A few questions...

Hi folks,
I have a few questions, if someone could clarify...

1) Why does Atkins recomment a two-week induction period, when it only
takes about three days to initially get into ketosis?

2) I've heard a couple of people say that regards aerobic exercise, it
is after 30 minutes that the body really starts to burn body fat. Is
this also true for poeple on a ketogenic diet?

3) I've heard body-building eperts say that after 40 minutes of a man
working out, his body starts making estrogen, which causes the body to
start using muscle as a fuel source. Is this true for men doing
aerobic workouts?

4) 60% of my max heart rate is 128 bpm. What is the optimum heart rate
for me to work out at for fat-burning purposes?

5) I started a ketogenic diet plus a daily aerobic workout exactly two
weks ago, weighing 207 lbs. I have lost eleven pounds in tis two
weeks. Is this good going?

6) Is there any health reason why one should limit the amount of
weight one loses per week, provided one is not feeling exhausted or
run-down?

Many thanks for any help on any of these qns..

Frank

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:39:13 GMT, (Frank) wrote:

1) Why does Atkins recomment a two-week induction period, when it only
takes about three days to initially get into ketosis?

Because you can continue to dehydrate and the deleterious effect is
that you are actually losing fat when you are being tricked and
deceived. Water loss.

2) I've heard a couple of people say that regards aerobic exercise, it
is after 30 minutes that the body really starts to burn body fat. Is
this also true for poeple on a ketogenic diet?

No.

3) I've heard body-building eperts say that after 40 minutes of a man
working out, his body starts making estrogen, which causes the body to
start using muscle as a fuel source. Is this true for men doing
aerobic workouts?

No.

4) 60% of my max heart rate is 128 bpm. What is the optimum heart rate
for me to work out at for fat-burning purposes?

Right there.

5) I started a ketogenic diet plus a daily aerobic workout exactly two
weks ago, weighing 207 lbs. I have lost eleven pounds in tis two
weeks. Is this good going?

If you like dehydration.

6) Is there any health reason why one should limit the amount of
weight one loses per week, provided one is not feeling exhausted or
run-down?

Yes.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040122.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Frank wrote:
:: Hi folks,
:: I have a few questions, if someone could clarify...
::
:: 1) Why does Atkins recomment a two-week induction period, when it
:: only takes about three days to initially get into ketosis?

The purpose of induction is not simply to induce ketosis -- it is to break
various addictions and it takes about two weeks for that to happen. Did you
not read the book?

::
:: 2) I've heard a couple of people say that regards aerobic exercise,
:: it is after 30 minutes that the body really starts to burn body fat.
:: Is this also true for poeple on a ketogenic diet?
::

Ignore such statements. Practically speaking, the aerobic fat-burning zone
is useless since you generally only burn little fuel. Just focus on burning
calories -- burn more than your bodies requires to maintain weight and
you'll generally lose weight (the exception may be if you're somehow
metabolically screwed). Read the links I provide below.

:: 3) I've heard body-building eperts say that after 40 minutes of a man
:: working out, his body starts making estrogen, which causes the body
:: to start using muscle as a fuel source. Is this true for men doing
:: aerobic workouts?

I think the part about using muscle for fuel is nonsense. As long as you
have sufficient dietary protein, your body won't eat muscle. LC diets
generally result in sparing muscle when losing weight. However, prolonged
workouts are generally not optimal for some purposes -- like growing muscle
(the slant taking by BB mags and such). Also, when restricting calories,
long workouts may result in too much of a calorie deficit, and that may have
negative effects on your body if maintained long enough. But 40 minutes
should not be a problem.

::
:: 4) 60% of my max heart rate is 128 bpm. What is the optimum heart
:: rate for me to work out at for fat-burning purposes?
::

http://www.wsu.edu/~strength/hiit.htm

http://www.cbass.com/FATBURN.HTM

http://www.stumptuous.com/fartlek.html

I suggest you not attempt HIIT until you have a sound aerobic base (have
been doing regular aerobic activity for a good period of time and with more
than just very low intensity). If you've been sedentary and decide to start
HIIT tomorrow, you might drop dead.

