If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
Right now I weight about 184 and would like to get down to 165.
Should I just stay in this induction phase until I get to 165.. ? Why would you move out of this before getting to the goal weight ... what is the reason people go onto the next phase ... is there something that is not good about the induction phase... so far I have no problems with it, and feel I can stay on it for a long time ... Thanks. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
John wrote:
Right now I weight about 184 and would like to get down to 165. So you currently have 19 pounds to lose, and that assumes that you used an accurate method to chose your goal weight like body fat percentages or looking yourself up in a life insurance chart and add 10 pounds. Should I just stay in this induction phase until I get to 165.. ? Well let's see. The directions say to move on the phase three PreMaintenance when you have 10-20 to lose and you are asking if you should stay at phase one. No. Following the directions works better than wishful thinking and refusing to believe that the process works. Why would you move out of this before getting to the goal weight In addition to the T3 issue mentioned by Susan, because it works better to follow the entire process than to do the obvious that treats Atkins like a fad diet. I'll mention fad diet farther down. ... what is the reason people go onto the next phase I can't tell if you're a troll or if you're ignoring posts. Following a porcess that took several decades to tune works better than some fad diet someone can dream up over night. ... is there something that is not good about the induction phase... Yes. so far I have no problems with it, Yes you do have problems with it - You are trying to cling to it. That's a problem. and feel I can stay on it for a long time ... Folks who stay on Induction have a higher drop out rate. So what if you feel now like you can stay on it longer. Lots of folks who dropped out stated that before dropping out. Fad diet - I worry if I go off Atkins or don't stick with it Induction is not Atkins. It is part of Atkins. Since the direction say you should now be moving to PreMaintenance you are definitely not sticking to it right now. and go back to carbs Reality check. Have you read the carb ladder that tells what carbs to try when? Then explain to me why adding more cauliflower equals "go back to carbs". You're not making sense here because you aren't depicting what Atkins actually is in the book. A hint - The first week of OWL has a carb quota of 25 net and you get there with extra servings of low carb veggies not a large spoon of chocolate cake. I will be even more susceptible to them putting the weight on. Treating Atkins like a fad diet does put you into a pattern of crash and burn, lament, regain, waiting too long to return, coming back, insisting on over doing it, crashing and buring again. Start today to not be in that cycle. Set you carb quota to 25 like it says in the book and follow the process as it is written. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
"John" wrote in message ... Right now I weight about 184 and would like to get down to 165. Should I just stay in this induction phase until I get to 165.. ? Why would you move out of this before getting to the goal weight ... what is the reason people go onto the next phase ... is there something that is not good about the induction phase... so far I have no problems with it, and feel I can stay on it for a long time ... Thanks. I stuck with perpetual induction-like carb numbers. It worked fine for me. I suspect even Atkins was afraid to recommend lifelong ketosis. He was, after all, a Medical Doctor. He caught a lot of flak for the diet even as it is. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
On Apr 12, 8:50 pm, "Cubit" wrote:
I stuck with perpetual induction-like carb numbers. It worked fine for me. I suspect even Atkins was afraid to recommend lifelong ketosis. He was, after all, a Medical Doctor. He caught a lot of flak for the diet even as it is. Here is an article which seems to say that there is no ill effects from staying on very low carbs. BEGIN: Why didn't Eskimos get scurvy before citrus was introduced to their diet? They have a traditional diet of almost entirely meat and fish. Where did they get their vitamin C? --Kevin Carson, via the Internet Dear Kevin: This calls to mind a question I've dealt with befo Why do the Eskimos (or Inuit, as those in Canada and Greenland generally prefer to be called) stay there? It turns out that the people of the north have a highly evolved physiology that makes them well suited to life in the arctic: a compact build that conserves warmth, a faster metabolism, optimally distributed body fat, and special modifications to the circulatory system. One marvels at the adaptability of the human organism, of course, but still one has to ask: Wouldn't it have been easier just to move to San Diego? Much of what we know about the Eskimo diet comes from the legendary arctic anthropologist and adventurer Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who made several daredevil journeys through the region in the early 20th century. Stefansson noticed the same thing you did, that the traditional Eskimo diet consisted largely of meat and fish, with fruits, vegetables, and other carbohydrates--the usual source of vitamin C--accounting for as little as 2 percent of total calorie intake. Yet they didn't get scurvy. Stefansson argued that the native peoples of the arctic got their vitamin C from meat that was raw or minimally cooked--cooking, it seems, destroys