet.com/

You'll see it on the page there. The authors advocate a high fat, low carb
diet. They claim that 100g of carbs is about right for most people, with 50
being around right for weight loss and 150 approximately right for weight
gain (pregnancy and muscle gain).

The more people I see reporting their Atkins CCLL and CCLM the more I
think those are the most common values. It also roughly agrees with
Eades. I like the fully custom Atkins approach but that's more work
than most are willing to put in so a median-or-average based system
works well.

Curiously, they are ok with rice & tubers
but not with cereal grains and legumes.

This seems a little arbitrary but not bad. The best known tuber is
potato which is in the nightshade family. The objections to nightshades
parallel the objections to legumes - Not available in paleolithic times.

Poopoo on Veggie oils, too.

There's been discussion of this topic on sci.life-extension recently.

They
are not for overeating protein, either. According to them, anything will
become toxic in the body at large enough dosage.

In the 1980s Scarsdale and other low carb, low fat, high protein diets
ended up problematic by building toxicity from excess protein.
Sometimes a macronutrient of calories, sometimes worse.

They tend to think in
terms of calories from the various macronutrients rather than grams.
Different, but ok.

It still works better than percentages.

PS. I happened to go in a Cracker Barrel this morning. They still have low
carb labeled meals on their menu. I found that surprising!

Cracker Barrel - Where yankees can get country ham. Yum. American
salted proscuitto, sorta-kinda.

New Book (reading is important)
 

Well, you've probably seen me say before that I think there are a lot more
people on low carb programs than the popular media lets on. Clues to this
are the popularity of the new Carbmaster yogurt at Krogers who also have the
best sugar free popsicles which seem to sell well and the popularity of the
KFC Double Down which has resulted in them keeping it on their menu when it
was originally planned to be a temporary offering. I think those of us who
have found it the way to go tend to recommend it to others and there have
been several research projects which have even hit the mainstream news.
Diabetics are finding out how well it works for BG control. I don't think
this group's activity is a good indicator, Usenet always has been populated
by a minority of computer users and with so many ISPs dropping the service
it doesn't get discovered by newbies.

As for tubers I never eat regular potatoes but do eat sweet potatoes, they
are a bit lower carb and have lots of wonderful nutrients in them.

Doug Freyburger wrote:
| Roger Zoul wrote:
||
|| I'm currently reading the PDF draft of the book at this site:
||
|| http://perfecthealthdiet.com/
||
|| You'll see it on the page there. The authors advocate a high fat,
|| low carb diet. They claim that 100g of carbs is about right for
|| most people, with 50 being around right for weight loss and 150
|| approximately right for weight gain (pregnancy and muscle gain).
|
| The more people I see reporting their Atkins CCLL and CCLM the more I
| think those are the most common values. It also roughly agrees with
| Eades. I like the fully custom Atkins approach but that's more work
| than most are willing to put in so a median-or-average based system
| works well.
|
|| Curiously, they are ok with rice & tubers
|| but not with cereal grains and legumes.
|
| This seems a little arbitrary but not bad. The best known tuber is
| potato which is in the nightshade family. The objections to
| nightshades parallel the objections to legumes - Not available in
| paleolithic times.
|
|| Poopoo on Veggie oils, too.
|
| There's been discussion of this topic on sci.life-extension recently.
|
|| They
|| are not for overeating protein, either. According to them, anything
|| will become toxic in the body at large enough dosage.
|
| In the 1980s Scarsdale and other low carb, low fat, high protein diets
| ended up problematic by building toxicity from excess protein.
| Sometimes a macronutrient of calories, sometimes worse.
|
|| They tend to think in
|| terms of calories from the various macronutrients rather than grams.
|| Different, but ok.
|
| It still works better than percentages.
|
|| PS. I happened to go in a Cracker Barrel this morning. They still
|| have low carb labeled meals on their menu. I found that surprising!
|
| Cracker Barrel - Where yankees can get country ham. Yum. American
| salted proscuitto, sorta-kinda.

New Book (reading is important)
 

FOB (removethis) wrote:

As for tubers I never eat regular potatoes but do eat sweet potatoes, they
are a bit lower carb and have lots of wonderful nutrients in them.

I also have better portion control with sweet potatoes. For me regular
potatoes are a mild slippery clope food. I can eat them in limited
amounts but it's easy for me to eat them a couple of days in a row then
start really wanting them. When I have a sweet potato it's something I
find easy to limit. Maybe the carb load, maybe something else.

On rec.gardens.edible someone recently mentioned that their leaves can
be eaten as a salad. My reaction was - Huh? Potatoes are in the
nightshade family so their leaves are considered toxic. I looked up
sweet potatoes. Sure enough they are not in the nightshade family.
They happen to look like potatoes but they are very distant in the tree
of life.

I don't know anyone who's ever mentioned eating sweet potato leaves but
I now know it can be done. Neat trivia.