:: 5) I started a ketogenic diet plus a daily aerobic workout exactly
:: two weks ago, weighing 207 lbs. I have lost eleven pounds in tis two
:: weeks. Is this good going?
::

Some of that weight loss is water weight.....it is normal for that to happen
when starting a LC diet. However, once that initial water weight is gone,
your weight loss will slow greatly.


:: 6) Is there any health reason why one should limit the amount of
:: weight one loses per week, provided one is not feeling exhausted or
:: run-down?
::

I think so. Weight loss that is too rapid will result in lots of muscle
mass loss. Keep in mind that this may be in any muscle within your body --
things like organs, too (though probaby not likely if you have big leg
muscles). A good rate is 1 to 2 lbs per week. If you are very heavy,
you're more likely to be at the high end.


:: Many thanks for any help on any of these qns..
::
:: Frank

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:54:52 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
wrote:

Some of that weight loss is water weight.....it is normal for that to happen
when starting a LC diet. However, once that initial water weight is gone,
your weight loss will slow greatly.

Is it your opinion then that water loss (weight) does not or does not
need to be regained?

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031122.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Sun & Mun_ wrote:
:: On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 09:54:52 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: wrote:
::
::: Some of that weight loss is water weight.....it is normal for that
::: to happen when starting a LC diet. However, once that initial
::: water weight is gone, your weight loss will slow greatly.
::
:: Is it your opinion then that water loss (weight) does not or does not
:: need to be regained?

After being in the reduced water weight state mostly for over two years, I
don't see why it does. I consume plenty of liquid and exercise hard. If
you follow a plan like ATkins, my guess is it would eventually come back
anyway once you move into maintenance, where your carb intake will be much
higher than while on induction.

I will note, however, that when I carb up and regain the water weight, I
enjoy the feeling of the pump I get. Last time I did that I took creatine
too and it was freaky.

I know some consider the water weight loss as dehydration, but I don't think
that can be so.

:: Is it your opinion then that water loss (weight) does not or does not
:: need to be regained after induction?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:11:45 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
wrote:

After being in the reduced water weight state mostly for over two years, I
don't see why it does. I consume plenty of liquid and exercise hard. If
you follow a plan like ATkins, my guess is it would eventually come back
anyway once you move into maintenance, where your carb intake will be much
higher than while on induction.

Then would you agree, when entering induction in a hydrated state,
that remaining in a dehydrated state, is a healthy approach?

I am wondering why the body would rehydrate itself if the dehydrated
state is acceptable.

I will note, however, that when I carb up and regain the water weight, I
enjoy the feeling of the pump I get. Last time I did that I took creatine
too and it was freaky.

Why did you take creatine?

I know some consider the water weight loss as dehydration, but I don't think
that can be so.

If you enter induction hydrated, then lose several pounds of weight in
a week or two, this would essentially, by definition, be a state of
dehydration.

Roger, Atkins induction, and I hear you when you claim that induction
is about reducing or eliminating food cravings, is a ruse. We know
that the Atkins plan is all about failure over time for the vast
majority of people, and induction, when viewed objectively, is not
true weight (fat) loss. Induction, in the end, when the weight comes
back, is a false promise and nothing more than a "feel good"
proposition that Dr. Bob knew would assist in selling his books and
propagating his dead end diet program.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031122.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Frank.
You should plan on a couple of months on induction, not two weeks.
PJ


On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 14:39:13 GMT, (Frank) wrote:


Hi folks,
I have a few questions, if someone could clarify...

1) Why does Atkins recomment a two-week induction period, when it only
takes about three days to initially get into ketosis?

2) I've heard a couple of people say that regards aerobic exercise, it
is after 30 minutes that the body really starts to burn body fat. Is
this also true for poeple on a ketogenic diet?

3) I've heard body-building eperts say that after 40 minutes of a man
working out, his body starts making estrogen, which causes the body to
start using muscle as a fuel source. Is this true for men doing
aerobic workouts?

4) 60% of my max heart rate is 128 bpm. What is the optimum heart rate
for me to work out at for fat-burning purposes?

5) I started a ketogenic diet plus a daily aerobic workout exactly two
weks ago, weighing 207 lbs. I have lost eleven pounds in tis two
weeks. Is this good going?

6) Is there any health reason why one should limit the amount of
weight one loses per week, provided one is not feeling exhausted or
run-down?

Many thanks for any help on any of these qns..

