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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
I'm eating right. I'm eating eggs and whole wheat bread and asparagus and apples and roast beef and chicken and salmon and cabbage and lowfat milk and cheese and beans and lots of other good stuff. I cook with olive oil, or, when necessary, peanut oil. chuck the whole wheat bread it is a waste of calories. just read the label. wheat has been so modified I doubt it has anything we can really use besides the carbs it contains. atleast get some sprouted wheat bread or whole grain bread. -- Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
... Lictor wrote: I don't think I am in danger of malnutrition by not having pasta I also doubt it, there are other sources of carbs than pasta. Though there is more to eating than nutriments. Pasta is also *good*. I don't like being deprived (I cannot anyway, as I am gluten intolerant - this is the part where "I discovered low carb by accident" comes in), and I still do on occasion have some wild or brown basmati rice. Then, it's a whole different matter. Sorry, I didn't know about that. The problem is that we should have different words for "diet" - one for people who diet because they want to lose weight, and another for people who have a metabolic condition forcing them on a diet. Obviously, you have the later, so it would be just stupid to pretend you can be on a diet with gluten and remain healthy. People who want to lose weight are a different matter. Around 10% of them have a real health problem, and in many cases, it only explains part of their weight. Some of these health problems (like thyroid problems) can actually be fixed. Maybe 30% have what used to be good genetics and is now bad : the ability to store fats very easily - but that's only part of the problem. For the majority of people on a weight loss plan, the problems are behavioural or psychological. I mean, for many obeses, you don't have to seek the reason for them being fat : they just eat too much. And often, the reason for them eating too much is not biological. I just don't think *any* diets are the *only* answer to a problem that involves such a large range of causes. Actually, I suspect they do more bads than goods. All diets work by building cognitive restrictions - a mental state that is at the center of boulimia and anorexia. A successfull diet is actually one that has managed to turn you into a "reasonnable anorexic" who manages to keep a permanent level of restriction without going too far. A half successfull one only turns you into a reasonnable boulimic who alternates between restrictions and binge eating. I don't think these are reasonnable long term solutions. It's an extremelly unstable situation - anything can tilt the balance one way or another. It doesn't teach you how to eat correctly, it doesn't teach you how to deal sanely with your hunger (actually most diets just try to teach you how to ignore it completely), it doesn't teach you how to deal with the events in your life without the food... Diets are a good answer for people like you, because you do need to restrict yourself from some kind of food. I choose, for my own personal health, to avoid glutenous grains. The fact that it is in most of the cultural food available in my area is not my fault, nor is it my problem. I simply don't eat it. Because your main problem is allergies, not weight. Then, it makes sense. For a "normal" person, it would make no sense not to eat any grains (there is a diet like that) as the mean to deal with a psychological pulsion. How I "fell into" low carbing is a story in and of itself. The short version is that for various health reasons I eliminated certain ingredients from my diet. I found myself feeling incredible and then someone told me that what I was doing 'sounded like' a low carb diet, so it was after that, that I did a bit of digging around and reading about what low-carbohydrate eating is. I also did fall into my own "diet" pattern this way. The last time I managed to lose a significant amount of weight was actually without dieting at all. Actually, I was eating at McDonald four times a week. The only difference was that I was feeling happy and had a bright vision on life. I also really enjoyed the food I ate (yes, even Big Macs), and was really tuned to my body signals (hunger, satiety). I lost the weight naturally and pretty fast, while feeling absolutely *great* and full of energy. The reason it finally failed were purely psychological (my girlfriend and I had a one year break up that looked definitive back then, I was forced to move abroad to a country I hated because of my job contract...). So, the logic thing to do would be to learn to deal with the psychological issues. Then, I did come uppon a "diet" that was centered around both these psychological issues and tuning yourself to your feelings. I could have written the book myself That's also the healthiest alternative. You worked your own diet for yourself, and then happened to find it was close to an existing diet. Your eating patterns still were mainly your own. Just like some people have a diet which happens to stick to some culturally established diet that happens to be pretty close - like some vegans will adopt Indian vegetarism, because it's already pretty close to their eating habits. I have more problems with the opposite alternative : people who adopt an alien diet that is completely opposite to their habits as one falls