Friday 20 August

Doug Freyburger wrote:

Well, I'd like to know, lol. That said, are lowfat diets always bad?

They aren't bad for everyone. What's bad for everyone - The idea that
one type of diet is better than all of the others therefore folks
should not try various types to see what works for them.

Low fat diets are bad for a few people. Same as other types of plan,
about the same failure rate too.

But there is a general objection to low fat plans: Once the medical
folks started stressing low fat as the one and only right answer, an
epidemic of obsesity occured. It's easy to blame this on low fat,
but realistically the problem is really view one type of plan as the
only right answer.

Why are they suboptimal?

Low protein plans lead to more lean loss compared to medium and high
protein plans. To the extent that low fat plans are low protein,
the objection applies. Are low fat plans actually low protein when
folks follow the directions in the books? No. It's more a problem
of what goes wrong when folks don't follow the directions. That
problem, too, is shared by other plans.

But there's a wide belief that just plain cutting total fat intake
works, so plenty of low fat folks don't get the book and there isn't
all that much pressure to do so. Just plain cutting fat is
perceived as safe for everyone.

With any plan it needs to be done carefully.

Thanks for the info, Doug. The more I learn and the better I eat the more
I'm sure a strict lowfat plan isn't really for me. The balance thing seems
to be working so far.

--
PL
(320/306/170)
(First mini-goal: 299)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 8/17/2004

Doug Freyburger wrote:

Low protein plans lead to more lean loss compared to medium and high
protein plans. To the extent that low fat plans are low protein,
the objection applies.

So you think that an optimal plan has moderate protein? Recipes with
moderate protein tend to come bundled with fat, so I'd guess that you're
in the 25-30% calories from fat if you're trying to keep protein levels
up (in the what, 20-25% range?) Which leaves maybe 45 to 55% of your
calories coming from carbs? Is *this* what you call a low-fat plan?

If so, it gets my stamp of approval. I'm just against ones that are
wildly unbalanced. 75% carb, 15% fat and 10% protein, for example, is a
great way to get fat an insulin resistant, even if you weren't before.

I'm serious: once we get past the terminology to the actual
macronutrient ratios that work for fat loss I keep finding that we're
all doing pretty much the same thing, plus or minus 10%.

Dally

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:05:40 -0400, "PL"
wrote:

Dally wrote:
I do understand. And you keep acting like it worked. Losing it and
keeping it off are two completely different things. We're teaching
people how to lose FAT and keep it off. You can lose WEIGHT
temporarily through any number of methods, including low-fatting it.

Wouldn't you like to know more about how to partition your weight loss
preferentially towards fat? Wouldn't you like to know more about how
we are finding ways of managing our food intake so we're not hungry or
deprived and can eat socially and just get used to doing this for the
rest of our lives?

Well, I'd like to know, lol. That said, are lowfat diets always bad? Why are
they suboptimal?

I think it's important to understand what we mean by "lowfat". Dally,
I think, eats around 30% of her calories from fat, as do I. That is
lower in fat than the average American diet, and considerably lower
than the very low-carb diets like Atkins and South Beach.

It's generally recognized now that some level of fat -- particularly
of the good fat found in fish, nuts, olive oils, etc. -- is important
to a healthy diet. These are important for mental function, skin and
hair health, and are generally thought to be important for helping
avoid various diseases. Dietary fat also helps with satiety --
avoiding hunger -- while dieting. Very low fat diets can compromise
one's health and are also harder to stick to.

Compounding the "bad rap" that very low fat diets have gotten is the
one-time plethora of lowfat food products that added lots of sugar and
weird additives to compensate for the lack of fat. Of course, now the
pendulum has swung the other way and there are lots of lowcarb foods
that have lots of fat and weird additives to compensate for the lack
of carbs :-).

Anyway, I'd recommend keeping fats at at least 25% of your calories,
making this up of mostly good fats.

Chris
262/141/ (145-150)

"Dally" wrote in message
...
Ignoramus8546 wrote:

Insulin resistance is understood as a combination os several
problems. For example, muscle may be slow tp take glucose, beta cells
may be slow to produce insulin, the liver can be slow in stopping
producing additional glucose. It is called a "triumvirate".

Right, and eating too much and exercising too little is what brings it on.
It is highly correlated with eating a high carb diet, in fact. I brought
it on myself with my high-grain vegan diet.