the vitamin. (In fact, for a long time "Eskimo" was thought to be a derisive Native American term meaning "eater of raw flesh," although this is now discounted.) Stefansson claimed the high incidence of scurvy among European explorers could be explained by their refusal to eat like the natives. He proved this to his own satisfaction by subsisting in good health for lengthy periods--one memorable odyssey lasted for five years--strictly on whatever meat and fish he and his companions could catch. A few holdouts didn't buy it. To settle the matter once and for all, Stefansson and a colleague lived on a meat-only diet for one year under medical supervision at New York's Bellevue Hospital, starting in February 1928. The two ate between 100 and 140 grams of protein a day, the balance of their calories coming from fat, yet they remained scurvy free. Later in life Stefansson became a strong advocate of a high-meat diet even if you didn't live in the arctic; he professed to enjoy improved health, reduced weight, etc, from meals consisting of coffee, the occasional grapefruit, and a nice steak, presumably rare. Doesn't sound half bad, and one might note that until recently the Inuit rarely suffered from atherosclerosis and other Western ailments. Vitamin C can be found in a variety of traditional Eskimo/Inuit staples, including the skin of beluga whales (known as muktuk), which is said to contain as much vitamin C as oranges. Other reported sources include the organ meats of sea mammals as well as the stomach contents of caribou. You're thinking: It'll be a mighty cold day in the arctic before they catch me eating the stomach contents of caribou. Indeed, you have to wonder whether the Inuit really ate such stuff either, since Stefansson describes it being fed to dogs. Other aspects of the arctic diet also remain controversial. For example, some say the Eskimos could get vitamin C from blueberries during the summer months, while others say you'd be lucky to find enough berries to cover a bowl of Rice Chex. I say let's not sweat the details of the menu, which varied from region to region anyway. We know Eskimos got enough vitamin C in their traditional diet to survive because obviously they did. Now it's academic--most arctic natives live in villages and get their vitamin C from OJ and Juicy Juice, just like you and I. Oh, and for all you vegetarians who've seen the error of your ways and were thinking of adopting the Inuit diet--think twice about the raw meat thing. Vitamin C might not a problem, but E. coli might. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
On Apr 12, 5:37 pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
John wrote: Well let's see. The directions say to move on the phase three PreMaintenance when you have 10-20 to lose and you are asking if you should stay at phase one. No. Following the directions works better than wishful thinking and refusing to believe that the process works. I totally believe that the process works, I just want to lose the weight quickly first and then I can move into the other stages. The summer is coming really soon and I want to look good on the beach so I prefer to get the weight off fast but will for sure stay on Atkins later stages once reaching the goal weight. I can't tell if you're a troll or if you're ignoring posts. Following a porcess that took several decades to tune works better than some fad diet someone can dream up over night. Not a troll, just curious. I have seen first hand so far the diet working so I'm not against it. I am just trying to figure it all out etc. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
"john" wrote in message ... On Apr 12, 8:50 pm, "Cubit" wrote: I stuck with perpetual induction-like carb numbers. It worked fine for me. I suspect even Atkins was afraid to recommend lifelong ketosis. He was, after all, a Medical Doctor. He caught a lot of flak for the diet even as it is. Here is an article which seems to say that there is no ill effects from staying on very low carbs. BEGIN: Why didn't Eskimos get scurvy before citrus was introduced to their diet? They have a traditional diet of almost entirely meat and fish. Where did they get their vitamin C? --Kevin Carson, via the Internet Dear Kevin: This calls to mind a question I've dealt with befo Why do the Eskimos (or Inuit, as those in Canada and Greenland generally prefer to be called) stay there? It turns out that the people of the north have a highly evolved physiology that makes them well suited to life in the arctic: a compact build that conserves warmth, a faster metabolism, optimally distributed body fat, and special modifications to the circulatory system. One marvels at the adaptability of the human organism, of course, but still one has to ask: Wouldn't it have been easier just to move to San Diego? Much of what we know about the Eskimo diet comes from the legendary arctic anthropologist and adventurer Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who made several daredevil journeys through the region in the early 20th century. Stefansson noticed the same thing you did, that the traditional Eskimo diet consisted largely of meat and fish, with fruits, vegetables, and other carbohydrates--the usual source of vitamin C--accounting for as little as 2 percent of total calorie intake. Yet they didn't get scurvy. Stefansson argued that the native peoples of the arctic got their vitamin C from meat that was raw or minimally cooked--cooking, it seems, destroys the vitamin. (In fact, for a long time "Eskimo" was thought to be a derisive Native American term meaning "eater of raw flesh," although this is now discounted.) Stefansson