into a religion. This means killing any personnal feelings they have about food and what they like, to adopt the completely external point of view of a doctor or a book. The problem of many people with obesity is actually externalism (trusting outside opinion more than their own - especially for basic signals like hunger). This only worsens the problem instead of solving it. Then the only conclusion I can come to, is that your body is different than mine and can handle different amounts of food which I eat far less of. Well, you do have a documented body difference : your allergy. So, obviously, I have options you do not have. You're also a woman, and dieting is something men seem to have some advantages with (we got to make up for all the extra years you get!). I also know my metabolism is still high, I'm losing weight quickly while still eating as much as normal people. My way of eating doesn't get in the way of my social life. For me, to have a body that felt as terrible as it felt when I was eating "the old way" would seem to get in the way of my social life. My friends still would want to be with me even if I turned down paella. Same with my friends, but it would still make my life more difficult. I would still have some stress associated with the situation, instead of just enjoying being with my friends and eating a great meal. I would likely thank them for the thought but explain that for health reasons I am unable to partake of the paella. Because you *do* have health reasons! That's a big difference. Being on a diet is quite different. Actually, except for my girlfriend, noone knows I am on a diet. When you tell people, they start wanting to put you on their own diet, they start to think you should only eat lettuce with boiled fish, and you get thousands of conflicting opinions a day. So far, noone has really noticed the weight loss (damn, don't they ever LOOK at my belly?) - I have started making bets with my girlfriend about who will notice first. When they do, I will probably tell people I'm on some fad diet ("I breakfast with raw tripe and ananas"), this usually satisfy them much better than telling them you're actually trying to do something serious about your weight. I've never had a situation where I've either had to ask my friends to prepare a special food for me, or appear rude by turning it down. Many of the meals we have together are a joint effort and we collaborate as to who brings what. Cultural difference there Bringing your own food is something only for extremelly unformal occasions here - like picnics. Otherwise it would be felt as insulting (exceptions being bringing the wine or the dessert). Most of my friends don't have a weight problem, so they do consider dripping potatoes in melted cheese along with smoked ham a perfectly acceptable meal. Most diet would require me to ask for a special meal, because not many enforce high fat/high carb. In my case, the solution is to eat some of the stuff in reasonnable amount. Cultural habits also call for stopping your diet when you're receiving friends as a courtesy (unless it's a religious or health related diet, then you cook regular stuff for them). It would be considered extremelly rude to have your special meal while the guests eat another. So, joint effort wouldn't be an option either. (Most of my friends are marrieds with children like myself and my husband). My friends know me, and accept me for who I am. In the same way I wouldn't feel "put out" if I made a pound of fudge for my diabetic friend who had to turn it down. Since most people are not aware of what I'm doing, it's not really an option. Actually, as a diabetic, I would eat that fudge of yours That thing is just too good to pass. However, I would eat it at the end of a real meal and certainly not a whole pound of it (actually, I'm having the hardest time keeping enough hunger to reach dessert lately)! Moderation is usually very well accepted, except by the people who either have themselves a problem with food (the only affection I can deliver is food or I am what I cook) or the ones who really don't want you to lose weight (the tempters). I do have such freedom. I have considerate friends and I have consideration for them. Many people have other reasons than just "being on some fad diet" to turn down certain foods. You do have one of these better reasons. It's not a problem of consideration, it's a problem of how far remote your friends are (being invited at a friend of a friend of a friend for instance) and how many people are invited (inviting 15 people which each one being on his own weird diet can be a nightmare). It's also a problem of politeness, unless I had a real health problem, I would feel rude to ask people to take more consideration for me than they would for the rest of the guests. I don't know how it is in the USA, but here most people on a diet just stop having a social life. They eat their powdered stuff (those are very popular) while their co-workers eat at the restaurant, and they just stay at home the evening. Let me clarify by saying that I am not on Atkins, but I have read the entire book. Many people associate the Atkins diet with a lifetime of only eating meat and salad vegetables. However, there is a far wider variety of food "allowed" on it than that. There are "phases" of the diet which allow grains and fruits and other things. I just downloaded Atkin's book, I will probably read some of it... My problem with Atkins (or low carbs in general) is not