My Progress

Kaz Kylheku wrote:
Andrew, in the Holy Spirit, boldly wrote:
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...e71fa96107435?

The irrational resistance (excuse-making) against using the simple
2PD-OMER Approach arises from the pervasive and deadly delusion that
"hunger is starvation" which has been discussed in a different thread
starting with the following OP:

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.m...915cc6cd0e47e?

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Those who call the 2PD-OMER Approach a "starvation diet" are the folks
that will also publicly declare "I am so hungry... I am starving!!!"

Essau essentially did this right before he profanely gave away the
entire Persian Gulf area for just a single meal (Genesis 25:32).

Only a pig could possibly think that.

Essau is described in Scripture as being covered all over with red
hair.

A study following 80,000 Europeans found that men ate at an average caloric
density of 1.9 kcal/g. Over two pounds, this translates to over 1800 calories,
which is plenty for the average male.

Correct.

Two pounds of food daily is in fact in the right ballpark for normal eating.

Correct.

Of course, folks suffering from the delusion that "hunger is
starvation" absolutely hate "Be Hungry" even though most of these
nay-sayers have not even read the book:

http://NetCabal.com

Hunger is a normal body signal that people who eat normally should feel several
times a day.

In truth, hunger is a healthy body signal that simply lets us know
that we are able to physically eat and digest food so that we **want**
to eat while not giving any indication that we need to eat.

The body signal that lets us know we need to eat is actually
**decreasing** hunger ! ! !

The mechanism behind the latter body signal is increasing ketonemia of
starvation ketosis.

It is when we confuse our **wants** with our **needs** that we have
fallen into temptation.

Moreover, it should persist during the consumption of a meal and
for some time afterward.

It should be ever-increasing for those of us who are getting
ever-healthier from doing the right things:

(1) Eating the right amount of food (32 ounces per day).

(2) Eating the right kinds of food (variety of favorites automatically
happens when holding to 32 ounces per day).

(3) Being with the right people (folks we love and love us in turn).

(4) Doing the right things (things that are meaningful).

Be hungrier, which truly is healthier especially for the heart:

http://TheWellnessFoundation.com/BeHealthier

Love in the truth,

Andrew
--
Andrew B. Chung, MD/PhD
Board-certified Cardiologist
http://EmoryCardiology.com

Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they restrict
liquids. I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. Sad.

On Tue, 12 May 2009 20:51:26 -0600, Tiger Lily wrote:

Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

Still does only water is excluded.

duh is simple even when you try to pervert the obvious, Lily.

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

Which is why you weigh.......?
--
http://tinyurl.com/5gt7

On Tue, 12 May 2009 20:02:54 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:

"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they restrict
liquids. I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. Sad.

Uh, correct. It does. All except water. Do you think you **** out
everything liquid?
--
http://tinyurl.com/5gt7

"Julie Bove" wrote:

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. *I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they restrict
liquids. *I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. *Sad.

This confusion remains common today -

On some occasions like high school wrestling tournaments
folks do indeed diet to lose water weight. On a low fat plan
that tends to increase water retention because it's high carb
there are attempts to reduce sodium to reduce the water,
and reducing liquids can be an incorrect reaction to that
goal.

But generally folks diet to lose fat. Water is not fat. Both
water and fat register on the scale because they are both
effected by gravity, but water isn't fat. Effort spent on losing
water is effort that could have been spent on losing fat but
wasn't - A waste of effort.

Water is one of the reasons there are articles like "Why the
Scale Lies". The scale measures lost fat indirectly and it's
quite inaccurate at it. The scale just happens to be a very
easy tool to use, so it gets widely overused.

"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message
...
"Julie Bove" wrote:

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they
restrict
liquids. I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. Sad.

This confusion remains common today -

On some occasions like high school wrestling tournaments
folks do indeed diet to lose water weight. On a low fat plan
that tends to increase water retention because it's high carb
there are attempts to reduce sodium to reduce the water,
and reducing liquids can be an incorrect reaction to that
goal.

But generally folks diet to lose fat. Water is not fat. Both
water and fat register on the scale because they are both
effected by gravity, but water isn't fat. Effort spent on losing
water is effort that could have been spent on losing fat but
wasn't - A waste of effort.