Frank

Sun & Mun_ wrote:
::::: Is it your opinion then that water loss (weight) does not or does
::::: not need to be regained after induction?
::
:: On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 10:11:45 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: wrote:
::
::: After being in the reduced water weight state mostly for over two
::: years, I don't see why it does. I consume plenty of liquid and
::: exercise hard. If you follow a plan like ATkins, my guess is it
::: would eventually come back anyway once you move into maintenance,
::: where your carb intake will be much higher than while on induction.
::
:: Then would you agree, when entering induction in a hydrated state,
:: that remaining in a dehydrated state, is a healthy approach?

Well, look at the definition of dehrdration (from dictionary.com):

1.. The process of removing water from a substance or compound.
2.. Excessive loss of water from the body or from an organ or body part,
as from illness or fluid deprivation
So, the question in my mind is whether there is excessive loss of water from
illness or fluid deprivation. The answer, in my mind, is no. This is based
simply on my own personal experience and what I've noticed of others. If
the dehydration came from not getting enough fluid or from illness, that is
another matter, imo.

::
:: I am wondering why the body would rehydrate itself if the dehydrated
:: state is acceptable.
::


Glycogen in liver and muscle issue -- you know that. The body is just
responding to the food it is receiving. When those carbs come in, some can
be stored for quick energy. When they don't, the body can still function.

::: I will note, however, that when I carb up and regain the water
::: weight, I enjoy the feeling of the pump I get. Last time I did
::: that I took creatine too and it was freaky.
::
:: Why did you take creatine?

An experiment. I don't take the stuff on a regular basis - just that once
time. I've read all of the claims for it, but I was sort of interested in
getting a pump. You see, on LC, I rarely get pumps -- not that it is
important -- but I remember them from my younger days. Since I carry more
muscle now and since I can see them better because of the fat loss -- well,
I'm sure you get the point.

::
::: I know some consider the water weight loss as dehydration, but I
::: don't think that can be so.
::
:: If you enter induction hydrated, then lose several pounds of weight
:: in a week or two, this would essentially, by definition, be a state
:: of dehydration.

I don't think so...but even if it is, I don't see it has the least bit
harmful.

::
:: Roger, Atkins induction, and I hear you when you claim that induction
:: is about reducing or eliminating food cravings, is a ruse.

Well, I won't argue that induction is necessary. Several LC plans don't
have an induction period and they still work, afaik.

We know
:: that the Atkins plan is all about failure over time for the vast
:: majority of people, and induction, when viewed objectively, is not
:: true weight (fat) loss.

Induction is not about fat loss -- true. But people do lose weight (fat) on
induction. It is just that most of the initial weight loss is water which
comes back just as quickly (or quicker) than it left. This cannot be
denied, imo.

Induction, in the end, when the weight comes
:: back, is a false promise and nothing more than a "feel good"
:: proposition that Dr. Bob knew would assist in selling his books and
:: propagating his dead end diet program.

Well, I don't know what Dr. Bob knew....certainly the "feel good" aspect is
real, since many people respond positively to the rapid weight loss.
Honestly, I do sometimes wish there was no such thing as induction or
ketostix (at least for check for ketosis by a dieter).

But where I disagree is with your focus on induction. That is only one part
of Dr. Bob's plan -- and the briefest part. To judge the entire weight loss
program by a two week period if unfair. Maybe Dr. Bob did have the purpose
you suggest in mind -- but if in the end that fast weight loss for someone
very heavy helps them stick to the program long term -- I see that has
working to a greater good.

So if the 120 lbs I've lost so far is really only 110 lbs (and I can pull in
a full 10 lbs of water weight over a weekend), then I'm still happy and much
better off. And I've been at this for over two years.

:: Then would you agree, when entering induction in a hydrated state,
:: that remaining in a dehydrated state, is a healthy approach?

On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:22:03 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
wrote:

Well, look at the definition of dehrdration (from dictionary.com):

1.. The process of removing water from a substance or compound.

Yes, we are either hydrating or dehydrating.

2.. Excessive loss of water from the body or from an organ or body part,
as from illness or fluid deprivation

Or induction.

So, the question in my mind is whether there is excessive loss of water from
illness or fluid deprivation. The answer, in my mind, is no. This is based
simply on my own personal experience and what I've noticed of others. If
the dehydration came from not getting enough fluid or from illness, that is
another matter, imo.

