Atkins Diet

"JMA" wrote in message ...

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
...
Annabel Smyth wrote:
But I don't find it easy to eat "small" meals, this is the problem.
Trust me, I know what works for me.

I agree with you. As a former bulimic/binge eater that just doesn't
work for me. My metabolism may well be "kicking in", but my drive to
eat too much overrides that, bigtime ;-)

I used to think that too, but my treatment program for my bulimia & binge
eating *required* eating 6 times a day - 3 meals and 3 snacks. It's been
very helpful for me but of course YMMV.

Jenn

Same here, Jenn -- I can completely relate to what Crafting Mom and Annabel are
saying -- I felt exactly the same, had the same problems with controlling intake at
meals -- and was very worried and skeptical when my nutritionist said the first thing
that had to change was eating my one or two meals a day. I didn't want to always be
thinking about food either and as it's been expressed, I was worried I wouldn't be
able to stop eating at those "small meals." I didn't have much experience with small
meals! :-) But what happened is that eating more often and smaller meals became a
very good tool in regulating blood sugar (sure I knew that diabetics had to eat every
couple of hours to help keep blood sugar on an even keel, but I never translated that
to my own needs) -- and none of my fears came to fruition. I didn't have the
overwhelming urges to overeat, and I credit that partly to more regulated insulin
production and also the psychological knowledge that I'd be eating again in a couple
of hours, so I didn't have to overeat now (all happening at a subconscious level, I
think).

Also, I was relieved from the psychological game of "OK, to make up for overdoing it
last night, I won't eat till suppertime" -- which usually led to a repeat of the
night before in uncontrolled eating and snacking (because how much damage could I do
in one meal? Turns out, a lot). It also helps that with five-six "meals" a day, I'm
not eating too many calories at one time, and apparently my body is using instead of
storing them.

Today, if I've had trouble with overeating or eating foods that I don't normally
include in my food plan (junky sugarfree stuff or really going bonkers on nuts, which
I can eat an amazing amount of), I can trace it to having gone too long without
eating. Of course and as always YMMV but I wanted to speak specifically to this
subject since I spent so much time on the other side of the fence.

Mary
325-154-148

Mary M - Ohio wrote:

Same here, Jenn -- I can completely relate to what Crafting Mom and
Annabel are saying -- I felt exactly the same, had the same problems
with controlling intake at meals -- and was very worried and skeptical
when my nutritionist said the first thing that had to change was eating
my one or two meals a day.

It's not that I was worried and skeptical, it's that it was the reality
for me. Eating frequently, for me, fed my "I must eat all the time"
mentality. I do eat MORE than "one or 2 meals a day", but I *listen to
my body*. I really examine what my body is telling me, rather than
reacting to the first *impulse* that enters my head.

The thing is, *sometimes* that actually *does* translate into eating
some snacks. I am not saying that eating several times per day is bad
and I'll never ever do it... because sometimes that does indeed wind up
being the most appropriate thing for whatever is going on in my day.
Like grabbing an apple here, and a cracker or 2 with peanut butter
there. But most often, I find myself just eating an actual meal and
then not being hungry enough to warrant a snack.

The whole point of me recovering from bulimia (coming on 5 years now
bulimia-free - after over 15 years of bulimia/coe) is that *I* get to
feel ok about eating whenever I choose to! I get to be flexible with
the way I eat!

We live in a culture where the idea of having an empty stomach for
longer than 5 seconds is taboo, (I speak of Canada here), but I actually
have come to like that feeling, and the resulting feeling of the
emptiness going away as I eat a decent sized meal. (Again, that is not
the only condition under which I eat)

To feed myself constantly, I never give my stomach the chance to do what
it does naturally, to actually process the food I've just eaten, empty
itself and send me the signal that it's time to eat again.

Again, I am not contradicting anyone here, I am just explaining why
certain things work for me and other things don't.

Cheers,
Crafting Mom

"Dally" wrote in message ...
Mary M - Ohio wrote:

"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
...

