I've remarked before about being relieved when i can get back to eating the way that makes me feel good.... I'm going to have to figure out how to eat the way i want to, all the time!
Don't get me wrong, it's fun to "misbehave" when i WANT to, but extremely vexing to "have to" eat wrongly when i don't. If i don't feel like eating at all -- even something "innocent" -- it's annoying to be put into a position where i feel i should. OTOH, i don't want to impose my unconventional patterns on my husband -- at least, not more than he's stuck with already! ...So how am i going to manage, so that two independent-minded people can eat what/when they like? It's not going to be TOO much longer before he decides to retire and be around a whole lot more.
Well, it's not only going to require keeping the right foods and drinks (yet to be determined) handy, but some research into MORE nearby restaurants with appropriate menu possibilities. Sure one can get a low-carb meal almost anywhere, but one does get tired of the same ol' side-dishes to go with one's simple meat-entree, and i got burned-out on salads way back in the '70s! I don't believe i've ever read many truly creative ways of making ordinary restaurants answer to our LCHF requirements -- i mean, i've been ordering sandwiches without the bread for YEARS, and more suggestions of that nature are pretty useless.
So anybody out there have unusual and brilliant ways of coping with the restaurant question?
Showing posts with label eating patterns. Show all posts
Showing posts with label eating patterns. Show all posts
Monday, January 28, 2013
Sunday, August 26, 2012
i was bad again
:-D
Oh, not really horrible -- there will be no lasting damage. We just spent last evening with our dear neighbors who ALWAYS fill us with great food, wine and friendship. Had a great time, drank too much and ate a lot of carbs. Won't happen again for some time.
THIS is why i'm "good" most of the time -- so i can enjoy a blowout like this occasionally with no regret. Should i call it an unintentional leptin reset?
I DO realize that i'm lucky, and what i ate over the course of a few hours won't start me down a cravings-slide: some people are in danger if they have ANY disallowed food. If i indulged for an extended period, it would be more dangerous in that respect, kinda like when my husband worked in New Orleans for almost two years. I had been doing low-carb for five years or so at that time, and going back to occasional wheat-eating was hard on my body, but i was also doing a huge amount of walking, so the scale went up only a little -- though the pain levels were significantly higher. But sometimes things were irresistible -- barbecued oysters, anyone? :-)
Today i'm delaying my fast-breaking, allowing some of that stored sugar to come out and be burnt. Tomorrow i'll have the guts to get back on the scale. I have a beautiful chuck roast all ready to go into the grinder, and i'll start eating right again, and we'll all live happily ever after.
Oh, not really horrible -- there will be no lasting damage. We just spent last evening with our dear neighbors who ALWAYS fill us with great food, wine and friendship. Had a great time, drank too much and ate a lot of carbs. Won't happen again for some time.
THIS is why i'm "good" most of the time -- so i can enjoy a blowout like this occasionally with no regret. Should i call it an unintentional leptin reset?
I DO realize that i'm lucky, and what i ate over the course of a few hours won't start me down a cravings-slide: some people are in danger if they have ANY disallowed food. If i indulged for an extended period, it would be more dangerous in that respect, kinda like when my husband worked in New Orleans for almost two years. I had been doing low-carb for five years or so at that time, and going back to occasional wheat-eating was hard on my body, but i was also doing a huge amount of walking, so the scale went up only a little -- though the pain levels were significantly higher. But sometimes things were irresistible -- barbecued oysters, anyone? :-)
Today i'm delaying my fast-breaking, allowing some of that stored sugar to come out and be burnt. Tomorrow i'll have the guts to get back on the scale. I have a beautiful chuck roast all ready to go into the grinder, and i'll start eating right again, and we'll all live happily ever after.
Monday, July 30, 2012
brisket's in the oven
I had a coffee-fast yesterday (with coconut milk). The scale still hasn't budged. My mind and my body are obviously having a very fun time stymying me and defying the laws of physics this week! ;-)
The mind is working on sneaking up behind, today; yesterday was about ketosis and autophagy -- today is a protein re-feed. I have a steak marinating to take care of it until the brisket is done. Taking a hint from Mrs. Beeton, i sprinkled a tiny bit of allspice on with the salt and pepper, and sealed it in its foil coffin before popping it into a low oven. I would have gone the whole way a la Flamande, but i don't have any carrots.... I like to half-cook a brisket, let it cool and slice it before putting it back in the oven to tenderize. Trying to slice a TENDER brisket produces huge quantities of shredded beef, which is less desirable when you don't eat sandwiches anymore.
Interestingly enough, Mark's column today answers a question about carb re-feeds, and i was proud of him -- this guy is no simple-minded extremist, even if he is a jock! ;-)
The mind is working on sneaking up behind, today; yesterday was about ketosis and autophagy -- today is a protein re-feed. I have a steak marinating to take care of it until the brisket is done. Taking a hint from Mrs. Beeton, i sprinkled a tiny bit of allspice on with the salt and pepper, and sealed it in its foil coffin before popping it into a low oven. I would have gone the whole way a la Flamande, but i don't have any carrots.... I like to half-cook a brisket, let it cool and slice it before putting it back in the oven to tenderize. Trying to slice a TENDER brisket produces huge quantities of shredded beef, which is less desirable when you don't eat sandwiches anymore.
Interestingly enough, Mark's column today answers a question about carb re-feeds, and i was proud of him -- this guy is no simple-minded extremist, even if he is a jock! ;-)
Thursday, July 19, 2012
progress update conclusion (i think): what WORKS
I'm down another pound this morning, putting me under my "San Francisco starting weight" of three weeks ago. As i don't have to go anywhere for over a month (knock on wood), i COULD actually make my goal weight before summer ends. Here's hoping i won't get any surprises in my life to derail me....
A year ago, i was coming to the conclusion that i might have to reconcile myself to being overweight the rest of my life. I felt i had gotten all the good i could out of low-carbing and paleo/primal eating, and that hormones had finally gotten the better of me; no matter how i reduced intake, it didn't seem to make any difference to my fat load.
This morning, i sat down in my thinking-chair (OKAY, the wing-chair in my bedroom where i like to read and watch movies) KNOWING that what's healthy for me is effective, and vice-versa. It doesn't take super-human willpower to eat a restricted diet, and i can even have a wild splurge every month or so with no ill effects. WOW. This is the definition of empowerment.
I think that the first thing a person like me has to do is BECOME A FAT-BURNER. If you're not fat/ketone-adapted, your body will fight you every step of the way. Hunger and cravings will take over your mind. Now, i was lucky in that i had broken the spell of carbohydrates quite awhile ago (and fully realize how seductively dangerous they are), so my quest was all about learning to control the metabolic flexibility we all need to thrive ... although, i didn't know that when i started.
I've learned that my instinct to wait a considerable time in the morning before eating is the correct one. Kindke blogged about the morning cortisol peak, which gave me a good reason to indulge myself. At home by myself, i have supplements and black coffee for breakfast most of the time. :-) The funny thing is, i've learned to PREFER my coffee black -- never in a million years would i have predicted that! If i have a good reason to eat a meal in the morning, it HAS to be a protein-fat one -- i'm a walking example of a carb-laden breakfast inducing appetite later in the day.