I would disagree and point to the fact that induction creates
dehydration that the body would, under normal, healthy circumstances,
severely resist.

:: I am wondering why the body would rehydrate itself if the dehydrated
:: state is acceptable.

Glycogen in liver and muscle issue -- you know that. The body is just
responding to the food it is receiving. When those carbs come in, some can
be stored for quick energy. When they don't, the body can still function.

Sure but the fact that, at some point, the body no longer will accept
the dehydrated state artificially initiated by induction speaks
volumes about induction from a health standpoint. If the body did not
need that fluid, it would, over time, remove it. It apparently needs
and desires it, biochemically, and , hence, does back to a state of
more normal hydration.

::: I will note, however, that when I carb up and regain the water
::: weight, I enjoy the feeling of the pump I get. Last time I did
::: that I took creatine too and it was freaky.
::
:: Why did you take creatine?

An experiment. I don't take the stuff on a regular basis - just that once
time. I've read all of the claims for it, but I was sort of interested in
getting a pump. You see, on LC, I rarely get pumps -- not that it is
important -- but I remember them from my younger days. Since I carry more
muscle now and since I can see them better because of the fat loss -- well,
I'm sure you get the point.

Understood. Is this nothing more than rehydration since creatine is
known for its ability to assist in water storage?

::: I know some consider the water weight loss as dehydration, but I
::: don't think that can be so.
::
:: If you enter induction hydrated, then lose several pounds of weight
:: in a week or two, this would essentially, by definition, be a state
:: of dehydration.

I don't think so...but even if it is, I don't see it has the least bit
harmful.

I would suggest that causing the body to artificially dehydrate is,
again by definition, harmful. Why else would the body prefer to be
hydrated?

:: Roger, Atkins induction, and I hear you when you claim that induction
:: is about reducing or eliminating food cravings, is a ruse.

Well, I won't argue that induction is necessary. Several LC plans don't
have an induction period and they still work, afaik.

Yes, but Atkins doesn't allow for that. Dr. Bob specifically points to
an induction phase and I believe it is a fraudulent, self-serving,
knowingly deceitful and charlatanisitc recommendation.

We know
:: that the Atkins plan is all about failure over time for the vast
:: majority of people, and induction, when viewed objectively, is not
:: true weight (fat) loss.

Induction is not about fat loss -- true. But people do lose weight (fat) on
induction. It is just that most of the initial weight loss is water which
comes back just as quickly (or quicker) than it left. This cannot be
denied, imo.

I will agree that inducted weight loss is not all water and part of it
is in muscular-connective tissue loss as well as loss in other
tissues. In short, I don't see one good thing about induction and
Atkins has perpetuated this fraud to his grave.

Induction, in the end, when the weight comes
:: back, is a false promise and nothing more than a "feel good"
:: proposition that Dr. Bob knew would assist in selling his books and
:: propagating his dead end diet program.

Well, I don't know what Dr. Bob knew....

Oh, Roger, he knew it and you know he knew it and if he didn't know
it, why in the world would anyone believe anything this man had to
say?

certainly the "feel good" aspect is
real, since many people respond positively to the rapid weight loss.

Sure do. Magic pill time.

Honestly, I do sometimes wish there was no such thing as induction or
ketostix (at least for check for ketosis by a dieter).

Same here.

But where I disagree is with your focus on induction. That is only one part
of Dr. Bob's plan -- and the briefest part. To judge the entire weight loss
program by a two week period if unfair.

I really don't judge Atkins totally on his insistence on induction but
I tell you what....it is so full of crap it colors all the rest of his
diet plan which is also nothing more, in reality, than a disguised
reduced eating scheme.

Maybe Dr. Bob did have the purpose
you suggest in mind -- but if in the end that fast weight loss for someone
very heavy helps them stick to the program long term -- I see that has
working to a greater good.

The failure numbers don't agree with that assessment, mof, when the
day is done, most people who yo-yo back feel "had." They figure out
that they have been deceived. People are not like cars; they don't
respond to jump starts when the jump start is proved to be put forward
as real and ends up being a ruse.

So if the 120 lbs I've lost so far is really only 110 lbs (and I can pull in
a full 10 lbs of water weight over a weekend), then I'm still happy and much
better off. And I've been at this for over two years.