I am not making any excuses for myself; I have been greedy, and eating
too much. This is why I need to use willpower to learn to eat rather
less. I personally find the easiest way of cutting my calorie intake is
by cutting my fat intake, since fat has over twice the calories per
gramme than any other sort of food does.

End of.


Do what works for YOU, Annabel.

I agree with that. I'm just worried that she's NOT doing what works for
her, but doing what she THINKS she's supposed to be doing. Going 7 or 8
hours between meals, using will-power not to snack when she's hungry,
eating high-carb low-fat low-protein meals because she thinks that's
healthy...

I realize it appears that I was specifically speaking about you, Dally and I really
didn't mean to come across that way -- I just relate to the frustration of having 10
million opinions (and some very strong ones at that) thrown at you when you're in the
formative stages of finding the right food plan. I am all for combining foods in a
protein-carb combo and getting rid of refined carbs as much as possible.

I am doing very well on a food plan that is both low
in refined carbohydrates AND low in fat.
Which means it's high in protein, right? (Either that or alcohol.) :-)
I don't know what you mean by "low" or high, but I found tracking food
at www.Fitday.com was incredibly illuminating. I bet none of us are
eating over 60% carbs AND successfully losing weight month after month.
Any takers?

By low fat and low refined carb, I mean that I eat foods that are not over 3g of fat
3g of sugar per serving. Of course, fruits probably exceed those guidelines, as do
peanut butter or turkey/chicken, but following that model (along with the limitation
of 250 mg of sodium per serving) has resulted in a pretty low-refined-carb, low-fat
diet. I do not track in Fitday and I really don't care what my percentages are. My
daily guidelines are up to 15 oz. in lean meat servings, 4 grain servings, 3 fruit
servings, 2 tablespoons olive oil, unlimited vegetables.

My
philosophy is keep an open mind, but don't let others force their ideas on you.

My philosophy is to figure out what works for me based on how my body
works - not based on what some diet guru told me.

I had been following a retarded 75% grain diet - aiming to be vegan and
Ornish and as low-fat as possible. Then I figured it out. I had to
change EVERYTHING. It was all tied together. I had to eat MORE, I had
to eat differently, I had to move differently. I had to CHANGE.

Well that does sound a bit unbalanced.

Did you lose your weight by changing just one thing?

Of course not -- the first to go was refined sugar in 1985.
Next change was exercising regularly (whatever that meant at the time).
Next change was going to a trainer in 1996 and keeping up a truly regular (3-4x a
week) professionally provided workout (I'm still going 4x week).
Next change was going to my nutritionist in 2002-present. Through him, I began the
food program outlined above (had a lot more servings of grains and fruits, though!),
as well as daily cardio exercise of 45-60 minutes-- I had only been doing it about 3x
a week and usually only a half-hour.
Next change was introducing the bicycle to my cardio program 3 weeks ago -- it's made
a huge difference and most welcome challenge. There are noticeable differences in my
body in only 3 weeks, and I never would have believed that!

Mind you I tried a million things in the meantime during all those years, but these
are the changes that made the most difference -- these were the permanent changes.

my mirror are definite proof that low fat works just fine for me. (Some assume
that
"lowfat" means "high refined carbohydrate" -- which is simply not true in my
case.)
What does "lowfat" mean to you? And how do you get lowfat and high
protein without hitting 30% fat? Proteins come bundled with fat so much
of the time. Just for some definitions, I generally think of low-fat as
in the 10-20% range. And of course the tendancy is to avoid as much fat
as you possibly can, which generally ends up meaning hardly any protein,
either.

I honestly don't care about percentages and I can't be bothered to figure it out or
doing the Fitday entries. I just follow what is working as far as servings are
concerned.

Compare 7 pounds lost in
4 months to 40 lbs. lost in 4 months, which happened with my nutritionist's
balanced
eating plan.

Balanced. As in 33/33/33?

I don't give a **** about percentages and have no intention of calculating them.

So you're saying not to listen to criticism
but then saying the same thing I am:

I don't see it that way.

that you didn't lose any weight
until you went on a balanced diet that was higher in protein than yours
used to be as a percentage of calories and that had carbs under 50%.