Water is one of the reasons there are articles like "Why the
Scale Lies". The scale measures lost fat indirectly and it's
quite inaccurate at it. The scale just happens to be a very
easy tool to use, so it gets widely overused.

-----------------

My reply...for some reason this didn't come out with the 's on it.

True, but it just doesn't seem healthy to restrict fluids for a pregnant
woman! Then again in those days they didn't want the pregnant women to gain
weight.

I don't know if they used speed in those days but they did when I was born.
My mom didn't take it with me, but she did with my brother. He is younger
than I am and they felt she gained too much weight with me. I think she
gained 10 or 12 pounds. The Dr. prescribed it.

On 2009-05-13, Tiger Lily wrote:
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

If you enjoy ``free'' anything, there may be hardly any calories in it,
true enough, but you are reinforcing the bad habit of putting
a snack in your mouth, which stimulates your digestive system into craving
food; and you are expanding your stomach, which makes it more difficult to feel
full. A human being is not a not a goat; your digestive system is adapted to
eating a few meals per day which are relatively calorie-dense. If you want to
be an animal, then emulate one /completely/. Eat only raw plants, and do
nothing but that all your waking hours, 7 days a week.

Foods that don't spike your bg level may still have lots of calories; this idea
that you can eat anything that doesn't spike the blood glucose level is an
incorrect theory in eating. Sure, styrofoam, sawdust and paper won't spike
your BG level, but somehow, I don't suspect you are talking about those, right?

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.support.diet.low-carb.]
On 2009-05-13, MU wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009 20:02:54 -0700, Julie Bove wrote:

"Tiger Lily" wrote in message
...
Kaz Kylheku wrote:

Indeed, I have seen in these newsgroups, two pounds of food per day
being called a ``starvation diet''.

Only a pig could possibly think that.

guess andie has changed his 'story' once again

he used to include all fluid intake in his 2lb diet

personally, i enjoy lots of 'free veggies' and foods that don't spike my
bg levels

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they restrict
liquids. I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. Sad.

Uh, correct. It does. All except water. Do you think you **** out
everything liquid?

Surely there is an exception for near-waters, like tea. I don't have
to weigh my hatomugi cha, do I? Even black coffee need not be weighed, IMHO,
but any milk going into it should be.

Fluids that contain calories, like juices and milk, are the enemies of good
eating. They are rapidly absorbed without triggering all of the satiety
signals. Ideally, everything that contains calories should be a bulky solid
that can push against your stomach walls. Fluid calories have precisely two
uses: feeding infants and the sick.

Weighing these fluids will discourage their inclusion. If you have only 907
grams to work with, you will think twice before putting a 300g sugary drink on
the scale. Better drink 300g of tea or water, and save the 300g for real food.
Also, fluids are awkward to weigh because they have to be contained, and
you must subtract the mass of the containers.

Thus, in two ways, this 2PD discourages the bat habit of quaffing your
calories, which is a nice point in favor of this approach.

On Wed, 13 May 2009 08:10:54 -0700 (PDT), Doug Freyburger wrote:

"Julie Bove" wrote:

I collect old books, particularly those on cooking, food, diets, heallth,
etc. *I have one for pregnant women from the 1940's and in it, they restrict
liquids. *I guess in those days they thought the liquid you consume had an
effect on weight. *Sad.

This confusion remains common today -

On some occasions like high school wrestling tournaments
folks do indeed diet to lose water weight. On a low fat plan
that tends to increase water retention because it's high carb

or high fat.........

there are attempts to reduce sodium to reduce the water,
and reducing liquids can be an incorrect reaction to that
goal.

But generally folks diet to lose fat.

Generally folks don't know the differences and diet to lose _weight_.

Water is not fat. Both
water and fat register on the scale because they are both
effected by gravity, but water isn't fat. Effort spent on losing
water is effort that could have been spent on losing fat but
wasn't - A waste of effort.

Water is one of the reasons there are articles like "Why the
Scale Lies". The scale measures lost fat indirectly and it's
quite inaccurate at it. The scale just happens to be a very
easy tool to use, so it gets widely overused.

If you have to use one; the mirror never lies. Neither does a simple
pinch test.
--
http://tinyurl.com/5gt7