Congratulations.

At two years, now is the time you are entering your greatest risk
period.

Be wary.

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap031122.html
Lift well, Eat less, Walk fast, Live long.

Sun & Mun_ wrote:
::::: Then would you agree, when entering induction in a hydrated state,
::::: that remaining in a dehydrated state, is a healthy approach?
::
:: On Fri, 23 Jan 2004 11:22:03 -0500, "Roger Zoul"
:: wrote:
::
::: Well, look at the definition of dehrdration (from dictionary.com):
:::
::: 1.. The process of removing water from a substance or compound.
::
:: Yes, we are either hydrating or dehydrating.
::
::: 2.. Excessive loss of water from the body or from an organ or body
::: part, as from illness or fluid deprivation
::
:: Or induction.

Your opinion. It is not proven harmful.

::
::: So, the question in my mind is whether there is excessive loss of
::: water from illness or fluid deprivation. The answer, in my mind,
::: is no. This is based simply on my own personal experience and what
::: I've noticed of others. If the dehydration came from not getting
::: enough fluid or from illness, that is another matter, imo.
::
:: I would disagree and point to the fact that induction creates
:: dehydration that the body would, under normal, healthy circumstances,
:: severely resist.

See....normal conditions means beyond a certain intake of carbs. If carbs
were not so easy to get, normal conditions would be different. The body,
imo, would still function. When it is supplied with quick energy, it saves
some (in case something wants to eat us )

::
::::: I am wondering why the body would rehydrate itself if the
::::: dehydrated state is acceptable.
::
::: Glycogen in liver and muscle issue -- you know that. The body is
::: just responding to the food it is receiving. When those carbs come
::: in, some can be stored for quick energy. When they don't, the body
::: can still function.
::
:: Sure but the fact that, at some point, the body no longer will accept
:: the dehydrated state artificially initiated by induction speaks
:: volumes about induction from a health standpoint. If the body did not
:: need that fluid, it would, over time, remove it. It apparently needs
:: and desires it, biochemically, and , hence, does back to a state of
:: more normal hydration.

If you remove the carbs, it removes its. Your argument is basically a
statement that the body needs the carbs, because if fills the muscles &
liver with gylcogen when plenty of carbs are present.

::
:::::: I will note, however, that when I carb up and regain the water
:::::: weight, I enjoy the feeling of the pump I get. Last time I did
:::::: that I took creatine too and it was freaky.
:::::
::::: Why did you take creatine?
:::
::: An experiment. I don't take the stuff on a regular basis - just
::: that once time. I've read all of the claims for it, but I was sort
::: of interested in getting a pump. You see, on LC, I rarely get
::: pumps -- not that it is important -- but I remember them from my
::: younger days. Since I carry more muscle now and since I can see
::: them better because of the fat loss -- well, I'm sure you get the
::: point.
::
:: Understood. Is this nothing more than rehydration since creatine is
:: known for its ability to assist in water storage?

Right. Creatine combined with a carb up, mind you. So I got a water rush
and about 10 lbs of weight gain in two days.

::
:::::: I know some consider the water weight loss as dehydration, but I
:::::: don't think that can be so.
:::::
::::: If you enter induction hydrated, then lose several pounds of
::::: weight in a week or two, this would essentially, by definition,
::::: be a state of dehydration.
:::
::: I don't think so...but even if it is, I don't see it has the least
::: bit harmful.
::
:: I would suggest that causing the body to artificially dehydrate is,
:: again by definition, harmful. Why else would the body prefer to be
:: hydrated?

Because when the body stores that quick energy it stores water along with
it. It simply goes to another operating point. Sort of like a transistor.
You're putting in a bias when you suggest that the body perfers to hold the
water.

::
::::: Roger, Atkins induction, and I hear you when you claim that
::::: induction is about reducing or eliminating food cravings, is a
::::: ruse.
:::
::: Well, I won't argue that induction is necessary. Several LC plans
::: don't have an induction period and they still work, afaik.
::
:: Yes, but Atkins doesn't allow for that. Dr. Bob specifically points
:: to an induction phase and I believe it is a fraudulent, self-serving,
:: knowingly deceitful and charlatanisitc recommendation.