I had to get the high-fat stuff out of my food plan too -- no cheese, commercial
sausage, bacon and other high-fat high-protein foods. Hence the failure on Atkins --
my body doesn't do well on high-fat high-protein at all. As I said I don't care about
or count percentages. I didn't lose weight until I stopped eating foods that were
high-fat, high-carb bombs -- pizza and sugarfree ice cream by the half gallon and
sugarfree cookies and sugarfree chocolate and potato chips and corn chips and pounds
of nuts and french fries and fried chicken wings and buttered bread and fried fish
and I need not go on. High fat-high carb foods were, are and always will be my
personal demon -- I gained 15 lbs. in 16 days when I first visited New Zealand by
eating more high-fat high-carb foods than normal. Yes, more protein has been an
important part of my current food plan -- because it helps keep the insulin
merry-go-round at bay -- that's been the crux of my food plan success -- keeping
blood sugar on an even keel.

One thing I've always found interesting is that we came from different
directions and different eating preferences and even label it
differently, but ALL of the big long-term losers seem to be eating
pretty much the same, give or take 5 or 10%.


Despite the way it looks, I'm not interested in picking on Annabel until
she runs crying from the group or kill-files me or anything. It's just
that she's here trying to do this and it only makes sense to let her
know how we did it.

Well "we" have had different ways of doing it. Giving up sugar was and is central to
my food plan, but you yourself have said that I'm too extreme about it. I tell what
it's done for me, but I don't hound others into giving it up themselves (I clearly
remember you asking once why I didn't eat a piece of cake that a stranger was forcing
on me -- asking couldn't I have eaten it to be polite -- and the outrage of that
****ed me off more than anything anyone on this newsgroup has ever said to me, so
that's why I remember it clearly). You've also said in the last day that we all tried
low-fat and we all failed at it and ended up fatter than ever (paraphrasing, but that
was the general idea). That's just so not true -- a weight loss of 175 lbs, with 100
of those off for 19 years is hardly a failure. Banning sugar and not eating high-fat
foods has worked great for me.

Mary

"Dally" wrote in message ...
Mary M - Ohio wrote:

"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
...

I am not making any excuses for myself; I have been greedy, and eating
too much. This is why I need to use willpower to learn to eat rather
less. I personally find the easiest way of cutting my calorie intake is
by cutting my fat intake, since fat has over twice the calories per
gramme than any other sort of food does.

End of.


Do what works for YOU, Annabel.

I agree with that. I'm just worried that she's NOT doing what works for
her, but doing what she THINKS she's supposed to be doing. Going 7 or 8
hours between meals, using will-power not to snack when she's hungry,
eating high-carb low-fat low-protein meals because she thinks that's
healthy...

I realize it appears that I was specifically speaking about you, Dally and I really
didn't mean to come across that way -- I just relate to the frustration of having 10
million opinions (and some very strong ones at that) thrown at you when you're in the
formative stages of finding the right food plan. I am all for combining foods in a
protein-carb combo and getting rid of refined carbs as much as possible.

I am doing very well on a food plan that is both low
in refined carbohydrates AND low in fat.
Which means it's high in protein, right? (Either that or alcohol.) :-)
I don't know what you mean by "low" or high, but I found tracking food
at www.Fitday.com was incredibly illuminating. I bet none of us are
eating over 60% carbs AND successfully losing weight month after month.
Any takers?

By low fat and low refined carb, I mean that I eat foods that are not over 3g of fat
3g of sugar per serving. Of course, fruits probably exceed those guidelines, as do
peanut butter or turkey/chicken, but following that model (along with the limitation
of 250 mg of sodium per serving) has resulted in a pretty low-refined-carb, low-fat
diet. I do not track in Fitday and I really don't care what my percentages are. My
daily guidelines are up to 15 oz. in lean meat servings, 4 grain servings, 3 fruit
servings, 2 tablespoons olive oil, unlimited vegetables.

My
philosophy is keep an open mind, but don't let others force their ideas on you.

My philosophy is to figure out what works for me based on how my body
works - not based on what some diet guru told me.

