Where are all the thin poeple from Atkins first book?

Rob wrote:
|| Roger Zoul wrote:
||
||
|||
||| Hey moron, where are all the folks you followed your "free
||| establishment advice" for the last 30 years?
|||
|| I don't have a chance. I'm all about eating less. What food
|| manufacturer is going to sponsor such profit cutting advice? They'd
|| much rather change a label to low fat or low carb and trick people
|| into believing they can eat all the want.

The medical establishment has been promoting it for years. The problem is,
that advice isn't any easier to follow than other advice. Just about all of
the major commerical diets will work, if the user follows them correctly and
consistently. The same is true of your approach. Some people have a
propensity to be overfat, some done. The real issue, for any person wanting
to lose weight, is simply finding a way that that person can stick with long
term.

Good morning,
On 4-Aug-2004, Rob wrote:

You've yet to explain what it is about Atkin's diet that means it
can't be followed long term.

Sorry for the confusion. I think all diets promise long term
results. I’m looking for one that’s living up to its promise.
Eating advice
that’s backed up by success stories from people, not studies. I
already found a study (95% failure rate within 5 years.) I don’t
consider
5 years long term. I think of long term as now until no longer
medically possible. I’m seeing plenty of Atkins weight loss numbers
short
term, but it seems somewhere in the maintenance phase there is a
failure
before the 5 year point. Perhaps the reintroduction of carbs tips
the scale. Perhaps the body somehow adjust to the diet and leads to
failure. I don’t know but I think it’s important.

Hey Rob, did you know that there was this guy in here a few days back
using your name?
It's easy to tell the difference between you two though. He was
unreasonable and confrontational. ;-)

Okay, on to the matter at hand.
If you're looking for a diet that lives up to its promises you'll end
up with eye strain
before you see it. As long as there are human beings involved that's
going to be the case.
In the case of Atkins I can only posit some guesses as to what the
reasons are (started
January 99, lost 100 pounds and reached goal August 2000, maintenance
since then).
Part of it is pure human behavior. Sweet tastes good, it's cheap and
it's everywhere.
It's somewhat more difficult to eat low carb in all situations.
Part of it involves the loss (after weight loss is complete) of any
constantly present compelling
reason to eat in the chosen style. If you're wearing normal sizes and
have for X amount of time
it's more difficult to dredge up much of a sense of urgency for
avoiding bad eating habits.
Part of it does have to do with raising carb amounts. An awful lot of
people in here report
getting an appetite suppressant effect from low carb amounts. The
phrase "I forgot to eat" even gets used.
For someone who spent a lot of time hungry on other diets that seems
like a miracle from Heaven. When
carb amounts get raised and that effect dissipates it starts getting
perilously close to being hard work.

That's my take on the matter. In the end it will always come down to
the individual, not the diet.

Take care,
Carmen

Good morning,
On 4-Aug-2004, Rob wrote:

You've yet to explain what it is about Atkin's diet that means it
can't be followed long term.

Sorry for the confusion. I think all diets promise long term
results. I’m looking for one that’s living up to its promise.
Eating advice
that’s backed up by success stories from people, not studies. I
already found a study (95% failure rate within 5 years.) I don’t
consider
5 years long term. I think of long term as now until no longer
medically possible. I’m seeing plenty of Atkins weight loss numbers
short
term, but it seems somewhere in the maintenance phase there is a
failure
before the 5 year point. Perhaps the reintroduction of carbs tips
the scale. Perhaps the body somehow adjust to the diet and leads to
failure. I don’t know but I think it’s important.

Hey Rob, did you know that there was this guy in here a few days back
using your name?
It's easy to tell the difference between you two though. He was
unreasonable and confrontational. ;-)

Okay, on to the matter at hand.
If you're looking for a diet that lives up to its promises you'll end
up with eye strain
before you see it. As long as there are human beings involved that's
going to be the case.
In the case of Atkins I can only posit some guesses as to what the
reasons are (started
January 99, lost 100 pounds and reached goal August 2000, maintenance
since then).
Part of it is pure human behavior. Sweet tastes good, it's cheap and
it's everywhere.
It's somewhat more difficult to eat low carb in all situations.
Part of it involves the loss (after weight loss is complete) of any
constantly present compelling
reason to eat in the chosen style. If you're wearing normal sizes and
have for X amount of time
it's more difficult to dredge up much of a sense of urgency for
avoiding bad eating habits.
Part of it does have to do with raising carb amounts. An awful lot of
people in here report
getting an appetite suppressant effect from low carb amounts. The
phrase "I forgot to eat" even gets used.
For someone who spent a lot of time hungry on other diets that seems
like a miracle from Heaven. When
carb amounts get raised and that effect dissipates it starts getting
perilously close to being hard work.

That's my take on the matter. In the end it will always come down to
the individual, not the diet.