I believe it was how he set up his plan - a choice. For those used to eating
carploads of carbs, he wanted to break that cycle. It makes logical sense
to me. Note that he could have suggested people to stay on induction -- but
he did not.

::
::: We know
::::: that the Atkins plan is all about failure over time for the vast
::::: majority of people, and induction, when viewed objectively, is not
::::: true weight (fat) loss.
:::
::: Induction is not about fat loss -- true. But people do lose weight
::: (fat) on induction. It is just that most of the initial weight
::: loss is water which comes back just as quickly (or quicker) than it
::: left. This cannot be denied, imo.
::
:: I will agree that inducted weight loss is not all water and part of
:: it is in muscular-connective tissue loss as well as loss in other
:: tissues. In short, I don't see one good thing about induction and
:: Atkins has perpetuated this fraud to his grave.

Well, we'll just have to disagree on that. I see some good points, but I
don't see it as necessary. Sadly, it does bring with it some bad points, but
I simply don't see dyhydration as one of them. I'm ready to be shown that
I'm wrong, btw.

::
::: Induction, in the end, when the weight comes
::::: back, is a false promise and nothing more than a "feel good"
::::: proposition that Dr. Bob knew would assist in selling his books
::::: and propagating his dead end diet program.
:::
::: Well, I don't know what Dr. Bob knew....
::
:: Oh, Roger, he knew it and you know he knew it and if he didn't know
:: it, why in the world would anyone believe anything this man had to
:: say?

What a minute. You're saying that he knew quick water loss would sell
books. I don't know that he knew that. That's your assertion -- and I
don't assume his goal was simply to sell books (if it were, he'd have done a
much better job on developing he book itself). I'm sure he knew there would
be quick weight loss due to water loss. So one should separate Atkins the
business man from Atkins the doctor and inventor of a weight loss plan. I
see no reason to believe Atkins as an astute business man.

::
::: certainly the "feel good" aspect is
::: real, since many people respond positively to the rapid weight loss.
::
:: Sure do. Magic pill time.

Human nature. Take the easy road. Electricity does that whenever it can.
Universal law, methinks.

::
::: Honestly, I do sometimes wish there was no such thing as induction
::: or ketostix (at least for check for ketosis by a dieter).
::
:: Same here.
::
::: But where I disagree is with your focus on induction. That is only
::: one part of Dr. Bob's plan -- and the briefest part. To judge the
::: entire weight loss program by a two week period if unfair.
::
:: I really don't judge Atkins totally on his insistence on induction
:: but I tell you what....it is so full of crap it colors all the rest
:: of his diet plan which is also nothing more, in reality, than a
:: disguised reduced eating scheme.

That's exactly what it is, imo. A reduced eating scheme that lots of people
can follow. If induction messes it up for you, that's just too bad, really.
I see induction as a tool devised by a doctor who was trying to help people.
We can debate whether it was a good idea or not, but I don't see it as an
evil plan hatched to sell books. If Atkins had really been trying to sell
books, he would have hired someone to rewrite this damn book to make it
easy to extract information from. As it is, the damn book is hard reading.

::
::: Maybe Dr. Bob did have the purpose
::: you suggest in mind -- but if in the end that fast weight loss for
::: someone very heavy helps them stick to the program long term -- I
::: see that has working to a greater good.
::
:: The failure numbers don't agree with that assessment, mof, when the
:: day is done, most people who yo-yo back feel "had." They figure out
:: that they have been deceived. People are not like cars; they don't
:: respond to jump starts when the jump start is proved to be put
:: forward as real and ends up being a ruse.
::

Well, I never know where you get failure numbers on a specific diet.
However, the real problem with diets is not the diet, but the people using
them. What you refer to is just part of human nature -- people are
resistance to real change -- especially where diet is concerned.

::: So if the 120 lbs I've lost so far is really only 110 lbs (and I
::: can pull in a full 10 lbs of water weight over a weekend), then I'm
::: still happy and much better off. And I've been at this for over
::: two years.
::
:: Congratulations.
::
:: At two years, now is the time you are entering your greatest risk
:: period.
::
:: Be wary.

I hear ya. That's why I remain here to keep my focus. Also, I set my goals
high, so if I fall short I'll hopefull still end up in a much much better
place than I was.