depression caused by stopping the Zone?

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 11:52:43 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:

Moosh wrote:

On Fri, 09 Apr 2004 12:16:58 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:


Moosh wrote:


On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 13:37:26 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:

I don't think anyone has identified any dangers of ketosis yet - I
haven't seen any yet anyways.

Well you certainly feel pretty ordinary, but I'll leave it to others
to drag up problems with carb restricted diets.
Try to avoid much exertion, driving machinery or doing anything else
that requires mental alertness.

I'm a programmer... if I suddenly became stupid, I'd kind of notice. so
would my clients.

I used to be a chemist. I could tell the difference in my thinking 5
days after smoking pot because my math skills got slower.

But there's no difference whatsoever in low-carbing except brain fog
occurs less often.

Not the experience of most. Are you low carbing 40% or Low carbing
10%?

Are you constantly in ketosis? Inuit are not....

Generally, around 2.5%... but with a range that varies from 1.5% to 4.2%.

Percentage of what?

My target ranges are 30-50 g carb, 80-100 g protein, and 1200-2000 calories.

Seems reasonable for a type 2DM. So long as you burn all these
calories and don't store any.

And yeah, I've been in ketosis continually for 3 months now.

How do you know this?

The only
unpleasantness, for me, is the first 3 or 4 days, which always sucks...
but feeling so much better afterwards is quite worth it.

For a type 2, of course.

And if you are a normal (weight) healthy human involved in regular
moderate exercise....

Nope. I'm not a normal healthy human being. I'm a diabetic.

Then all bets are off. If you are type 2, you just about must restrict
carbs severely. Your gluconeogenesis pathways will be fully induced
and going flat strap.

Too well, I'm afraid. I don't feel cutting protein is realistic at this
point, as with the low carbs, I'd be looking at an unpalatable level of
fat to cut my BG any further via just diet. But my BG is still
uncontrolled; this morning's fasting number is 162. Thus meds are in my
immediate future.

Fat burning can supply some glucose. If it is still short from the
diet, your muscles may be in danger of being used for this purpose.

Lucky for me that low-carb doesn't make people stupid as it would suck
to have to choose between making a living and dying.

Who said stupid? You over-interpret.

Ha! This from the guy who went off on an anti-PETA tangent cause I
posted about CSAs! Heh.

Anti PETA? I don't even know what this means. Are you not confusing me
with someone else?

I believe this exchange was merely a difference of opinion as to
whether the 6,000,000,000 inhabitants of this planet could be fed with
their present diet without any cruelty to animals. I contend it isn't.

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 10:09:39 +0800, "Moosh" posted:

On 8 Apr 2004 11:54:55 -0700, (Doug Freyburger)
posted:

Moosh wrote:

Read the book.

I read it once and came a way with the impression
that most folks have, that you can eat to your heart's content of meat
and fat -- cream, sausages, bacon, pork, chops -- with photos} and so
long as you cut carbs, you will lose weight.

I read a Peanuts comic strip once and thought it was about space
exploration. Then someone noticed my fever was so bad I was
halucinating and they took me to the hospital. You did not read
the book, and as a result you have no idea what it's contents are.
There's no need to halucinate about it.

I watched the BBC Horizon part one of its investigation of the Atkin's
diet. They must have read the same book that I did as their
description and calims by it are much the same as mine.

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to the recommended carb intake on
it? I understood the ongoing maintenance part was considerably carb
restricted, as opposed to the introductory part where ketosis must be
suffered with virtually no carbs. I've known folks who have eaten zero
carbs and not been able to become ketotic.
Anyway, a number of folks here say that the maintenace phase is 40%
carb calories just like the Zone. This is NOT low carb in my opinion,
and all the studies I've seen done on low carb.


Further to this, I came across a newspaper article in our local daily.

http://www.thewest.com.au/20040316/n...sto121550.html

"The atkins diet recommends less than 10% carbohydrates."

"The high protein, low carbohydrate diet...."

They say there is a new website in Australia.
I go in search..

I found another article from a principle newspaper in Oz

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...?from=storyrhs

"The products are widely available in Britain and the US. But health
experts are concerned about plans to branch into the Australian market
with the high protein, low carbohydrate diet. "

and,

"National Heart Foundation chief executive Maurice Swanson said the
diet was directly linked to an increased risk of heart disease and
stroke, which were among Australia's biggest killers. "


Have a look at this site if you feel tempted to follow Atkins.

http://www.atkinsdietalert.org/


Cant find the Australian site.
I'll look later. Got some house renovation to do....

Moosh burbled across the ether:
Have a look at this site if you feel tempted to follow Atkins.

http://www.atkinsdietalert.org/

This site is by PETA/PCRM/vegans-- not exactly an unbiased or truthful
source.