I had been following a retarded 75% grain diet - aiming to be vegan and
Ornish and as low-fat as possible. Then I figured it out. I had to
change EVERYTHING. It was all tied together. I had to eat MORE, I had
to eat differently, I had to move differently. I had to CHANGE.

Well that does sound a bit unbalanced.

Did you lose your weight by changing just one thing?

Of course not -- the first to go was refined sugar in 1985.
Next change was exercising regularly (whatever that meant at the time).
Next change was going to a trainer in 1996 and keeping up a truly regular (3-4x a
week) professionally provided workout (I'm still going 4x week).
Next change was going to my nutritionist in 2002-present. Through him, I began the
food program outlined above (had a lot more servings of grains and fruits, though!),
as well as daily cardio exercise of 45-60 minutes-- I had only been doing it about 3x
a week and usually only a half-hour.
Next change was introducing the bicycle to my cardio program 3 weeks ago -- it's made
a huge difference and most welcome challenge. There are noticeable differences in my
body in only 3 weeks, and I never would have believed that!

Mind you I tried a million things in the meantime during all those years, but these
are the changes that made the most difference -- these were the permanent changes.

my mirror are definite proof that low fat works just fine for me. (Some assume
that
"lowfat" means "high refined carbohydrate" -- which is simply not true in my
case.)
What does "lowfat" mean to you? And how do you get lowfat and high
protein without hitting 30% fat? Proteins come bundled with fat so much
of the time. Just for some definitions, I generally think of low-fat as
in the 10-20% range. And of course the tendancy is to avoid as much fat
as you possibly can, which generally ends up meaning hardly any protein,
either.

I honestly don't care about percentages and I can't be bothered to figure it out or
doing the Fitday entries. I just follow what is working as far as servings are
concerned.

Compare 7 pounds lost in
4 months to 40 lbs. lost in 4 months, which happened with my nutritionist's
balanced
eating plan.

Balanced. As in 33/33/33?

I don't give a **** about percentages and have no intention of calculating them.

So you're saying not to listen to criticism
but then saying the same thing I am:

I don't see it that way.

that you didn't lose any weight
until you went on a balanced diet that was higher in protein than yours
used to be as a percentage of calories and that had carbs under 50%.

I had to get the high-fat stuff out of my food plan too -- no cheese, commercial
sausage, bacon and other high-fat high-protein foods. Hence the failure on Atkins --
my body doesn't do well on high-fat high-protein at all. As I said I don't care about
or count percentages. I didn't lose weight until I stopped eating foods that were
high-fat, high-carb bombs -- pizza and sugarfree ice cream by the half gallon and
sugarfree cookies and sugarfree chocolate and potato chips and corn chips and pounds
of nuts and french fries and fried chicken wings and buttered bread and fried fish
and I need not go on. High fat-high carb foods were, are and always will be my
personal demon -- I gained 15 lbs. in 16 days when I first visited New Zealand by
eating more high-fat high-carb foods than normal. Yes, more protein has been an
important part of my current food plan -- because it helps keep the insulin
merry-go-round at bay -- that's been the crux of my food plan success -- keeping
blood sugar on an even keel.

One thing I've always found interesting is that we came from different
directions and different eating preferences and even label it
differently, but ALL of the big long-term losers seem to be eating
pretty much the same, give or take 5 or 10%.


Despite the way it looks, I'm not interested in picking on Annabel until
she runs crying from the group or kill-files me or anything. It's just
that she's here trying to do this and it only makes sense to let her
know how we did it.

Well "we" have had different ways of doing it. Giving up sugar was and is central to
my food plan, but you yourself have said that I'm too extreme about it. I tell what
it's done for me, but I don't hound others into giving it up themselves (I clearly
remember you asking once why I didn't eat a piece of cake that a stranger was forcing
on me -- asking couldn't I have eaten it to be polite -- and the outrage of that
****ed me off more than anything anyone on this newsgroup has ever said to me, so
that's why I remember it clearly). You've also said in the last day that we all tried
low-fat and we all failed at it and ended up fatter than ever (paraphrasing, but that
was the general idea). That's just so not true -- a weight loss of 175 lbs, with 100
of those off for 19 years is hardly a failure. Banning sugar and not eating high-fat
foods has worked great for me.