claimed the high incidence of scurvy among European explorers could be explained by their refusal to eat like the natives. He proved this to his own satisfaction by subsisting in good health for lengthy periods--one memorable odyssey lasted for five years--strictly on whatever meat and fish he and his companions could catch. A few holdouts didn't buy it. To settle the matter once and for all, Stefansson and a colleague lived on a meat-only diet for one year under medical supervision at New York's Bellevue Hospital, starting in February 1928. The two ate between 100 and 140 grams of protein a day, the balance of their calories coming from fat, yet they remained scurvy free. Later in life Stefansson became a strong advocate of a high-meat diet even if you didn't live in the arctic; he professed to enjoy improved health, reduced weight, etc, from meals consisting of coffee, the occasional grapefruit, and a nice steak, presumably rare. Doesn't sound half bad, and one might note that until recently the Inuit rarely suffered from atherosclerosis and other Western ailments. Vitamin C can be found in a variety of traditional Eskimo/Inuit staples, including the skin of beluga whales (known as muktuk), which is said to contain as much vitamin C as oranges. Other reported sources include the organ meats of sea mammals as well as the stomach contents of caribou. You're thinking: It'll be a mighty cold day in the arctic before they catch me eating the stomach contents of caribou. Indeed, you have to wonder whether the Inuit really ate such stuff either, since Stefansson describes it being fed to dogs. Other aspects of the arctic diet also remain controversial. For example, some say the Eskimos could get vitamin C from blueberries during the summer months, while others say you'd be lucky to find enough berries to cover a bowl of Rice Chex. I say let's not sweat the details of the menu, which varied from region to region anyway. We know Eskimos got enough vitamin C in their traditional diet to survive because obviously they did. Now it's academic--most arctic natives live in villages and get their vitamin C from OJ and Juicy Juice, just like you and I. Oh, and for all you vegetarians who've seen the error of your ways and were thinking of adopting the Inuit diet--think twice about the raw meat thing. Vitamin C might not a problem, but E. coli might. In Taubes' book there is a hypothesis that the refined carbohydrates act as an anti-nutrient, thus, increasing the need for vitamin C. The British sailors apparently had a lot of sugar sweetened foods back when scurvy became recognized. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
john wrote:
Doug Freyburger wrote: The directions say to move on the phase three PreMaintenance when you have 10-20 to lose and you are asking if you should stay at phase one. *No. I totally believe that the process works, I just want to lose the weight quickly first and then I can move into the other stages. Why do you believe the false assumption that increasing your carb quota will result in slower loss? Cite the studies Susan mentioned about decreasing T3 and the stalls that will cause and any data anyone has on the topic. Explain why phase two has the name Ongoing Weight Loss. Seriously, Dr A spent decades tuning the process in non-obvious ways to produce results better than the obvious. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
john wrote:
"Cubit" wrote: Here is an article which seems to say that there is no ill effects from staying on very low carbs. BEGIN: Why didn't Eskimos get scurvy before citrus was introduced to their diet? They have a traditional diet of almost entirely meat and fish. Where did they get their vitamin C? --Kevin Carson, via the Internet Have you seen what Inuits eat to stay healthy on nearly all meat diets? You want fresh seal eyeballs and fermented flesh with fresh maggots, go for it dude. Dear Kevin: It turns out that the people of the north have a highly evolved physiology that makes them well suited to life in the arctic: a compact build that conserves warmth, a faster metabolism, optimally distributed body fat, and special modifications to the circulatory system. One marvels at the adaptability of the human organism, of course, but still one has to ask: Wouldn't it have been easier just to move to San Diego? While this has truthful parts the fact remains that random people who switch the the fresh seal eyeball and fermented flesh with fresh maggot diet have very good health. Inuits do not thrive because of their genetics. They thrive because they share our genetics. Much of what we know about the Eskimo diet comes from the legendary arctic anthropologist and adventurer Vilhjalmur Stefansson, who made several daredevil journeys through the region in the early 20th century. Stefansson noticed the same thing you did, that the traditional Eskimo diet consisted largely of meat and fish, with fruits, vegetables, and other carbohydrates--the usual source of vitamin C--accounting for as little as 2 percent of total calorie intake. Yet they didn't get scurvy. And he ate food most of us won't. Stefansson argued that the native peoples of the arctic got their vitamin C from meat that was raw or minimally cooked--cooking, it seems, destroys the vitamin. (In fact, for a long time "Eskimo" was thought to be a derisive Native American term meaning "eater of raw flesh," although this is now discounted.) Stefansson claimed the high incidence of scurvy among European explorers could be explained by their refusal to eat like the natives. He proved this to his own satisfaction by subsisting in good health for lengthy periods--one