Being fat-adapted, i sometimes have to make myself eat a meal in the middle of the day, because (with the load of "food" i carry around under my skin) i constantly have fuel to burn. But i NEED my protein, so my dinner (my largest meal, whenever it is) is ideally about a half-pound of pastured meat; if it doesn't carry its own lipids along, it gets the addition of butter or real-cream sauce. Depending upon how "good" i'm behaving, black coffee or 4 ounces of wine is the mandatory side-dish. Drinking water or other cold beverages with a meal is a BIG mistake for me -- one thing a hypothyroid needs to make sure of is stomach acid! Coffee and wine unbalance me the least.
Water, i drink at the midpoints between meals. If i feel like a cocktail in the afternoon, but am inclined to deny myself the carbs, i'll make a pot of tea. Jasmine or Earl Grey make for the perfect stress-buster, in lieu of a Gimlet! The important thing is to make it in a pot and pour it in a cup (not a mug), and not work at anything while drinking it. It makes you slow down. Speaking of tea -- should i not be in the mood for coffee with food, i find lapsang souchong is about the only tea that isn't overpowered by a meaty meal.
I make sure to have something to eat before it gets too late; i never really like to start a meal after 8. If i'm allowing myself any carby food at all, this is when it's acceptable. Supper can be like dinner if i really feel an appetite, or it can be a tin of sardines, glass of raw-milk kefir, home-made gelatin, or even my own ice-cream if i'm not particularly hungry.
Sleep is immensely important to me. Even though some experts get really hot about the legitimacy of "adrenal fatigue," i've found that treating it like it's real has improved my health considerably. Stress creates a whole cascade of horrible effects on anyone with a weak thyroid, so by doing my best to pamper my adrenals, i save myself a world of discomfort. I've installed F-lux on my old not-quite-dead laptop as well as on the one i'm using now, AND my husband's. I darken my bedroom to the best of my ability, and cover the blue light of my cellphone. The goal is my ideal of eight to nine hours of uninterrupted sleep, but if i wake during the night, i no longer stress about it; with the knowledge of biphasic sleep i've gained, i just read something soothing for an hour or so.
Sounds so simple.... But like my supplement routine, it took a lot of trial and error and PAYING ATTENTION to my body to come down to it. It took input from knowledgeable sources of all kinds, many of whom write the blogs on the list on this page. It took reassurance by Vilhjalmur Stefansson, Dr. Donaldson and Lucas Tafur that i wasn't ruining myself with the "extreme" diet i thrive on. It took the notions put forth by eccentric doctors whose central points are sound, despite the lengths to which they push them. Hell, i want to thank the WORLD for the help i've gotten in managing this tricky body of mine!
A year ago, i was coming to the conclusion that i might have to reconcile myself to being overweight the rest of my life. I felt i had gotten all the good i could out of low-carbing and paleo/primal eating, and that hormones had finally gotten the better of me; no matter how i reduced intake, it didn't seem to make any difference to my fat load.
This morning, i sat down in my thinking-chair (OKAY, the wing-chair in my bedroom where i like to read and watch movies) KNOWING that what's healthy for me is effective, and vice-versa. It doesn't take super-human willpower to eat a restricted diet, and i can even have a wild splurge every month or so with no ill effects. WOW. This is the definition of empowerment.
I think that the first thing a person like me has to do is BECOME A FAT-BURNER. If you're not fat/ketone-adapted, your body will fight you every step of the way. Hunger and cravings will take over your mind. Now, i was lucky in that i had broken the spell of carbohydrates quite awhile ago (and fully realize how seductively dangerous they are), so my quest was all about learning to control the metabolic flexibility we all need to thrive ... although, i didn't know that when i started.
I've learned that my instinct to wait a considerable time in the morning before eating is the correct one. Kindke blogged about the morning cortisol peak, which gave me a good reason to indulge myself. At home by myself, i have supplements and black coffee for breakfast most of the time. :-) The funny thing is, i've learned to PREFER my coffee black -- never in a million years would i have predicted that! If i have a good reason to eat a meal in the morning, it HAS to be a protein-fat one -- i'm a walking example of a carb-laden breakfast inducing appetite later in the day.
Being fat-adapted, i sometimes have to make myself eat a meal in the middle of the day, because (with the load of "food" i carry around under my skin) i constantly have fuel to burn. But i NEED my protein, so my dinner (my largest meal, whenever it is) is ideally about a half-pound of pastured meat; if it doesn't carry its own lipids along, it gets the addition of butter or real-cream sauce. Depending upon how "good" i'm behaving, black coffee or 4 ounces of wine is the mandatory side-dish. Drinking water or other cold beverages with a meal is a BIG mistake for me -- one thing a hypothyroid needs to make sure of is stomach acid! Coffee and wine unbalance me the least.
Water, i drink at the midpoints between meals. If i feel like a cocktail in the afternoon, but am inclined to deny myself the carbs, i'll make a pot of tea. Jasmine or Earl Grey make for the perfect stress-buster, in lieu of a Gimlet! The important thing is to make it in a pot and pour it in a cup (not a mug), and not work at anything while drinking it. It makes you slow down. Speaking of tea -- should i not be in the mood for coffee with food, i find lapsang souchong is about the only tea that isn't overpowered by a meaty meal.
I make sure to have something to eat before it gets too late; i never really like to start a meal after 8. If i'm allowing myself any carby food at all, this is when it's acceptable. Supper can be like dinner if i really feel an appetite, or it can be a tin of sardines, glass of raw-milk kefir, home-made gelatin, or even my own ice-cream if i'm not particularly hungry.
Sleep is immensely important to me. Even though some experts get really hot about the legitimacy of "adrenal fatigue," i've found that treating it like it's real has improved my health considerably. Stress creates a whole cascade of horrible effects on anyone with a weak thyroid, so by doing my best to pamper my adrenals, i save myself a world of discomfort. I've installed F-lux on my old not-quite-dead laptop as well as on the one i'm using now, AND my husband's. I darken my bedroom to the best of my ability, and cover the blue light of my cellphone. The goal is my ideal of eight to nine hours of uninterrupted sleep, but if i wake during the night, i no longer stress about it; with the knowledge of biphasic sleep i've gained, i just read something soothing for an hour or so.
Sounds so simple.... But like my supplement routine, it took a lot of trial and error and PAYING ATTENTION to my body to come down to it. It took input from knowledgeable sources of all kinds, many of whom write the blogs on the list on this page. It took reassurance by Vilhjalmur Stefansson, Dr. Donaldson and Lucas Tafur that i wasn't ruining myself with the "extreme" diet i thrive on. It took the notions put forth by eccentric doctors whose central points are sound, despite the lengths to which they push them. Hell, i want to thank the WORLD for the help i've gotten in managing this tricky body of mine!
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
progress report, part 2: eating out is the DEVIL
I can't even wait a day before continuing, because looking back on all i've learned is so exciting and encouraging to me. Looking back is an excellent Mercury-retrograde activity.... ;-)
Since the beginning of the year, when i've been at home and doing the cooking i haven't failed to lose weight, and when i've been eating out a lot, i haven't failed to gain. It's that simple. Because i know what the pitfalls are, i haven't gained MUCH, and i haven't failed to lose it again, but it just goes to show you what happens when other people are in charge of the kitchen.