Mary

"Dally" wrote in message ...
Mary M - Ohio wrote:

"Annabel Smyth" wrote in message
...

I am not making any excuses for myself; I have been greedy, and eating
too much. This is why I need to use willpower to learn to eat rather
less. I personally find the easiest way of cutting my calorie intake is
by cutting my fat intake, since fat has over twice the calories per
gramme than any other sort of food does.

End of.


Do what works for YOU, Annabel.

I agree with that. I'm just worried that she's NOT doing what works for
her, but doing what she THINKS she's supposed to be doing. Going 7 or 8
hours between meals, using will-power not to snack when she's hungry,
eating high-carb low-fat low-protein meals because she thinks that's
healthy...

I realize it appears that I was specifically speaking about you, Dally and I really
didn't mean to come across that way -- I just relate to the frustration of having 10
million opinions (and some very strong ones at that) thrown at you when you're in the
formative stages of finding the right food plan. I am all for combining foods in a
protein-carb combo and getting rid of refined carbs as much as possible.

I am doing very well on a food plan that is both low
in refined carbohydrates AND low in fat.
Which means it's high in protein, right? (Either that or alcohol.) :-)
I don't know what you mean by "low" or high, but I found tracking food
at www.Fitday.com was incredibly illuminating. I bet none of us are
eating over 60% carbs AND successfully losing weight month after month.
Any takers?

By low fat and low refined carb, I mean that I eat foods that are not over 3g of fat
3g of sugar per serving. Of course, fruits probably exceed those guidelines, as do
peanut butter or turkey/chicken, but following that model (along with the limitation
of 250 mg of sodium per serving) has resulted in a pretty low-refined-carb, low-fat
diet. I do not track in Fitday and I really don't care what my percentages are. My
daily guidelines are up to 15 oz. in lean meat servings, 4 grain servings, 3 fruit
servings, 2 tablespoons olive oil, unlimited vegetables.

My
philosophy is keep an open mind, but don't let others force their ideas on you.

My philosophy is to figure out what works for me based on how my body
works - not based on what some diet guru told me.

I had been following a retarded 75% grain diet - aiming to be vegan and
Ornish and as low-fat as possible. Then I figured it out. I had to
change EVERYTHING. It was all tied together. I had to eat MORE, I had
to eat differently, I had to move differently. I had to CHANGE.

Well that does sound a bit unbalanced.

Did you lose your weight by changing just one thing?

Of course not -- the first to go was refined sugar in 1985.
Next change was exercising regularly (whatever that meant at the time).
Next change was going to a trainer in 1996 and keeping up a truly regular (3-4x a
week) professionally provided workout (I'm still going 4x week).
Next change was going to my nutritionist in 2002-present. Through him, I began the
food program outlined above (had a lot more servings of grains and fruits, though!),
as well as daily cardio exercise of 45-60 minutes-- I had only been doing it about 3x
a week and usually only a half-hour.
Next change was introducing the bicycle to my cardio program 3 weeks ago -- it's made
a huge difference and most welcome challenge. There are noticeable differences in my
body in only 3 weeks, and I never would have believed that!

Mind you I tried a million things in the meantime during all those years, but these
are the changes that made the most difference -- these were the permanent changes.

my mirror are definite proof that low fat works just fine for me. (Some assume
that
"lowfat" means "high refined carbohydrate" -- which is simply not true in my
case.)
What does "lowfat" mean to you? And how do you get lowfat and high
protein without hitting 30% fat? Proteins come bundled with fat so much
of the time. Just for some definitions, I generally think of low-fat as
in the 10-20% range. And of course the tendancy is to avoid as much fat
as you possibly can, which generally ends up meaning hardly any protein,
either.

I honestly don't care about percentages and I can't be bothered to figure it out or
doing the Fitday entries. I just follow what is working as far as servings are
concerned.

Compare 7 pounds lost in
4 months to 40 lbs. lost in 4 months, which happened with my nutritionist's
balanced
eating plan.

Balanced. As in 33/33/33?