Take care,
Carmen

Rob wrote:

Dr. Atkins published his first book back in the 70's based on the same
concepts as his current book. If these plans worked in the long run,
the release of new diet books wouldn't even be necessary.

You're confusing business strategies with changes in health issues.

jamie wrote:

Thank you for answering my questions and again, congratulations!

Dinner sounded delicious.

Rob wrote:

You have reintroduced carbs but kept them below a certain number, will
you share what that number is?


It varies from about 40 to 80 day to day, with one weekend meal
off low-carb every other weekend.


Do you choose complex vs. simple carbs for your selections?


I think that's an artificial distinction. There are a number of
starchy foods, starch being complex, that have a higher glycemic index
than simple carbs in fruit. I avoid sucrose. I eat small amounts
of fruit. I eat a small portion of starchy food every 2 or 3 days
on maintenance. Every day is too much for me.


Do you get protein from mostly fatty meat sources or from lean meats and
vegetables?


I eat plenty of veggies, but I don't think there's significant
protein in them -- I despise all beans except green beans. I might eat
boneless skinless chicken breast one day, and a rib-eye steak the next.
I use cheese as a condiment, not a snack food. Sometimes I butter
my veggies, and sometimes I don't.


Would you share a dinner menu or two?


It was over 100 degrees today, and the AC is not keeping up very
well, so I didn't want to heat up the kitchen, and it was too hot
to stand over the BBQ. I picked up a cooked rotisserie chicken from
the supermarket. We ate it with large servings of cabbage-brocolli
slaw with bits of carrot, bacon and sunflower kernels.


Do you have any idea why so many have failed behind you?


Plenty of reasons for plenty of people. There's no simple answer to
that.


I hope others understand the sacrifice you’ve made to get to this point
and keep it up for this long. I hope while you maintain it they look on
you proudly instead of tagging you as “naturally skinny”.


I was thin most of my life, but I'd always watched my weight, and
I naturally ate fairly close to low-carb. It was only when I was
directed to eat low-fat for familial high cholesterol that my appetite
got out of control. I gained almost 50 pounds in 5 years following the
low-fat diet, and it only made my blood lipids much worse, dropping
my fairly high HDL to next to nothing, and LDL climbing from kind of
high to completely ridiculous. It went back to where it was in the
first place on low-carb.

Rob wrote:

Luna wrote:

Uh, their way of eating most probably will not have the same results
for an
overweight person.

You don’t think eating identically to them, item for item, portion for
portion will change your size to much closer to theirs?

Well if a diabetic adopt a sugary diet that someone else has they will
most likely die, so that would be a big NO. If you read Atkins'
theories or other low-carb proponents you would see how strong the
link between obesity in the general population and diabetic issues
looks to be.

I know thin, active people who have never been fat who
say "I just eat when I'm hungry, and I eat whatever I want!"

They’ve learned to cope with the hunger as you can too.

NO they haven't!

People who were "healthy" (water you construe that to mean) their
whole lives typically don't do anything special to be that way!
People of 5, 12, 17, 22 years old don't spend every meal saying I
can't eat anymore, I'll get too fat. They are naturally that way.
Diet/exercise regimes were a culture monkey people adopted, so they
could be anorexic-model thin or have 5% BF to show off muscle tone.
Sure when people get older they now hit a gym cause they don't like
how age is looking on them. BUt if you were normal weight your whole
life you mostly likely don't need to "diet" or have an "exercise"
program. The human body, like every other animal, maintains it
automatically without any thought required from the person. For some
people those mechanisms don't work. For more and more those mechanisms
fail. The idea that all people are the weight they are through sheer
power of will is nonsense. Weight-loss that simply blames weight on
weak-willed and lazy people is just prejudice. LIke saying all
insert racial profile are lazy, immoral, low-class. If you look for
something to justify that prejudice you will always find it.

They eat
whatever they want in front of others. When they’re alone, it’s right
back to skipping this or that to stay under their RMR calorie number.

No that is what an obsessive dieter does. Normal people don't count
****.

Even if they binge for a day, the rest of the week is adjusting meals to
compensate for the treats they had days before. I do it all the time.
I'm sorry they wouldn't share a better answer with you, but they do have it.

Again binge, refrain, adjust, these are dieters terms. Not the way a
normal person eats. And yes the whole USA seems to be convinced that
they need to be on a diet to establish the most basic sense of being a
healthy human.


DiGiTAL_ViNYL (no email)
350/273/Jul-269/200
Atkins since Jan 12, 2004
Maint.-70 carbs/day (CCLL=50-60)

Rob wrote:

They all became very shy, so in order to go out in public they had to
disguise themselves under 200lbs of fat.

The disguise worked well didn't it, you couldn't spot them.

Regards


David

Rob wrote in message ...
The Voice of Reason wrote:

So if someone is obese then loses the weight and keeps it off for
life, they are a 'quick fixer'? Are you saying that obese people can
only lose weight through quick fixes rather than through lifestyle
changes? You're making less and less sense the more of your posts I
read.