And sometimes IR and for that matter T2 diabetes is the luck of the genetic
draw. My 66 year old father in law was recently diagnosed with T2 during a
routine physical - no symptoms or predisposition whatsoever. He was a
little overweight in his 40's but lost weight, he's very active, and he eats
very healthily: lots of veggies, fish and lean meats with very little junk
food. Definitely not someone you'd guess would be T2.

I am defining this term according to the government definition.

http://www.pueblo.gsa.gov/cic_text/f...ramid/main.htm

(talking in the context of the recommended low fat diet)

They never reference "low fat" anywhere in that page. They recommend
people limit their calories from fat to 30%, which is about what I suggest
people do INSTEAD of low-fatting. People doing "low-fat" do NOT aim to
get to the 30% level. Have you ever done low-fat? 10-20% level is
normal. I try to eat more like 30% but I end up around 25% partly because
I don't have much urge to eat fat after years of low-fatting.

Well, ig never let facts get in the way of what he *knows* is right.

Anyway, did you notice that you had to work your way up slowly regarding the
fat thing? One thing that people need to watch out for regarding fats is
gallstones - especially women. When I had my gall bladder out many moons
ago the doctor said the typical patient has the 4 F's: fat, female, fair,
and forty. (three out of four worked for me) However, the type of fat
really *does* make a difference. I could never tolerate high amounts of
saturated fat, but fat from vegetables and seeds seems to be just fine. A
recent study did bear that out in that women who get most of their fat from
vegetable sources tend to have fewer incidences of gallstone disease.

It is improper to say in one sentence that a low fat diet is wrong and
advise to get 25% of calories from fat.

Life is just awful that way. I hope you manage to get over the shock.


Why do you want to insult me? What is it that it will accomplish for you?

"Low" is a word referring to relative levels. You don't get to assume
everyone means the same thing by it. I'm telling you what I mean by it.
You're still upset that I don't mean the same thing you mean and making up
bogus definitions by fiat. I don't know what else to do with this besides
laugh at you and let it go.

I wouldn't take it personally Dally, anyone who disagrees with him is
*insulting* to him.

Jenn

Chris Braun wrote:

Anyway, I'd recommend keeping fats at at least 25% of your calories,
making this up of mostly good fats.

Chris
262/141/ (145-150)

Thanks Chris. I'm trying to stay around 33%/33%/33%, give or take a few
percentage points here and there. It seems to be working. I haven't felt
hungry or deprived.

--
PL
(320/306/170)
(First mini-goal: 299)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 8/17/2004

Chris Braun wrote:

Anyway, I'd recommend keeping fats at at least 25% of your calories,
making this up of mostly good fats.

Chris
262/141/ (145-150)

Thanks Chris. I'm trying to stay around 33%/33%/33%, give or take a few
percentage points here and there. It seems to be working. I haven't felt
hungry or deprived.

--
PL
(320/306/170)
(First mini-goal: 299)


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.740 / Virus Database: 494 - Release Date: 8/17/2004

"Chris Braun" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:05:40 -0400, "PL"
wrote:


I think it's important to understand what we mean by "lowfat". Dally,
I think, eats around 30% of her calories from fat, as do I. That is
lower in fat than the average American diet, and considerably lower
than the very low-carb diets like Atkins and South Beach.

Just a minor correction though, South Beach isn't really low carb. Even in
the first phase, the most restrictive, you can have skim or 1% milk or
yogurt, and beans like garbanzos and black beans. In the second phase,
fruit and whole grains are added in. So it's only low carb if you want it
to be.

Jenn

On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 20:46:21 -0500, "JMA"
wrote:


"Chris Braun" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 12:05:40 -0400, "PL"
wrote:


I think it's important to understand what we mean by "lowfat". Dally,
I think, eats around 30% of her calories from fat, as do I. That is
lower in fat than the average American diet, and considerably lower
than the very low-carb diets like Atkins and South Beach.

Just a minor correction though, South Beach isn't really low carb. Even in
the first phase, the most restrictive, you can have skim or 1% milk or
yogurt, and beans like garbanzos and black beans. In the second phase,
fruit and whole grains are added in. So it's only low carb if you want it
to be.