I don't give a **** about percentages and have no intention of calculating them.

So you're saying not to listen to criticism
but then saying the same thing I am:

I don't see it that way.

that you didn't lose any weight
until you went on a balanced diet that was higher in protein than yours
used to be as a percentage of calories and that had carbs under 50%.

I had to get the high-fat stuff out of my food plan too -- no cheese, commercial
sausage, bacon and other high-fat high-protein foods. Hence the failure on Atkins --
my body doesn't do well on high-fat high-protein at all. As I said I don't care about
or count percentages. I didn't lose weight until I stopped eating foods that were
high-fat, high-carb bombs -- pizza and sugarfree ice cream by the half gallon and
sugarfree cookies and sugarfree chocolate and potato chips and corn chips and pounds
of nuts and french fries and fried chicken wings and buttered bread and fried fish
and I need not go on. High fat-high carb foods were, are and always will be my
personal demon -- I gained 15 lbs. in 16 days when I first visited New Zealand by
eating more high-fat high-carb foods than normal. Yes, more protein has been an
important part of my current food plan -- because it helps keep the insulin
merry-go-round at bay -- that's been the crux of my food plan success -- keeping
blood sugar on an even keel.

One thing I've always found interesting is that we came from different
directions and different eating preferences and even label it
differently, but ALL of the big long-term losers seem to be eating
pretty much the same, give or take 5 or 10%.


Despite the way it looks, I'm not interested in picking on Annabel until
she runs crying from the group or kill-files me or anything. It's just
that she's here trying to do this and it only makes sense to let her
know how we did it.

Well "we" have had different ways of doing it. Giving up sugar was and is central to
my food plan, but you yourself have said that I'm too extreme about it. I tell what
it's done for me, but I don't hound others into giving it up themselves (I clearly
remember you asking once why I didn't eat a piece of cake that a stranger was forcing
on me -- asking couldn't I have eaten it to be polite -- and the outrage of that
****ed me off more than anything anyone on this newsgroup has ever said to me, so
that's why I remember it clearly). You've also said in the last day that we all tried
low-fat and we all failed at it and ended up fatter than ever (paraphrasing, but that
was the general idea). That's just so not true -- a weight loss of 175 lbs, with 100
of those off for 19 years is hardly a failure. Banning sugar and not eating high-fat
foods has worked great for me.

Mary

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
news
Mary M - Ohio wrote:
It's not that I was worried and skeptical, it's that it was the reality
for me. Eating frequently, for me, fed my "I must eat all the time"
mentality. I do eat MORE than "one or 2 meals a day", but I *listen to
my body*. I really examine what my body is telling me, rather than
reacting to the first *impulse* that enters my head.

The thing is, *sometimes* that actually *does* translate into eating
some snacks. I am not saying that eating several times per day is bad
and I'll never ever do it... because sometimes that does indeed wind up
being the most appropriate thing for whatever is going on in my day.
Like grabbing an apple here, and a cracker or 2 with peanut butter
there. But most often, I find myself just eating an actual meal and
then not being hungry enough to warrant a snack.

The whole point of me recovering from bulimia (coming on 5 years now
bulimia-free - after over 15 years of bulimia/coe) is that *I* get to
feel ok about eating whenever I choose to! I get to be flexible with
the way I eat!

We live in a culture where the idea of having an empty stomach for
longer than 5 seconds is taboo, (I speak of Canada here), but I actually
have come to like that feeling, and the resulting feeling of the
emptiness going away as I eat a decent sized meal. (Again, that is not
the only condition under which I eat)

To feed myself constantly, I never give my stomach the chance to do what
it does naturally, to actually process the food I've just eaten, empty
itself and send me the signal that it's time to eat again.

Again, I am not contradicting anyone here, I am just explaining why
certain things work for me and other things don't.

I understand where you are coming from, Crafting Mom, and you should really be proud
of yourself for having come such a long way to overcome bulimia. Binge eating/bulimia
is a nightmare (I have more experience with the former than the latter) and you are a
great example.
Very well-put post.