Try looking at some actual research by real scientists at respected
institutions.

www.lowcarbresearch.org/lcr/results.asp


--
revek www.geocities.com/tanirevek/LowCarb.html lowcarbing since June
2002 5'2" 41 F 165+/too much/size seven petite please
Humans are always slightly lost. It's a basic characteristic. It
explains a lot about them. {Lords and Ladies, 1992}

Moosh wrote:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 11:52:43 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:

Not the experience of most. Are you low carbing 40% or Low carbing
10%?

Are you constantly in ketosis? Inuit are not....

Generally, around 2.5%... but with a range that varies from 1.5% to 4.2%.

Percentage of what?

Of calories. I eat way below 5% of my calories as carbs.

My target ranges are 30-50 g carb, 80-100 g protein, and 1200-2000 calories.

Seems reasonable for a type 2DM. So long as you burn all these
calories and don't store any.

It's reasonable for non-diabetics too, especially those with insulin
resistance. People can avoid becoming frankly diabetic by minimizing carbs.

And yeah, I'm burning all those calories... and then some. I'm losing a
lb/week on average.

And yeah, I've been in ketosis continually for 3 months now.

How do you know this?

At this point, familiarity with the symptoms. I've used ketostix in the
past, but am not doing so now. There's a metallic taste in my mouth
that I recognize.


The only
unpleasantness, for me, is the first 3 or 4 days, which always sucks...
but feeling so much better afterwards is quite worth it.

For a type 2, of course.

And for anyone with insulin resistance as well. Estimates put that at a
good 25% of the population. There's a *lot* of folks who can benefit
from a low-cabr diet.

Not everyone though. I've posted elsewhre, my hubby grew up in a bakery
and ate cake every day. He can still put away a huge pile of sugar with
no real effect on his blood sugar, like eat a half a cake and have a 1
hour post-cake bg of 90.

I don't believe low carbing would harm him though. If he wanted to lose
20 lbs, I'd suggest it over a low-fat diet as the appetite suppresant
effects make it a much more pleasant method of restricting calories even
for those who are not insulin resistant or diabetic.

Too well, I'm afraid. I don't feel cutting protein is realistic at this
point, as with the low carbs, I'd be looking at an unpalatable level of
fat to cut my BG any further via just diet. But my BG is still
uncontrolled; this morning's fasting number is 162. Thus meds are in my
immediate future.

Fat burning can supply some glucose. If it is still short from the
diet, your muscles may be in danger of being used for this purpose.

Unlikely as I'm eating sufficient protein to support my lean body mass.
Plus I'm weight training, which builds muscles mass, though that's
not my focus... my purpose is building strength, building muscles is
just a side effect. Similarly, low-carbing is for blood sugar control,
losing weight is just a side effect.

Further, in my specific case, my bg is still high even with low-carbing
and exercise, indicating that I'm making plenty of glucose, indeed too
much. This is why I say meds are in my immediate future.

I can't cut carbs much from where I am, not for a long-term diet,
there'd be insufficient vegetables for the long run. I can't cut
protein much either, just for palatability reasons as noted - if I cut
protein, I'd have to replace it with fat and there's only so much fat I
actually want to eat.

Lucky for me that low-carb doesn't make people stupid as it would suck
to have to choose between making a living and dying.

Who said stupid? You over-interpret.

Ha! This from the guy who went off on an anti-PETA tangent cause I
posted about CSAs! Heh.

Anti PETA? I don't even know what this means. Are you not confusing me
with someone else?

I believe this exchange was merely a difference of opinion as to
whether the 6,000,000,000 inhabitants of this planet could be fed with
their present diet without any cruelty to animals. I contend it isn't.

My point stands - it's a straw man. I never argued about what everyone
on the planet should do.

I made suggestions about what an *individual* could do to change their
shopping habits to reduce cruelty to animals, conserve topsoil, support
local families rather than mega-corporations, and reduce reliance on
fossil fuels.

You were arguing with someone else.

--
Newbie tip: Read the FAQ. It's posted here daily, contains tons of
great info on low-carbing and lots of links to more great info and tons
of recipes too!

On Fri, 16 Apr 2004 22:14:12 -0500, "revek"
posted:

Moosh burbled across the ether:
Have a look at this site if you feel tempted to follow Atkins.

http://www.atkinsdietalert.org/

This site is by PETA/PCRM/vegans-- not exactly an unbiased or truthful
source.

Try looking at some actual research by real scientists at respected
institutions.

www.lowcarbresearch.org/lcr/results.asp

Seen it, thanks. Much the same. Trouble is not much research has been
done on Atkins. I saw a doco by BBC (Horizon) with some preliminary
investigations into Atkins. The observed weight loss was not due to
lower carbs, or more fat, or thermogenic effect, or ketones in the
breath or urine, but by reducing calorie intake from a reduction of
appetite from higher protein in the diet. Several medical experts
claimed that they would not follow the diet longterm until the safety
of longterm high protein diets was established.
That satisfies me for the time being....

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 10:27:24 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:

Moosh wrote:

On Sun, 11 Apr 2004 11:52:43 -0400, Jackie Patti
posted:

Not the experience of most. Are you low carbing 40% or Low carbing
10%?