Other people's condiments are full of industrial-seed oil, sugar, texture- and flavor-enhancers (like carrageenan, guar gum, MSG, etc), preservatives (which may or may not be a problem), artificial colors (which sensitive people find problematic), and so on. Other people don't properly nixtamalize corn, ferment grains and legumes, soak nuts and seeds -- in other words, they take shortcuts that ruin potentially-nourishing substances. Other people believe advertising propaganda, and think grain-fiber is a good thing, and that metabolic poisons are "a good part of this balanced diet." Other people don't realize that anti-meat "information" is frequently from veg*an sources.
Yes, you can eat out. You can eat out a McDonald's, for heaven's sake, and not ruin your health. What you CAN'T do is make any assumptions about what you're getting. The "best" Italian restaurants are known to use artificial "olive oil." Almost any restaurant steak is going to be seasoned with things you really don't want to consume. The first thing i look for in an omelette is, whether the egg is homogenous or streaky with white and yolk -- if you have doubts, it's best to order the eggs fried rather than scrambled, because GOK what might be in there.
So, when i was in Texas in Jan/Feb and again in May/June, when i was in San Francisco a week in each the spring and summer, and when i had houseguests for a week in April, i did a LO-O-O-O-O-OT of eating out, and it totally screwed my weight goals. Most of the time, i tried to eat according to what i know is best for me, but on about a half-dozen occasions (single meals, that is) i completely FEASTED. The thing i've learned from feasting is, though, to FAST afterward, for a meal or a day. When i'd get home again each time, especially when my husband was still out-of-town, i'd get right back on my VLC diet and/or the Strong Medicine protocol, and i'd be back to normal within days. I've gained and lost the same five pounds, four or five times, but i'm about eight pounds down from the first of the year. Twelve to go.
And rather than thinking it a privation to go back on my "diet," i resume my eating pattern with RELIEF. I just don't feel good when i'm eating like other people do. When i eat my 100 grams each of animal protein and fat per day, i don't feel hungry and food-obsessed, and my brain works, and i hurt less, and i'm HAPPY. I don't like to snack anymore, even though the thought of cocktails and antipasti STILL has allure. I still enjoy some junkfood, but i know it comes with a price i don't like to pay.
I have a lot of sympathy for people who haven't found the "formula" that works to tame their appetites and control their intake for maximal comfort. Until i tweaked the Strong Medicine and my supplement list to "fit" me, i did a LOT more thinking about food with longing!* Now i tell myself, "You're perfectly satisfied, and you feel great on these foods -- you're losing weight with no hunger. Don't even think about luscious foods you're not allowing yourself RIGHT NOW -- you'll have them later. Meanwhile, make progress while there are no distractions!" And i AM! :-D
________
* I also did a lot more planning, shopping and cooking; a lot more SPENDING of money and time. I love the change.
Since the beginning of the year, when i've been at home and doing the cooking i haven't failed to lose weight, and when i've been eating out a lot, i haven't failed to gain. It's that simple. Because i know what the pitfalls are, i haven't gained MUCH, and i haven't failed to lose it again, but it just goes to show you what happens when other people are in charge of the kitchen.
Other people's condiments are full of industrial-seed oil, sugar, texture- and flavor-enhancers (like carrageenan, guar gum, MSG, etc), preservatives (which may or may not be a problem), artificial colors (which sensitive people find problematic), and so on. Other people don't properly nixtamalize corn, ferment grains and legumes, soak nuts and seeds -- in other words, they take shortcuts that ruin potentially-nourishing substances. Other people believe advertising propaganda, and think grain-fiber is a good thing, and that metabolic poisons are "a good part of this balanced diet." Other people don't realize that anti-meat "information" is frequently from veg*an sources.
Yes, you can eat out. You can eat out a McDonald's, for heaven's sake, and not ruin your health. What you CAN'T do is make any assumptions about what you're getting. The "best" Italian restaurants are known to use artificial "olive oil." Almost any restaurant steak is going to be seasoned with things you really don't want to consume. The first thing i look for in an omelette is, whether the egg is homogenous or streaky with white and yolk -- if you have doubts, it's best to order the eggs fried rather than scrambled, because GOK what might be in there.
So, when i was in Texas in Jan/Feb and again in May/June, when i was in San Francisco a week in each the spring and summer, and when i had houseguests for a week in April, i did a LO-O-O-O-O-OT of eating out, and it totally screwed my weight goals. Most of the time, i tried to eat according to what i know is best for me, but on about a half-dozen occasions (single meals, that is) i completely FEASTED. The thing i've learned from feasting is, though, to FAST afterward, for a meal or a day. When i'd get home again each time, especially when my husband was still out-of-town, i'd get right back on my VLC diet and/or the Strong Medicine protocol, and i'd be back to normal within days. I've gained and lost the same five pounds, four or five times, but i'm about eight pounds down from the first of the year. Twelve to go.
And rather than thinking it a privation to go back on my "diet," i resume my eating pattern with RELIEF. I just don't feel good when i'm eating like other people do. When i eat my 100 grams each of animal protein and fat per day, i don't feel hungry and food-obsessed, and my brain works, and i hurt less, and i'm HAPPY. I don't like to snack anymore, even though the thought of cocktails and antipasti STILL has allure. I still enjoy some junkfood, but i know it comes with a price i don't like to pay.
I have a lot of sympathy for people who haven't found the "formula" that works to tame their appetites and control their intake for maximal comfort. Until i tweaked the Strong Medicine and my supplement list to "fit" me, i did a LOT more thinking about food with longing!* Now i tell myself, "You're perfectly satisfied, and you feel great on these foods -- you're losing weight with no hunger. Don't even think about luscious foods you're not allowing yourself RIGHT NOW -- you'll have them later. Meanwhile, make progress while there are no distractions!" And i AM! :-D
________
* I also did a lot more planning, shopping and cooking; a lot more SPENDING of money and time. I love the change.
Tuesday, July 3, 2012
horrible American food and dietary habits!!!
I'm in San Francisco for another visit this week. It ain't N'Orleans, but we haven't had a bad meal yet. This is part of why i get a little annoyed with sweeping statements about how bad "American" food is, and how it's no wonder so many people are fat, seeing as how we eat fastfood all the time.
HUH? News to me....
The Americas, in fact, have an awe-inspiring culinary heritage as a result of being the "melting pot of the world." That statement may sound like a piece of self-important fatuousness, but like most banal truisms it has a basis in fact. When people came here from all over the globe, they brought their food traditions -- and recipes -- with them. The magic happened when old-world dishes couldn't be made exactly as they were before, and new-world ingredients were added in an attempt to replace the unobtainable.
Can ANYONE deplore the addition of pumpkins ... tomatoes ... CHOCOLATE to the world's collective cuisine? I even stand staunchly behind potatoes and maize (if it's properly nixtamalized...). Stevia. Turkeys. Why fixate on Dr. Pemberton's contribution to international culture and forget the rest? And why conflate greedy businessmen trying to make a fortune off a cheap product, with creative purveyors of outstanding cuisine?