Mary

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
news
Mary M - Ohio wrote:
It's not that I was worried and skeptical, it's that it was the reality
for me. Eating frequently, for me, fed my "I must eat all the time"
mentality. I do eat MORE than "one or 2 meals a day", but I *listen to
my body*. I really examine what my body is telling me, rather than
reacting to the first *impulse* that enters my head.

The thing is, *sometimes* that actually *does* translate into eating
some snacks. I am not saying that eating several times per day is bad
and I'll never ever do it... because sometimes that does indeed wind up
being the most appropriate thing for whatever is going on in my day.
Like grabbing an apple here, and a cracker or 2 with peanut butter
there. But most often, I find myself just eating an actual meal and
then not being hungry enough to warrant a snack.

The whole point of me recovering from bulimia (coming on 5 years now
bulimia-free - after over 15 years of bulimia/coe) is that *I* get to
feel ok about eating whenever I choose to! I get to be flexible with
the way I eat!

We live in a culture where the idea of having an empty stomach for
longer than 5 seconds is taboo, (I speak of Canada here), but I actually
have come to like that feeling, and the resulting feeling of the
emptiness going away as I eat a decent sized meal. (Again, that is not
the only condition under which I eat)

To feed myself constantly, I never give my stomach the chance to do what
it does naturally, to actually process the food I've just eaten, empty
itself and send me the signal that it's time to eat again.

Again, I am not contradicting anyone here, I am just explaining why
certain things work for me and other things don't.

I understand where you are coming from, Crafting Mom, and you should really be proud
of yourself for having come such a long way to overcome bulimia. Binge eating/bulimia
is a nightmare (I have more experience with the former than the latter) and you are a
great example.
Very well-put post.

Mary

"Beverly" wrote in message
...

I couldn't find a link with counties of Ohio but this is for the entire
state. Ohio is no better off than many other states in general obesity
category. I'm sure the obesity rate varies from community to community
based on the availability of several things - exercise opportunities, food
sources, etc.

http://tinyurl.com/4zv8b

That's very interesting. We (US) seem to have a "fat belt" - a stripe of
states where more than 22% of the population is obese... I live in
Tennessee. I can tell you that many of us here are large. I have been
impressed, though, lately to see more healthy choices in the stores. I wish
we had a Trader Joe's -- we have a "Wild Oats" healthfood supermarket, but
it is expensive. I have taken to preparing meals ahead of time - I like
making stew and freezing it in containers - then I always have "brainless"
food I can eat and know I am making a good choice. I bake bread for my son
who is allergic to gluten and dairy - I freeze it also and it tastes pretty
good. I like to use buckwheat and oats.
Laters...
Jen

"OceanView" wrote in message
...
ostpile (Sarandipidy) wrote in
:


Exactly. I looked in our grocery store and could not find
real 100% whole grain bread. All that bread was fake.

you guys should be eating ezekiel or spelt bread. both are
in the health section, far away from the regular breads.
neither will be fluffy or sweet like the 'fake' ones, but
they are much better for you.

sara

hello teacher tell me what's my lesson,
look right through me, look right through me.

Why does this sound like I should riding a camel across the
desert while eating this bread?

Yes, camel riding is good exercise and part of a healthy lifestyle.
Y'all can find ezekiel and french meadow speltr breads in the freezer
section of the health food section at the larger supermarkets - I can find
it at Kroger, Safeway and Publix (US)...
Jen

"OceanView" wrote in message
...
ostpile (Sarandipidy) wrote in
:


Exactly. I looked in our grocery store and could not find
real 100% whole grain bread. All that bread was fake.

you guys should be eating ezekiel or spelt bread. both are
in the health section, far away from the regular breads.
neither will be fluffy or sweet like the 'fake' ones, but
they are much better for you.

sara

hello teacher tell me what's my lesson,
look right through me, look right through me.

Why does this sound like I should riding a camel across the
desert while eating this bread?

Yes, camel riding is good exercise and part of a healthy lifestyle.
Y'all can find ezekiel and french meadow speltr breads in the freezer
section of the health food section at the larger supermarkets - I can find
it at Kroger, Safeway and Publix (US)...
Jen