Thanks -- I hadn't realized you could eat whole grains on South Beach.
The one person I know well who is on it doesn't seem to eat any grain
products. I think it would be hard to really get a lot of carbs just
from fruits and veggies. (I guess that "low carb", just like "low
fat", is a relative term. But I'd consider anything under 100g or so
a day of carbs as fairly low carb.)

Chris
262/141/ (145-150)

"Patricia Heil" wrote in message ...
"PL" wrote in message

What's bad about low-fat? You eat lots of lovely fruit and tangy plain
yogurt instead of ice cream.

Ice cream doesn't belong in *any* eating plan IMV (too calorie dense
to enjoy without blowing the day's calorie limit), but I fail to see
the benefits of low-fat yogurt vs. normal yogurt, or similarly 0% milk
(aka water) vs. 1% milk.

Declaring war on fat is simply missing the point, I'm afraid, at least
for me. I never would have been able to lose 50lbs if I had to keep to
a jihad against fats. There's just such a nice accompaniment to what
I'm eating, be it the carbs in bread (butter), milk fats in cheese and
milk, or the animal fats in meats. Like I said, if I lose weight
eating fats but cutting down quantities and carbs, feel fuller and
certainly don't ever feel denied, I see no reason to cut the fats out.

Not using butter on your bread isn't such a hardship when it's really good bread.

Using butter on bread isn't such a big deal if you eat less bread.

You use mustard and ketchup in your sandwiches but not mayonnaise.

Or you use a nice minimal but tasty coating of mayonnaise to enjoy the
taste of what you're making.

You leave the cheese out of your chili but you add peppers -- yumm!

Oh no! Cheese! run away!

You make oven fries with Pam and Mrs. Dash
seasonings instead of deep frying. You can still have wine and beer and so
on (7 calories a gram instead of 9 for fat but it's still empty calories so
watch it). I have a ton of low-fat recipes that taste great.

You're not losing flavor unless you are using the wrong recipe book. So
what's the problem?

Fats fill me up and taste good, much better than carbs. Meeting the
Required Calories for the day is my first priority, then I worry about
the macronutrient balance. IMV it's terribly naive to think that
dietary fat turns into body fat. If anything, dietary fat seems to
help body fat loss, since the body homoregulation functions aren't
being distressed as severely.

Growing up I was brainwashed by the diet == denial marketing crap. Now
I know better.

Heywood

232/183/182

"Patricia Heil" wrote in message ...
"PL" wrote in message

What's bad about low-fat? You eat lots of lovely fruit and tangy plain
yogurt instead of ice cream.

Ice cream doesn't belong in *any* eating plan IMV (too calorie dense
to enjoy without blowing the day's calorie limit), but I fail to see
the benefits of low-fat yogurt vs. normal yogurt, or similarly 0% milk
(aka water) vs. 1% milk.

Declaring war on fat is simply missing the point, I'm afraid, at least
for me. I never would have been able to lose 50lbs if I had to keep to
a jihad against fats. There's just such a nice accompaniment to what
I'm eating, be it the carbs in bread (butter), milk fats in cheese and
milk, or the animal fats in meats. Like I said, if I lose weight
eating fats but cutting down quantities and carbs, feel fuller and
certainly don't ever feel denied, I see no reason to cut the fats out.

Not using butter on your bread isn't such a hardship when it's really good bread.

Using butter on bread isn't such a big deal if you eat less bread.

You use mustard and ketchup in your sandwiches but not mayonnaise.

Or you use a nice minimal but tasty coating of mayonnaise to enjoy the
taste of what you're making.

You leave the cheese out of your chili but you add peppers -- yumm!

Oh no! Cheese! run away!

You make oven fries with Pam and Mrs. Dash
seasonings instead of deep frying. You can still have wine and beer and so
on (7 calories a gram instead of 9 for fat but it's still empty calories so
watch it). I have a ton of low-fat recipes that taste great.

You're not losing flavor unless you are using the wrong recipe book. So
what's the problem?

Fats fill me up and taste good, much better than carbs. Meeting the
Required Calories for the day is my first priority, then I worry about
the macronutrient balance. IMV it's terribly naive to think that
dietary fat turns into body fat. If anything, dietary fat seems to
help body fat loss, since the body homoregulation functions aren't
being distressed as severely.

Growing up I was brainwashed by the diet == denial marketing crap. Now
I know better.

Heywood

232/183/182