because they let you eat far or whatever. Low fat has always felt crazy to me anyway. My problem is because it's still a diet, it works by further removing you from being a normal regulated eater. And for many people, Atkins still mean they can eat as much as they want as far as there is no carb. That's the simplification that is being repeated by the medias, and as a consequence, that's what most people think it is. Well, like I said, it's unfortunate that 90% of the continent (North America being the one I am in) has an obsession with putting sugar and flour as a filler in a lot of the food. I wouldn't call that "gastronomy" I don't think corn syrup has anything to do with gastronomy. I do believe that flour as a room in gastronomy (hell, my country is very serious about bread - though we don't put additives as you do and we use a flour that is less white), but using tons of flour in pre-made meals to give them the texture they can't achieve on their own is not gastronomy. If you look at your continent, there are a wider variety of food than what is available in fast food... I see nothing wrong with Chili con carne, cajun food or even buritos... Low carbing found me by default, I didn't go looking for it. I simply took away foods which were doing me more harm than good and by default it turned out to be low-carb. For me, it's about ingredients, not carb counts. Then, it's different. It came from a combination of your own tastes and the limitations caused by your illness. I can respect that. I haven't bothered checking exactly what I eat, I don't even bother with calories, but I'm certainly not eating low fat. Low fat is just depressing and tasteless (a good deal of the aromas are contained in the fat). I know I'm eating rather high protein, because I love red meat (though I'm trying to bring in some fish and vegetal protein sources as well). I'm also eating low fast-carbs. Except for the difference that I can chunk gluten as a snack, I'm probably not on a very different diet than yours. It's just that the average balance is not a rule, it's just a matter of tastes - if I want to eat a high carb meal, I won't even think in term of high carb, I will just eat the meal I fancy. My diet is very balanced. I just don't eat the same repertoire you eat. I eat all kinds of vegetables, protein dishes, rice, but not every day, sometimes even (hang on to your hat) corn bread that my friend prepares for me, Ahhh but these are not low-carb things you say. Balanced = balanced in macro-nutriments, not healthy That's what I meant anyway. But you see, this is my problem with low carb. Many people claim to be eating low carb, but once you dig a bit, they are actually eating a rather balanced diet. The thing they are doing is that they are certainly not eating low fat or high carb. I see nothing wrong there, both were crazy extremes. Actually, it seems to me many people are using the "low carb" flag as a way to fend off the low fat nazism that seems to be the norm in the USA. If I look at your diet, it just sounds balanced to me. You're eating mainly slow carbs and no sugars, you have not removed fats or proteins from your meals, and from time to time, you indulge in food you like even if it doesn't fit your plan. Sounds very reasonnable to me. You're not putting yourself under strong restriction, which is probably why you're not bingeing either. You have just a given dietetary pattern that is your own, just like I have mine. And like mine, yours probably shifts slightly with seasons, moo d or whatever. I would be tempted not to call it a diet, feels rather like hygiene to me. The problem is that when you're counted among the successes, you will get attached to all kind of things, including Atkins, induction for life or just doing plain stupid stuff as long as it is no carb, which don't have much to do with your actual diet. I have the freedom now to walk for miles without huffing and puffing (this occured even before any significant weight was lost, about a week after changing my lifestyle), to not invest lots of money on antacids, and a whole host of other "unexplainable" minor, but annoying complaints I used to go running to the doctor for. Antiacids? That for stomach burns? Why would you have to do that??? If a diet caused me stomach burns, I would drop it ASAP! I experienced about the same thing, though stopping the cigarette did the thing for me about the huffing issue I certainly feel more ease with moving my body. It's almost impossible to make a generalization about what people on low-carbohydrate diets eat or don't eat, and why, and be correct. The media loves to slant things to create a sensational thing to talk about, and very little of what I've read about low-carbohydrate dieting from the news is anywhere close to reality. The problem is that the news set the reality. Moderation seems very hard for many people, most people operate on a manicheist mode, and this is even more true for the people on diets. If the media say "low fat", you can be sure people will go on 15% fat or less and utterly ruin their health and then rebound happilly to even heavier than they were before. Of course, low fat was initially only 30-40% energy from fat. Now that people hear "low carb", what exactly do you think they will do? Do you bet on them following a relatively sane diet like you do, or do you bet on them having three T-bones a day? Our countries are full of people who want a magic solution, they want to eat as much as they can and lose weight. The stupider the diet, the happier they will be. They tried losing weight by eating ananas, grapefruit, dissociated meals, Mayo... When they hear "low carb" all over the medias, their first thought will be that they should bath themselves in animal fat... |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