Jokes (and prejudices) aside, there's a wealth of great food here. If you can't find it, you don't know how to look. In some of the most out-of-the-way, unlikely places one may find a jewel, and some of the shabbiest dives serve the best food -- i could tell you stories.... Customers flock to our farmers' markets, which are packed with beautiful locally-produced foods of every variety. Grass-fed beef, pastured pork, poultry and eggs, raw milk (where legal) are eagerly sought by people in-the-know, who impatiently sit on waiting-lists for an opportunity to buy.
Yes, a LOT of people eat McDonald's "food." Most people don't eat it often, though. They grab a burger or some doughnuts when they're on the highway or vacationing in a strange place, because they know what they'll be getting, and these places are EVERYWHERE. Pizza becomes a "treat," when you don't allow yourself to eat it but once a year. Ditto for Kentucky Fried Chicken. These are things we picnicked on when we skipped classes and went to the park instead; we sat on the grass and listened to Chicago or Crosby, Stills & Nash on transistor radios, and "made out" in public to the shocked disbelief of our elders....
The only "people" i know who really seem to LIKE fastfoods are children of a certain stage of development, and i suspect it has a lot to do with the rarity of their visits, the fact that they don't get to drink soda with meals at home, the especially-enticing playground equipment, and the collectible toys that come with the "meals." My grandchildren have the same enthusiasm for McD's that my own kids did; none of them has ever eaten like this regularly, because responsible parents (and there ARE a lot of them here, despite the poor advice they get about childrearing) don't allow it as a generality. This stuff is designed to entice kids, and SOME kids (far from all) bullyrag their parents into going there SOMETIMES. Especially when vacationing.
But "bad American food"? It's out there, but it's pretty easy to avoid, too. Next time you're in St. Louis, go to Billie's Fine Foods -- it's an old-school diner, and it has one of the best omelettes i've ever tasted, the Supreme. Highly reminiscent of a supreme pizza, as a matter of fact. At the Deja Vu in New Orleans, get the Deja Vu omelette (not available during Mardi Gras week, though). These are not places you'll find in touristy areas -- you actually have to look for them, google-search good restaurants in strange towns and read the reviews. Of course, if your bus is leaving in 20 minutes and you're ravenous, McDonald's and Cici's Pizza IS right there, and you know what you're getting....
HUH? News to me....
The Americas, in fact, have an awe-inspiring culinary heritage as a result of being the "melting pot of the world." That statement may sound like a piece of self-important fatuousness, but like most banal truisms it has a basis in fact. When people came here from all over the globe, they brought their food traditions -- and recipes -- with them. The magic happened when old-world dishes couldn't be made exactly as they were before, and new-world ingredients were added in an attempt to replace the unobtainable.
Can ANYONE deplore the addition of pumpkins ... tomatoes ... CHOCOLATE to the world's collective cuisine? I even stand staunchly behind potatoes and maize (if it's properly nixtamalized...). Stevia. Turkeys. Why fixate on Dr. Pemberton's contribution to international culture and forget the rest? And why conflate greedy businessmen trying to make a fortune off a cheap product, with creative purveyors of outstanding cuisine?
Jokes (and prejudices) aside, there's a wealth of great food here. If you can't find it, you don't know how to look. In some of the most out-of-the-way, unlikely places one may find a jewel, and some of the shabbiest dives serve the best food -- i could tell you stories.... Customers flock to our farmers' markets, which are packed with beautiful locally-produced foods of every variety. Grass-fed beef, pastured pork, poultry and eggs, raw milk (where legal) are eagerly sought by people in-the-know, who impatiently sit on waiting-lists for an opportunity to buy.
Yes, a LOT of people eat McDonald's "food." Most people don't eat it often, though. They grab a burger or some doughnuts when they're on the highway or vacationing in a strange place, because they know what they'll be getting, and these places are EVERYWHERE. Pizza becomes a "treat," when you don't allow yourself to eat it but once a year. Ditto for Kentucky Fried Chicken. These are things we picnicked on when we skipped classes and went to the park instead; we sat on the grass and listened to Chicago or Crosby, Stills & Nash on transistor radios, and "made out" in public to the shocked disbelief of our elders....
The only "people" i know who really seem to LIKE fastfoods are children of a certain stage of development, and i suspect it has a lot to do with the rarity of their visits, the fact that they don't get to drink soda with meals at home, the especially-enticing playground equipment, and the collectible toys that come with the "meals." My grandchildren have the same enthusiasm for McD's that my own kids did; none of them has ever eaten like this regularly, because responsible parents (and there ARE a lot of them here, despite the poor advice they get about childrearing) don't allow it as a generality. This stuff is designed to entice kids, and SOME kids (far from all) bullyrag their parents into going there SOMETIMES. Especially when vacationing.
But "bad American food"? It's out there, but it's pretty easy to avoid, too. Next time you're in St. Louis, go to Billie's Fine Foods -- it's an old-school diner, and it has one of the best omelettes i've ever tasted, the Supreme. Highly reminiscent of a supreme pizza, as a matter of fact. At the Deja Vu in New Orleans, get the Deja Vu omelette (not available during Mardi Gras week, though). These are not places you'll find in touristy areas -- you actually have to look for them, google-search good restaurants in strange towns and read the reviews. Of course, if your bus is leaving in 20 minutes and you're ravenous, McDonald's and Cici's Pizza IS right there, and you know what you're getting....
Sunday, July 1, 2012
eat low-carb, or punish yourself
That title was meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. I have to announce this up front, or some doctorate-types would insist that i'm 1) lying; 2) ignorant; 3) unqualified to open my mouth in public; or 4) all the above.
Reading all the commentary (in TPJ-approved sites) on why the Kitavan diet isn't a high-carb diet in the "modern world's" sense, something occurred to me: a truly high-carbohydrate diet is all about Biblical-style asceticism! YES! If you eat a high PERCENTAGE of your diet as carbs you have a few choices to make, to keep yourself from embodying the Deadly Sins of Gluttony and Sloth.
You can eat your huge percentage of carbohydrates in comparatively meagre quantity. A very low CALORIE diet can afford to be high-carb! And what do we call a very low calorie diet, kids? STARVATION. Saints used to be very fond of that; it shows that you value spirituality more than worldly hedonism -- and you get really kewl visions and stuff -- sometimes you get to hear God talk to you!
Instead of eating very little every day, you can also choose to eat as much as you want today, and nothing at all tomorrow -- it balances out the same way. If you prefer to eat every day, you can also decide to eat for a very short time. Fasting is a multi-disciplinary-approved means of self-denial.
OR ... you can eat enough to saturate your bodies with all those strengthening "energy foods" and work extra hard to make them go into the SPECIFIC tissues you want them in. Punishing the body to chasten it was also very popular in the height of the monastic era (AKA the Dark Ages). If you worked hard enough you could make your body forget it has all sorts of horrible urges like ... a LIBIDO! Ewwwww.... Where's that Ben-Gay -- i mean HAIR SHIRT?
;-) Thanks but no thanks. Their self-righteousness is not for me! The believers in Gluttony and Sloth (reincarnated as food reward) may think i'm damned because of my faith in the Golden Calf (BEEF, yes!), but i'm not afraid. Even if they're right about my destination, their idea of hell has no terrors for me -- and the music there is said to be much better.