No, if they’ve kept it off for life, they’re a success story that I’d
like to hear. Given the condition of the population, I’d guess
statistically there are more obese people that have lost then gained it
back then those that have lost and kept it off. We’re not looking for
diet advice to drop 20 lbs, we’re looking for maintenance diets.

Maintenance diet = eating as many calories as you need to maintain
your current weight. Also, why maintain when weight gain is
preferable?

You mentioned lifestyle. Do you consider an active lifestyle something
that helps one lose and maintain weight or is an active lifestyle only
possible when weight is lost and maintained? For me it was the latter.

You're saying that an active lifestyle doesn't help lose weight? What
have you been smoking?

I lost my weight without exercise but I wonder if I could have even
played volleyball or soccer while heavy. Maybe my heart wouldn’t have
survived it. I think the “eat right and exercise” theory may be flawed.
Perhaps it’s eat right first, exercise when it’s safe.

If you don't exercise when you lose weight you'll end up losing the
wrong sort of weight.

Why should we listen to what you say about anything? You've lost
weight so you're just a 'quick fixer'. Your diet must be a fad. I
should go and ask someone who's never thought about what he eats or
what exercise he does.

Yes, the 3 year fat spot means you shouldn’t listen to me. Although,
since I’m keeping it off you might want to question why just a little
bit.

I'm saying that because that's /exactly/ what you just said above. I'm
growing tired of your idiocy. It seems that my original theory that
you're a wind-up merchant is gaining more credibility.

Weren't you saying before that your calorie-counting diet is hard to
follow, then criticising other diets for being hard to follow? Weren't
you saying before that you were fat and lost weight, then saying that
people who have lost weight are quick fixers on fad diets who
shouldn't be listened to? Please make your mind up.

I don’t think I said calorie-counting was hard to follow.

Yes you did, I read it last night. Stop lying, I'm not falling for it.
You know exactly what you said.

Rob wrote in message ...
jbuch wrote:

Rob wrote:

Low carbohydrate diet regimens have been in existence for decades.
Dr. Atkins published his first book back in the 70's based on the same
concepts as his current book. If these plans worked in the long run,
the release of new diet books wouldn't even be necessary. The
followers would have actually been capable of maintaining weight loss
by eliminating high carbohydrate foods for over 25 years. Their long
term weight loss success stories would have spread worldwide as the
cure to obesity. Paradoxically, as more and more diets appear, the
weight loss industry continues to get richer, and America continues to
grow fatter.



Where are all the thin people from LOW FAT DIETS that have been
postulated for the last 40 years?

Ask yourself all the same questions as in your speech above.

Jim



My eating habits don’t conform to the low fat diet standards either. I
eat plenty of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fat. It’s the
saturated fats and trans-fats that I limit.

You don't do "low fat". You do "calorie counting". But the same
question applies. "Calorie counting" has been around a LONG time.
I have cookbooks from the 40's and 50's with calorie tables in them.
Where are all the thin people from calorie counting?

Tony Lew wrote:




My eating habits don’t conform to the low fat diet standards either. I
eat plenty of polyunsaturated and monounsaturated fat. It’s the
saturated fats and trans-fats that I limit.


You don't do "low fat". You do "calorie counting". But the same
question applies. "Calorie counting" has been around a LONG time.
I have cookbooks from the 40's and 50's with calorie tables in them.
Where are all the thin people from calorie counting?

"calorie counting" seems to have been a bad term to use. I call it that
since I calculate my resting metabolic rate (RMR) then add it to my
exercise calories to find my max caloric intake.

RMR=13x155+500
RMR=2515 calories

"Portion control" is apparently a more accepted term than counting
calories so lets use that instead. I'm convinced that "most", since
there are exceptions to every rule, fit people portion control their
meals and that's how they stay trim. They may have tried "low fat" or
"low carb." along the way, but portion control was their key to success.
Published diets drop foods, food groups and ingredients but in the
end, it’s less or equal calories in than are burned, that makes the
final difference.

Where are all the thin people from calorie counting?

They are a shrinking percentage of the population, but they're
everywhere you see someone thin (theater, television, magazines, office,
gym, etc.) They're limiting portion sizes to maintain their weight.
Even those with medical reasons for being thin adjust their caloric
intake, although much higher than others, to maintain the weight they want.

Since I find it common in most diets, it must be the root of the failures.
Why does one slowly lose track of portion control?
Was the hunger control only temporary?
Occasional cheating becomes the norm?
Are they overconfident in themselves and figure they can increase the
portions?
What makes so many diets fail at this continual maintenance phase?

If it’s any or all of the above, how do we collectively find a solution
that might work for everyone? How would our government, who’s been
blamed for obesity, keep portion control in check?