Steve Knight wrote:
I would like to know what eating right is? Poor disadvantaged right handed folks looking at some chopsticks and wondering what to do, in this leftie's opinion ;^) There is no one "right" way to eat. Diets that lead to healthy populations run from almost 100% raw meat among the few Eskimos and Inuits who still live the traditional hunting lifestyle to nearly 100% root vegitables among mountain dwelling subsistance farmers. This is why both low carb and low fat diets work for some percentage of the population. But there are certain common trends. The more variety the better. Eating naturally occuring (pre domestication) foods beats eating domesticated foods beats factory produced foods. Having the option to eat until stuffed at any time of any day is a problem. Systems of eating that include a lot of walking to get to the food beat systems with a conveyor belt so you never have to get off the sofa. Stuff like that. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
"Doug Freyburger" wrote in message
om... But there are certain common trends. The more variety the better. Eating naturally occuring (pre domestication) foods beats eating domesticated foods beats factory produced foods. Having the option to eat until stuffed at any time of any day is a problem. Systems of eating that include a lot of walking to get to the food beat systems with a conveyor belt so you never have to get off the sofa. Stuff like that. Another option is to built diet around cultural diets : - They come with plenty of already existing tasty recipes - If the culture managed to survive, it's diet is usually reasonnable healthy For instance if you look at Indian vegetarism, it's built around products that provide all the amino-acids you need. I guess the people who did not follow this didn't died an awfull death, and people adapted it until they survived. If you look at France, the south western part built a diet around large quantity of duck fat, beans, wine and fresh vegetables. That's one of the area of the world where life expenctancy is at its highest, and with the lowest rate of heart diseases. South east is the classical mediterranean diet, not very original. Western coast has mixed high butter intake with lots of fish and sea food - the fish offset the cholesterol and butter is high in CLA (anti-carcinogenic). The problem in the USA is that the established cultural food is still weak, with the country being still young. And the food and fast food industries have devolved this cultural eating into a freaky version of it. Moreover, they have introduced stuff, like hydrogenation, which should have never been in a diet in the first place. To make things worse, various diet crazes have made this diet more and more artificial : first removing fat (that is, replacing real butter and unsaturated fat with tons of trans fat and adding lots of fast carbs in the process and adding flavors since they were dissolved in the fat), then removing carbs (since you don't have much left, you need lots of stuff to create taste and create volume and texture). In the name of healthy eating, we have created food that is anything but healthy. I mean, the recipe for real bread is : flour (usually not totally white, bread is "low quality" flour normally), water, leaven (non chemical) and salt, point. Now, check the content of what is called bread by the food industry... |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
The problem in the USA is that the established cultural food is still weak, with the country being still young. And the food and fast food industries have devolved this cultural eating into a freaky version of it. Moreover, they have introduced stuff, like hydrogenation, which should have never been in a diet in the first place. To make things worse, various diet crazes have made this diet more and more artificial : first removing fat (that is, replacing real butter and unsaturated fat with tons of trans fat and adding lots of fast carbs in the process and adding flavors since they were dissolved in the fat), then removing carbs (since you don't have much left, you need lots of stuff to create taste and create volume and texture). In the name of healthy eating, we have created food that is anything but healthy. I mean, the recipe for real bread is : flour (usually not totally white, bread is "low quality" flour normally), water, leaven (non chemical) and salt, point. Now, check the content of what is called bread by the food industry... 90% or more of the food at a grocery store should never be eaten. I lot of it if not all has stemmed from laziness or lack of time. plus greed for producing such garbage. snapple sold us on the greatest stuff on earth. but they come out with this god awful meal replacement that is mostly sugar. who but someone that only cared about the bottom line would make such crap?? now we are seeing really crappy low carb stuff. Just like we did with low fat. all of the fake fats and the fake sugars that are such crap. everything aimed for kids is really sweet. well that sure makes it easy to eat right as an adult. -- Knight-Toolworks & Custom Planes Custom made wooden planes at reasonable prices See http://www.knight-toolworks.com For prices and ordering instructions. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