Reading all the commentary (in TPJ-approved sites) on why the Kitavan diet isn't a high-carb diet in the "modern world's" sense, something occurred to me: a truly high-carbohydrate diet is all about Biblical-style asceticism! YES! If you eat a high PERCENTAGE of your diet as carbs you have a few choices to make, to keep yourself from embodying the Deadly Sins of Gluttony and Sloth.
You can eat your huge percentage of carbohydrates in comparatively meagre quantity. A very low CALORIE diet can afford to be high-carb! And what do we call a very low calorie diet, kids? STARVATION. Saints used to be very fond of that; it shows that you value spirituality more than worldly hedonism -- and you get really kewl visions and stuff -- sometimes you get to hear God talk to you!
Instead of eating very little every day, you can also choose to eat as much as you want today, and nothing at all tomorrow -- it balances out the same way. If you prefer to eat every day, you can also decide to eat for a very short time. Fasting is a multi-disciplinary-approved means of self-denial.
OR ... you can eat enough to saturate your bodies with all those strengthening "energy foods" and work extra hard to make them go into the SPECIFIC tissues you want them in. Punishing the body to chasten it was also very popular in the height of the monastic era (AKA the Dark Ages). If you worked hard enough you could make your body forget it has all sorts of horrible urges like ... a LIBIDO! Ewwwww.... Where's that Ben-Gay -- i mean HAIR SHIRT?
;-) Thanks but no thanks. Their self-righteousness is not for me! The believers in Gluttony and Sloth (reincarnated as food reward) may think i'm damned because of my faith in the Golden Calf (BEEF, yes!), but i'm not afraid. Even if they're right about my destination, their idea of hell has no terrors for me -- and the music there is said to be much better.
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
contentment!
With my husband out of town on business again, yesterday was a modified-Strong-Medicine day, and it felt so GOOOOD! My mental fog has been lifting over the last 36 hours, my joint pain subsiding, and my exhaustion alleviating. The bathroom scale read almost a pound less than yesterday. Today will be more of the same.
In the throes of socializing i forget myself, and if there are contraband foods in front of me, i can't trust myself not to eat them. I'm really safest when it's just me and the dog! :-) Intellectually, i know i'll feel best when i avoid the carbohydrates, and that i'll regret it later ... but the ATMOSPHERE of eating the stuff can be contagious.
Atmospheres are powerful things! Esotericists will tell you, being around depressed people is a downer even for the most optimistic, and the company of criminals blunts one's moral sense. It stands to reason that when you're in the company of people who WANT you to stray from your dietary straight-and-narrow, it's harder to be true to it.
So while Spense and i are alone for these few days, we'll be eating and drinking with conscious intent ... and it'll be EASY. I LIKE meat and coffee, and other low-carb fare. So why do i EVER eat and drink things i shouldn't? Because they're there, and we have a biological drive to take advantage of abundant nutrients, AND a lot of people are constantly sending nonverbal (and verbal) cues urging us to be "bad."
Note to self: when eating and drinking in the company of others, be especially aware of body language that "rewards" me for consuming things i know i shouldn't....
In the throes of socializing i forget myself, and if there are contraband foods in front of me, i can't trust myself not to eat them. I'm really safest when it's just me and the dog! :-) Intellectually, i know i'll feel best when i avoid the carbohydrates, and that i'll regret it later ... but the ATMOSPHERE of eating the stuff can be contagious.
Atmospheres are powerful things! Esotericists will tell you, being around depressed people is a downer even for the most optimistic, and the company of criminals blunts one's moral sense. It stands to reason that when you're in the company of people who WANT you to stray from your dietary straight-and-narrow, it's harder to be true to it.
So while Spense and i are alone for these few days, we'll be eating and drinking with conscious intent ... and it'll be EASY. I LIKE meat and coffee, and other low-carb fare. So why do i EVER eat and drink things i shouldn't? Because they're there, and we have a biological drive to take advantage of abundant nutrients, AND a lot of people are constantly sending nonverbal (and verbal) cues urging us to be "bad."
Note to self: when eating and drinking in the company of others, be especially aware of body language that "rewards" me for consuming things i know i shouldn't....
Friday, June 22, 2012
save us from ... ourselves?
I've tried to read several articles inspired by the British show, "The Men Who Made Us Fat," but i keep bumping up against the title. It reminds me of grade-schoolers who do something naughty, and when caught make the excuse, "It wasn't MY fault -- Johnny made me do it!" The parent/teacher glares at the child and asks, "And just HOW did Johnny 'make' you do it?" ... At least, parents and teachers of my generation did that; GOK what they do these days.
Now, i KNOW the situation isn't analogous. ;-) It just "takes me back," is all....
Nor am i hinting that the parental reply should have been, "Yes, it IS your fault, you little monster." The bit is, pointing the finger of blame doesn't do a damn lot of good in solving the problem. And WHERE should the finger point, anyway?
In trying to find a villain we'll all love to hate, i suspect the writers went for the cheap and easy target. SHAME on vendors who try to sell us stuff! Don't they know they're responsible for every bite/drink we take of their products? (Our wills are as weak and flabby as our bellies, some people seem to think.) Don't they know that it's up to them to make sure we don't get too many calories in one sitting? That it's incumbent upon our restaurant server to make sure we finish our vegetables before they bring round the dessert cart?
No? ... How about this -- they should be held accountable for the human psychology that makes us snap up a perceived bargain? They should be legally responsible for our evolutionary taste for sweets, that they take advantage of? For knowing that pictures of food encourage our appetites?
Or MAYBE ... the dietary advice from MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS has, for half a century, told us to eat the wrong things, things that make us hungry two hours after we finish a meal and mess up our glucose tolerance simultaneously? (Things that -- coincidentally -- make us avidly search for a snack to tide us over till our next meal, which will do the same thing AGAIN.) Told us to forgo satisfying red meat and satiating fat, and instead eat skinned chicken breasts and plenty of pasta ... oh, and don't forget your healthyfruitsandvegetables! If you finish, you can have some low-fat frozen yogurt for dessert -- because you WILL have room for it, i can guarantee that.
NAW!!!
Now, i KNOW the situation isn't analogous. ;-) It just "takes me back," is all....
Nor am i hinting that the parental reply should have been, "Yes, it IS your fault, you little monster." The bit is, pointing the finger of blame doesn't do a damn lot of good in solving the problem. And WHERE should the finger point, anyway?
In trying to find a villain we'll all love to hate, i suspect the writers went for the cheap and easy target. SHAME on vendors who try to sell us stuff! Don't they know they're responsible for every bite/drink we take of their products? (Our wills are as weak and flabby as our bellies, some people seem to think.) Don't they know that it's up to them to make sure we don't get too many calories in one sitting? That it's incumbent upon our restaurant server to make sure we finish our vegetables before they bring round the dessert cart?
No? ... How about this -- they should be held accountable for the human psychology that makes us snap up a perceived bargain? They should be legally responsible for our evolutionary taste for sweets, that they take advantage of? For knowing that pictures of food encourage our appetites?
Or MAYBE ... the dietary advice from MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS has, for half a century, told us to eat the wrong things, things that make us hungry two hours after we finish a meal and mess up our glucose tolerance simultaneously? (Things that -- coincidentally -- make us avidly search for a snack to tide us over till our next meal, which will do the same thing AGAIN.) Told us to forgo satisfying red meat and satiating fat, and instead eat skinned chicken breasts and plenty of pasta ... oh, and don't forget your healthyfruitsandvegetables! If you finish, you can have some low-fat frozen yogurt for dessert -- because you WILL have room for it, i can guarantee that.