Are you constantly in ketosis? Inuit are not....

Generally, around 2.5%... but with a range that varies from 1.5% to 4.2%.

Percentage of what?

Of calories. I eat way below 5% of my calories as carbs.

Reasonable for a DM2, although even that brings problems, I believe.
Glucagon caused spikes of glucose when you least expect it.

My target ranges are 30-50 g carb, 80-100 g protein, and 1200-2000 calories.

Seems reasonable for a type 2DM. So long as you burn all these
calories and don't store any.

It's reasonable for non-diabetics too, especially those with insulin
resistance. People can avoid becoming frankly diabetic by minimizing carbs.

Not shown by all the evidence. Insulin resistance is an illness that
is sometimes called pre-diabetes.
It has not been shown that such extremes in avoiding perfectly fine
foods is healthy. Not without danger.

And yeah, I'm burning all those calories... and then some. I'm losing a
lb/week on average.

So you are overweight too?

And yeah, I've been in ketosis continually for 3 months now.

How do you know this?

At this point, familiarity with the symptoms. I've used ketostix in the
past, but am not doing so now. There's a metallic taste in my mouth
that I recognize.

So your insulin resistance is quite severe? Yout pancreas is
struggling to cope? The glucose in your blood can't be used and so fat
burning must be called upon at high levels?

The only
unpleasantness, for me, is the first 3 or 4 days, which always sucks...
but feeling so much better afterwards is quite worth it.

For a type 2, of course.

And for anyone with insulin resistance as well.

Much the same thing.

Estimates put that at a
good 25% of the population. There's a *lot* of folks who can benefit
from a low-cabr diet.

Of fat Americans, but not of the human population. Percentages without
specifying "of what", are misleading

Not everyone though. I've posted elsewhre, my hubby grew up in a bakery
and ate cake every day. He can still put away a huge pile of sugar with
no real effect on his blood sugar, like eat a half a cake and have a 1
hour post-cake bg of 90.

That's pretty normal, but I hope he is getting a balanced diet
(supplying all nutritional needs) and is not overweight.

I don't believe low carbing would harm him though.

So if you believe it won't harm you, it's OK? What if it DID harm him?
Why fix something that ain't broke?

If he wanted to lose
20 lbs, I'd suggest it over a low-fat diet as the appetite suppresant
effects make it a much more pleasant method of restricting calories even
for those who are not insulin resistant or diabetic.

It's not the fat that's an appetite suppresssant, it's extra protein.
What is his protein intake?

Too well, I'm afraid. I don't feel cutting protein is realistic at this
point, as with the low carbs, I'd be looking at an unpalatable level of
fat to cut my BG any further via just diet. But my BG is still
uncontrolled; this morning's fasting number is 162. Thus meds are in my
immediate future.

Fat burning can supply some glucose. If it is still short from the
diet, your muscles may be in danger of being used for this purpose.

Unlikely as I'm eating sufficient protein to support my lean body mass.

It's not protein per se, but lack of energy. If you ate a 1000 cal
diet of pure protein, you would still get muscle wastage.

Plus I'm weight training, which builds muscles mass, though that's
not my focus... my purpose is building strength, building muscles is
just a side effect. Similarly, low-carbing is for blood sugar control,
losing weight is just a side effect.

Exercise is perhaps even more important, well at least as important
for the trteatment of IR/DM2

Further, in my specific case, my bg is still high even with low-carbing
and exercise, indicating that I'm making plenty of glucose, indeed too
much. This is why I say meds are in my immediate future.

Your insulin is the problem, glucose will always be avilable on a diet
that can provide it one way or another. Your bg is high because your
insulin is not working.

I can't cut carbs much from where I am, not for a long-term diet,
there'd be insufficient vegetables for the long run. I can't cut
protein much either, just for palatability reasons as noted - if I cut
protein, I'd have to replace it with fat and there's only so much fat I
actually want to eat.

So how much protein are you eating per day? You do know that as a DM2
you are at high risk for kidney disease? I hope you are getting most
of your calories from fat.

Lucky for me that low-carb doesn't make people stupid as it would suck
to have to choose between making a living and dying.

Who said stupid? You over-interpret.

Ha! This from the guy who went off on an anti-PETA tangent cause I
posted about CSAs! Heh.

Anti PETA? I don't even know what this means. Are you not confusing me
with someone else?

I believe this exchange was merely a difference of opinion as to
whether the 6,000,000,000 inhabitants of this planet could be fed with
their present diet without any cruelty to animals. I contend it isn't.

My point stands - it's a straw man. I never argued about what everyone
on the planet should do.

I thought you did.

I made suggestions about what an *individual* could do to change their
shopping habits to reduce cruelty to animals, conserve topsoil, support
local families rather than mega-corporations, and reduce reliance on
fossil fuels.

Which I showed was totally useless in the scheme of things.

You were arguing with someone else.

And yet you seemed even in this post to be advocating low carb for
everyone?