memorable odyssey lasted for five years--strictly on whatever meat and fish he and his companions could catch. And they prepred that catch Inuit syle. I'll pass and eat some brocolli thanks. Vitamin C can be found in a variety of traditional Eskimo/Inuit staples, including the skin of beluga whales (known as muktuk), which is said to contain as much vitamin C as oranges. Interesting point - Most mammals synthesize their own. Other reported sources include the organ meats of sea mammals as well as the stomach contents of caribou. You're thinking: It'll be a mighty cold day in the arctic before they catch me eating the stomach contents of caribou. Indeed, you have to wonder whether the Inuit really ate such stuff either, since Stefansson describes it being fed to dogs. But I've seen fresh seal eyeballs being eaten by Anthony Bourdain on FoodTV. If you're on Induction why are you discussing the Inuit fresh seal eyeball diet? Very little similarity. You understand it does not apply at all to your situation, right? |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
On Apr 13, 6:32 pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
john wrote: If you're on Induction why are you discussing the Inuit fresh seal eyeball diet? Very little similarity. You understand it does not apply at all to your situation, right? All I'm pointing out here is that we simply don't need carbs, or need extremely little carbs and can still keep living. Carbs don't seem to be a necessity. In theory one could simply eat meat every day and pop a vitamin pill every day and could do that for like a year no problem. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
another atkins question
On Apr 12, 5:37*pm, Doug Freyburger wrote:
John wrote: Right now I weight about 184 and would like to get down to 165. So you currently have 19 pounds to lose, and that assumes that you used an accurate method to chose your goal weight like body fat percentages or looking yourself up in a life insurance chart and add 10 pounds. Should I just stay in this induction phase until I get to 165.. ? Well let's see. *The directions say to move on the phase three PreMaintenance when you have 10-20 to lose and you are asking if you should stay at phase one. *No. *Following the directions works better than wishful thinking and refusing to believe that the process works. Why would you move out of this before getting to the goal weight In addition to the T3 issue mentioned by Susan, because it works better to follow the entire process than to do the obvious that treats Atkins like a fad diet. *I'll mention fad diet farther down. ... what is the reason people go onto the next phase I can't tell if you're a troll or if you're ignoring posts. *Following a porcess that took several decades to tune works better than some fad diet someone can dream up over night. ... is there something that is not good about the induction phase... Yes. so far I have no problems with it, Yes you do have problems with it - You are trying to cling to it. *That's a problem. and feel I can stay on it for a long time ... Folks who stay on Induction have a higher drop out rate. *So what if you feel now like you can stay on it longer. *Lots of folks who dropped out stated that before dropping out. Oh, please. Here we go again. There is no basis for this statement that people who stick with induction longer have a higher drop out rate. Atkins had no problem with people staying on induction longer. In fact, he suggested that before moving on to the OWL, they consider staying with induction longer. Now, I do agree that for someone with only 20 lbs to lose, it's OK to move from induction after the normal 2 weeks, especially if he drops 4 lbs in that time. One of the points of the whole plan is that you're supposed to stay on a reduced carb plan to keep the weight off. By transitioning to it over time by slowly adding carbs back, you get eased into it. Also, moving past induction allows more food choices, which makes Atkins easier to stick with. Fad diet - I worry if I go off Atkins or don't stick with it Induction is not Atkins. *It is part of Atkins. *Since the direction say you should now be moving to PreMaintenance you are definitely not sticking to it right now. and go back to carbs Reality check. *Have you read the carb ladder that tells what carbs to try when? *Then explain to me why adding more cauliflower equals "go back to carbs". *You're not making sense here because you aren't depicting what Atkins actually is in the book. *A hint - The first week of OWL has a carb quota of 25 net and you get there with extra servings of low carb veggies not a large spoon of chocolate cake. I will be even more susceptible to them putting the weight on. Treating Atkins like a fad diet does put you into a pattern of crash and burn, lament, regain, waiting too long to return, coming back, insisting on over doing it, crashing and buring again. *Start today to not be in that cycle. *Set you carb quota to 25 like it says in the book and follow the process as it is written. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Atkins Question | John[_2_] | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 35 | April 11th, 2008 11:09 PM |
Atkins question | Beth M. | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 6 | January 2nd, 2006 11:59 PM |
Atkins Question Please | Jo-Ann | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 8 | January 18th, 2004 11:41 PM |
atkins question | Tig | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 8 | January 7th, 2004 11:44 AM |
Atkins fat question | Michael Walker | Low Carbohydrate Diets | 1 | November 24th, 2003 12:29 AM |