NAW!!!
Friday, May 18, 2012
the power of "no appetite"
Since my LAST guest left, i put in about 24 hours -- 4 meals'-worth -- of the Strong Medicine protocol, which is to say that i ate 8 ounces of fatty meat and a cup of coffee for each meal, and nothing else but 3 cups of water between breakfast and lunch, 3 more between lunch and dinner, and NOTHING else except for the water and supplements i took first thing in the morning and before bed. My appetite left me.
This morning's weigh-in shows that i've re-lost the pounds i put on during this last trip. Now i can work on actually making some progress! It's annoying that i spend so much time "recovering" from the damaging effects of "normal" (albeit low-carb) food! Sometimes you can dig in your heels and say NO to the inappropriate things available to eat, but there are moments when it's rude or just plain unkind to resist. [sigh]
On those rare and golden occasions when i lose my appetite, i've learned that it's best to RIDE that pony as far as it'll take me! The first time i tried the StM technique, i was actually alarmed at how fast the weight came off, and i added in some vegetable matter at dinnertime to slow it a bit. Donaldson said that it's "safe" to take off three pounds a week, but that you want your skin to "follow" the fat reduction.... After two abdominal surgeries, my belly is unattractive enough without screwing it up more, so i got concerned -- or is that too much information? :-)
If i back off any plan while the going is GREAT, i lose a lot of impetus, AND re-entering the program is less effective than it was before. While it's working ya gotta HANG ONTO IT!!! Let the goodies pass you by, and explain to the disappointed face in front of you that you've developed digestive difficulties with whatever it is they're offering ... but that it looks SO GOOD that only the fear of later pain keeps you from digging in. ;-) In theory, anyone who cares about you will want to spare you PAIN, so it'll be a lot more acceptable than "you want me to screw up my diet for boxed cake mix and cool-whip frosting???"
So, one would think that having to detour from the StM for a couple of days would be a downer -- well, not THIS time, because the reason is different! Yesterday i was not hungry until late afternoon (i DID have some coffee during the morning...) so around 5:00 i had a tin of sardines, a little of my hazelnut-chia bread, butter, and some white wine. (It filled me to the "80%" level, so i really didn't feel the need to eat more, and i didn't wake this morning ravenous.) Success! I'm on a roll again, and i give full credit to the diet plan that CAUSES a lack of appetite.
Incidentally, i'm back to feeling good about skipping breakfast -- Dr. Donaldson frowned on this because it "put out the fat-burning fire." Kindke recently posted about the morning cortisol surge that's normal for us, and how it encourages glucose intolerance, insulin resistance, and fat storage if one eats during it. Now, this may be fine and dandy for gymrats who want to use it to put on muscle, but frankly i'm FAR more interested in how i can work around it to LOSE FAT. I simply am not hungry in the morning unless i've been eating too many carbs, so why fight nature? ... As a matter of fact, fighting nature at ANY time is just plain stoopid.
So, fighting natural appetite is HISTORY from my point of view! The thing that i've found workable is to manipulate it through food choice; i eat StM-fashion till my appetite is pretty much gone, and then i ride it with prudent low-carb variations like a surfer rides a wave.
Kowabunga.
This morning's weigh-in shows that i've re-lost the pounds i put on during this last trip. Now i can work on actually making some progress! It's annoying that i spend so much time "recovering" from the damaging effects of "normal" (albeit low-carb) food! Sometimes you can dig in your heels and say NO to the inappropriate things available to eat, but there are moments when it's rude or just plain unkind to resist. [sigh]
On those rare and golden occasions when i lose my appetite, i've learned that it's best to RIDE that pony as far as it'll take me! The first time i tried the StM technique, i was actually alarmed at how fast the weight came off, and i added in some vegetable matter at dinnertime to slow it a bit. Donaldson said that it's "safe" to take off three pounds a week, but that you want your skin to "follow" the fat reduction.... After two abdominal surgeries, my belly is unattractive enough without screwing it up more, so i got concerned -- or is that too much information? :-)
If i back off any plan while the going is GREAT, i lose a lot of impetus, AND re-entering the program is less effective than it was before. While it's working ya gotta HANG ONTO IT!!! Let the goodies pass you by, and explain to the disappointed face in front of you that you've developed digestive difficulties with whatever it is they're offering ... but that it looks SO GOOD that only the fear of later pain keeps you from digging in. ;-) In theory, anyone who cares about you will want to spare you PAIN, so it'll be a lot more acceptable than "you want me to screw up my diet for boxed cake mix and cool-whip frosting???"
So, one would think that having to detour from the StM for a couple of days would be a downer -- well, not THIS time, because the reason is different! Yesterday i was not hungry until late afternoon (i DID have some coffee during the morning...) so around 5:00 i had a tin of sardines, a little of my hazelnut-chia bread, butter, and some white wine. (It filled me to the "80%" level, so i really didn't feel the need to eat more, and i didn't wake this morning ravenous.) Success! I'm on a roll again, and i give full credit to the diet plan that CAUSES a lack of appetite.
Incidentally, i'm back to feeling good about skipping breakfast -- Dr. Donaldson frowned on this because it "put out the fat-burning fire." Kindke recently posted about the morning cortisol surge that's normal for us, and how it encourages glucose intolerance, insulin resistance, and fat storage if one eats during it. Now, this may be fine and dandy for gymrats who want to use it to put on muscle, but frankly i'm FAR more interested in how i can work around it to LOSE FAT. I simply am not hungry in the morning unless i've been eating too many carbs, so why fight nature? ... As a matter of fact, fighting nature at ANY time is just plain stoopid.
So, fighting natural appetite is HISTORY from my point of view! The thing that i've found workable is to manipulate it through food choice; i eat StM-fashion till my appetite is pretty much gone, and then i ride it with prudent low-carb variations like a surfer rides a wave.
Kowabunga.
Wednesday, May 16, 2012
state of the weightion
We now interrupt our regular series of philosophizing and rants to bring you a progress report.... ;-)
The past month has been a little disorganized for me and my dietary explorations. With one thing after another after another, i haven't been able to stay in a dull little groove of eating what i know is optimal and systematically testing other things. The bad news is that i gained about three or four pounds, though half of it has gone already, and was probably mostly water anyway. The good news is ... i've lost my appetite.
During each phase of this experience, i tried to keep my carbs and omega-6s from getting outrageously high, while acknowledging that they WOULD be notably higher than usual. The problem with eating out is largely, to become satisfied one has to eat the potatoes, too. ONLY at Billie's is the omelette big enough and full enough to be a complete meal -- bless their little hearts! Most places, they're hopelessly wimpy. And it's shocking how few places have REAL saturated fats on hand. :-(
Feeling rather poorly one day in Virginia, when my husband planned a steak dinner i had him buy me a big fatty ribeye and cook it VERY rare -- that perked me right up. Lesson -- restaurant food is usually lacking in the "vital force" which rawtarians praise but can't definitively describe; i think it's a combination of enzymes and ... what vampires crave.