Steve Knight wrote:
90% or more of the food at a grocery store should never be eaten. Exactly. I hate the excuse of "Oh It's a large part of 'culture'". It is not my fault that the food is there, NOR is it MY responsibility to eat it. I am not a human garbage can. It's bad enough food companies have to resort to making OTHER people pay for their waste products instead of disposing of them themselves. CM |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
... Exactly. I hate the excuse of "Oh It's a large part of 'culture'". It is not my fault that the food is there, NOR is it MY responsibility to eat it. I am not a human garbage can. It's bad enough food companies have to resort to making OTHER people pay for their waste products instead of disposing of them themselves. I don't see what hydrogenated fats, corn syrup and similar stuff have to do with *culture*. All they have to do with is industry (and lobbies). I'm sure the *traditionnal* American way of eating is not that unhealthy, and the human body has some room to adapt before a diet is so bad it will start to hurt it. The problem is that the traditionnal way of eating has been morphed by the industry into something that looks like it, doesn't really taste like it, and certainly does not feel the same way to your body. On the occasions I visited the USA (only NCY and San Francisco, but my girlfriend spent three weeks on the roads in Louisiana), I was actually surprised that it was possible to eat very good tasting stuff that also happened to be reasonnably healthy. But I was also surprised at how low quality stuff like McDonalds (or KFC or Taco Bell) are. Actually, while visiting NYC, I wondered why people were going to these instead of the nearby salad bars where the burgers where incredibly tastier (and cheaper). The big surprise is that I also have McDonalds in Paris (it seems they're much more successful here than in the USA). But the food and service is "higher" quality (they're very heavy on traceability, hygiene, throwing away stuff that has been made more than 5 minutes ago...), the portions are smaller, salads have been around for a whole decade, the law is very strict with oil quality... We had the mad cow disease, and the whole fast food industry freaked out - so they do everything they can to avoid any suspicion. If you compare traditionnal hamburger/fries to what McDonalds serves, you will see what I mean. The traditionnal version is high calorie (which just means you should eat less of it), but highly satisfying, the French fries are made with vegetable oil that hasn't been used 18 hours a day for the last week, the meat is good quality... In the McDonalds or whatever version, the French fries are made with some "frying preparation" which is pure hydrogenated oils loaded with trans fat, the buns use flour as white as possible, the meat is the cheapest thing that can still pass for meat - and it's still as high calorie and is *nowhere* as satisfying. Same with real buritos vs Taco Bell's. Or real Southern style fried chicken vs KFC. Or homemade meals vs pre-made ones. It's the "same" meals, but they have grown less and less satisfying, leaving you hungry again sooner and sooner, and they come loaded with tons of stuff that doesn't belong into food. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
Lictor wrote:
"Crafting Mom" wrote in message ... Exactly. I hate the excuse of "Oh It's a large part of 'culture'". It is not my fault that the food is there, NOR is it MY responsibility to eat it. I am not a human garbage can. It's bad enough food companies have to resort to making OTHER people pay for their waste products instead of disposing of them themselves. I don't see what hydrogenated fats, corn syrup and similar stuff have to do with *culture*. Exactly. But some people seem to insist that such things are part of our "culture", and eliminating them is "deprivation" LOL |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
Crafting Mom wrote in news:vIXdc.24794
: Exactly. But some people seem to insist that such things are part of our "culture", and eliminating them is "deprivation" LOL If nobody buys it - it will cease to exist. It's that easy. -- Walking on . . . Laurie in Maine 207/110 60 inches of attitude! Start: 2/02 Maintained since 2/03 |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Atkins Diet
SnugBear wrote:
Crafting Mom wrote in news:vIXdc.24794 : Exactly. But some people seem to insist that such things are part of our "culture", and eliminating them is "deprivation" LOL If nobody buys it - it will cease to exist. It's that easy. I may not buy it, but it'll exist. Like I said, it's not my problem, and not my responsibility to ensure that it's not a problem for other people. CM |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Uncovering the Atkins diet secret | Diarmid Logan | General Discussion | 135 | February 14th, 2004 04:56 PM |
Low carb diets | General Discussion | 249 | January 8th, 2004 11:15 PM | |
Atkins diet may reduce seizures in children with epilepsy | Diarmid Logan | General Discussion | 23 | December 14th, 2003 11:39 AM |
The Atkins Spousal Syndrome: Partners of Low-Carb Dieters Suffer | Mars at the Mu_n's Edge | General Discussion | 0 | October 28th, 2003 04:08 PM |
Is this better than Atkins? | Ferrante | General Discussion | 13 | October 8th, 2003 08:46 PM |