When we were back home, all my guests were gone, and i looked forward to eating "normally" again (for me -- "really weird" for everybody else), i plunged back into the Strong Medicine regimen. Only problem was, my stomach wasn't ready for it. Three meals of that and i felt overloaded. When i used StM before, i had a similar reaction which i attributed to lack of salt, but that wasn't to blame THIS time. And like before, i'm reminded of Stefansson's men and their early loss of appetite. I guess this reaction is to be expected EVERY TIME one transfers from a "balanced" diet to a VLC one. The full digestive process needs time to get on board.
So yesterday i finished the kefir for breakfast and had coffee-with-cream for lunch, before eating my last patty of ground chuck with the leftover roasted okra. (I put the leftover mashed yams in the freezer.) Later this morning, WHEN i actually start to feel hungry, i'll cook the tenderloin filet that i thawed the day before yesterday, and eat it rare with a big dollop of GF butter. I have another chuck roast thawing, to turn into more lovely juicy burgers, which i'll make a little smaller than the last ones: see if that doesn't reduce the load on my digestive equipment!
I have ANOTHER out-of-town adventure coming up -- a living-history event the weekend of Memorial Day, and a visit to my daughter. This time i'll do some preparation that will -- with any kind of luck -- keep me from confusing my body quite as much as the last trip did.
The past month has been a little disorganized for me and my dietary explorations. With one thing after another after another, i haven't been able to stay in a dull little groove of eating what i know is optimal and systematically testing other things. The bad news is that i gained about three or four pounds, though half of it has gone already, and was probably mostly water anyway. The good news is ... i've lost my appetite.
During each phase of this experience, i tried to keep my carbs and omega-6s from getting outrageously high, while acknowledging that they WOULD be notably higher than usual. The problem with eating out is largely, to become satisfied one has to eat the potatoes, too. ONLY at Billie's is the omelette big enough and full enough to be a complete meal -- bless their little hearts! Most places, they're hopelessly wimpy. And it's shocking how few places have REAL saturated fats on hand. :-(
Feeling rather poorly one day in Virginia, when my husband planned a steak dinner i had him buy me a big fatty ribeye and cook it VERY rare -- that perked me right up. Lesson -- restaurant food is usually lacking in the "vital force" which rawtarians praise but can't definitively describe; i think it's a combination of enzymes and ... what vampires crave.
When we were back home, all my guests were gone, and i looked forward to eating "normally" again (for me -- "really weird" for everybody else), i plunged back into the Strong Medicine regimen. Only problem was, my stomach wasn't ready for it. Three meals of that and i felt overloaded. When i used StM before, i had a similar reaction which i attributed to lack of salt, but that wasn't to blame THIS time. And like before, i'm reminded of Stefansson's men and their early loss of appetite. I guess this reaction is to be expected EVERY TIME one transfers from a "balanced" diet to a VLC one. The full digestive process needs time to get on board.
So yesterday i finished the kefir for breakfast and had coffee-with-cream for lunch, before eating my last patty of ground chuck with the leftover roasted okra. (I put the leftover mashed yams in the freezer.) Later this morning, WHEN i actually start to feel hungry, i'll cook the tenderloin filet that i thawed the day before yesterday, and eat it rare with a big dollop of GF butter. I have another chuck roast thawing, to turn into more lovely juicy burgers, which i'll make a little smaller than the last ones: see if that doesn't reduce the load on my digestive equipment!
I have ANOTHER out-of-town adventure coming up -- a living-history event the weekend of Memorial Day, and a visit to my daughter. This time i'll do some preparation that will -- with any kind of luck -- keep me from confusing my body quite as much as the last trip did.
Tuesday, May 15, 2012
"American" diet
Catching up on superficial "news" of my friends and family on Facebook, i noticed the Weston Price posting about rice consumption in Asia. I began idly reading some of the comments....
Most instructive, probably, were ones by people who moved to various oriental countries from foreign lands; the pattern seemed to go, "foreigners always think X, but Y is closer to the truth." I think this observation is pretty universal.
Until you live in a place for a significant time, and are cooked-for by natives of that place in their everyday fashion, it's not easy to tell what those people really eat. I'll use my own home country as an example.
I grew up in the middle of the U S of A, in the middle of the twentieth century. We weren't well-off; my mother worked as a secretary since my early childhood; she did a good part of the cooking, though my sisters and grandmother (who lived with us for awhile) also did kitchen work. We ate "balanced" meals, with animal protein, vegetables and starches for dinner every night (rarely dessert), and various things in moderation for other meals -- eggs, cereal, sandwiches, canned soup, etc. We had minimal snacks and "drinks" (those are expensive). My grandmother was obese, my mother "plump" and my sisters lean -- i, a hypothyroid, was chubby till my teen years.
My best friends in childhood and high-school had different situations, one richer and the other as poor as we (but less organized -- less home-cooking in both); their foods were different but "recognizable," and these friends and their families were also lean. So what was American food in those days, cereal, cold cheese sandwich with margarine on white bread, kool-aid, fried chicken, canned vegetables, hotdogs, lots of potatoes...? Today, i would refuse to eat it.
While i had guests in my house over the past month, i tried to cook meals (when we DID eat "in") that would be a compromise between what i wanted to eat and what they would enjoy; i cooked a liver casserole with onions and bacon (because i knew my mother, sister and niece like liver), fresh vegetables, mashed white sweet-potatoes, oven-braised brisket, grilled steaks, salads, that sort of thing. When we ate out, my guests continued to order what i would call "real food." Is this what "foreigners" consider American food, these days? Or do they think what ALL people eat on vacation is typical of everyday fare?
In hotels, a "free" breakfast is frequently offered which is comprised of the worst possible "food" imaginable -- might as well guzzle straight sugar! The kinds of restaurants which cluster around tourist-attractions and places of entertainment are far from representative of the kind of food which family members (who are less carb-conscious than i) typically cook, eat, or even order in REAL restaurants. McDonald's, Pizza Hut, KFC, IHOP, Pasta House, Taco Bell, Dairy Queen, etc are NOT REAL RESTAURANTS. Allow me to coin a new term -- these are Junkfood Parlors. They do not serve American FOOD. Americans may eat there, but it's far from typical, just like the statistics on how much sugar is consumed is not typical of me, my family, or of anyone i hang around with.
So it is for a lot of countries, i'm sure. When it comes to white rice in Asia or sweet-potatoes in Kitava, the mere fact that these foods are eaten as a PROPORTION OF DIET means less than what measured quantity of them are eaten at once, and in what context.
Most instructive, probably, were ones by people who moved to various oriental countries from foreign lands; the pattern seemed to go, "foreigners always think X, but Y is closer to the truth." I think this observation is pretty universal.
Until you live in a place for a significant time, and are cooked-for by natives of that place in their everyday fashion, it's not easy to tell what those people really eat. I'll use my own home country as an example.
I grew up in the middle of the U S of A, in the middle of the twentieth century. We weren't well-off; my mother worked as a secretary since my early childhood; she did a good part of the cooking, though my sisters and grandmother (who lived with us for awhile) also did kitchen work. We ate "balanced" meals, with animal protein, vegetables and starches for dinner every night (rarely dessert), and various things in moderation for other meals -- eggs, cereal, sandwiches, canned soup, etc. We had minimal snacks and "drinks" (those are expensive). My grandmother was obese, my mother "plump" and my sisters lean -- i, a hypothyroid, was chubby till my teen years.
My best friends in childhood and high-school had different situations, one richer and the other as poor as we (but less organized -- less home-cooking in both); their foods were different but "recognizable," and these friends and their families were also lean. So what was American food in those days, cereal, cold cheese sandwich with margarine on white bread, kool-aid, fried chicken, canned vegetables, hotdogs, lots of potatoes...? Today, i would refuse to eat it.
While i had guests in my house over the past month, i tried to cook meals (when we DID eat "in") that would be a compromise between what i wanted to eat and what they would enjoy; i cooked a liver casserole with onions and bacon (because i knew my mother, sister and niece like liver), fresh vegetables, mashed white sweet-potatoes, oven-braised brisket, grilled steaks, salads, that sort of thing. When we ate out, my guests continued to order what i would call "real food." Is this what "foreigners" consider American food, these days? Or do they think what ALL people eat on vacation is typical of everyday fare?
In hotels, a "free" breakfast is frequently offered which is comprised of the worst possible "food" imaginable -- might as well guzzle straight sugar! The kinds of restaurants which cluster around tourist-attractions and places of entertainment are far from representative of the kind of food which family members (who are less carb-conscious than i) typically cook, eat, or even order in REAL restaurants. McDonald's, Pizza Hut, KFC, IHOP, Pasta House, Taco Bell, Dairy Queen, etc are NOT REAL RESTAURANTS. Allow me to coin a new term -- these are Junkfood Parlors. They do not serve American FOOD. Americans may eat there, but it's far from typical, just like the statistics on how much sugar is consumed is not typical of me, my family, or of anyone i hang around with.
So it is for a lot of countries, i'm sure. When it comes to white rice in Asia or sweet-potatoes in Kitava, the mere fact that these foods are eaten as a PROPORTION OF DIET means less than what measured quantity of them are eaten at once, and in what context.
Thursday, April 26, 2012
eat to live
:-) This is not a new idea.
Somehow, i've gotten the impression that some people look on dietary plans as contests, in which the winner is s/he who gets to consume the most yummy stuff while maintaining an acceptable weight. I think this point of view is problematic.
"Ha ha!" laughs the imp sitting on my left shoulder, "You should talk! You're constantly thinking and reading and writing about food!"
"Thinking, reading and writing -- not eating and planning to eat. I think there's a significant difference," i retort, as i flick the little bastard off and encourage my faithful Spenser to tear it apart....
I LOVE to eat yummy stuff. When my husband was spending so much time working in New Orleans, Spense and i frequently drove down (okay -- Spense didn't help with the driving; no opposable thumbs, you know...), and DESTROYED our diets with the best food America has to offer*. I could sing paeons of praise to the baguettes at Croissant d'Or (but FORGET the pathetic excuse of a beignet at that touristy Cafe place...). Sad thing, though -- the rest of my body didn't enjoy it as much as my tastebuds did.
When you're not so young anymore, and your body wants to get fatter and slower and more painful, BUT YOUR MIND DOESN'T WANT IT TO, a compromise has to be struck. Mind and Tastebuds get together and say, "there's a lot that we both approve of -- let's work on that." Knees, intestines, and thyroid say, "THANK YOU!!!" The baguette is bought by somebody else, while my miscellaneous parts get to enjoy a muffaletta omelette for breakfast, oysters, turtle soup, sweetbreads, more oysters, steaks, fish, wine, veggies, MORE oysters, and that excellent coffee for dessert -- *sigh*....
The virtue i've always found in low-carb eating is, hunger is conquered. Slow mindful enjoyment of well-chosen food satisfies appetite with moderate quantity. Having taught my body to use fat as its primary fuel, the every-two-hour urge that (20 years ago) had me prowling to the refrigerator to find something to devour no longer exists. Morning coffee accompanied by unconsciously-burned body fat fills me up till late morning, when a meal featuring protein and some fat with a garnish of something plant-based satisfies me till early evening, and another similar meal keeps me happy till the next morning renews the cycle -- and all the while i haven't had that haunting urge to nibble! It's almost magical.
Low-carb paleo food has "normalized" my relationship with what i eat, i believe. I concentrate on subjects i study without visions of snacks intruding themselves. I go about my everyday tasks without meal-timing being an issue. I'm not limited by frequent calls by my body and gut-bugs to energy replenishment, because my food is built in, so to speak. And considering my genetic heritage and time of life, the chance that i'll get so thin that this will all change is small-to-none.
So when people say, "it IS possible to gain weight by eating a low-carb diet," i have to wonder WHAT and HOW MUCH they are eating! No doubt -- yes, it is possible. But if one isn't trying to maximize the amount they CAN eat -- not trying to eat the most elaborate dishes, comprised of things like nuts and cream -- it'll be darned hard. If most every day, one is eating normal-sized meals of REAL FOOD, it's not likely to happen, even with an occasional FEAST. (And when i say "feast" i'm thinking of the Commander's Palace.... OMG, how i miss N'Orleans!)
_____
* in my humble opinion! ;-)
Somehow, i've gotten the impression that some people look on dietary plans as contests, in which the winner is s/he who gets to consume the most yummy stuff while maintaining an acceptable weight. I think this point of view is problematic.
"Ha ha!" laughs the imp sitting on my left shoulder, "You should talk! You're constantly thinking and reading and writing about food!"
"Thinking, reading and writing -- not eating and planning to eat. I think there's a significant difference," i retort, as i flick the little bastard off and encourage my faithful Spenser to tear it apart....
I LOVE to eat yummy stuff. When my husband was spending so much time working in New Orleans, Spense and i frequently drove down (okay -- Spense didn't help with the driving; no opposable thumbs, you know...), and DESTROYED our diets with the best food America has to offer*. I could sing paeons of praise to the baguettes at Croissant d'Or (but FORGET the pathetic excuse of a beignet at that touristy Cafe place...). Sad thing, though -- the rest of my body didn't enjoy it as much as my tastebuds did.
When you're not so young anymore, and your body wants to get fatter and slower and more painful, BUT YOUR MIND DOESN'T WANT IT TO, a compromise has to be struck. Mind and Tastebuds get together and say, "there's a lot that we both approve of -- let's work on that." Knees, intestines, and thyroid say, "THANK YOU!!!" The baguette is bought by somebody else, while my miscellaneous parts get to enjoy a muffaletta omelette for breakfast, oysters, turtle soup, sweetbreads, more oysters, steaks, fish, wine, veggies, MORE oysters, and that excellent coffee for dessert -- *sigh*....
The virtue i've always found in low-carb eating is, hunger is conquered. Slow mindful enjoyment of well-chosen food satisfies appetite with moderate quantity. Having taught my body to use fat as its primary fuel, the every-two-hour urge that (20 years ago) had me prowling to the refrigerator to find something to devour no longer exists. Morning coffee accompanied by unconsciously-burned body fat fills me up till late morning, when a meal featuring protein and some fat with a garnish of something plant-based satisfies me till early evening, and another similar meal keeps me happy till the next morning renews the cycle -- and all the while i haven't had that haunting urge to nibble! It's almost magical.
Low-carb paleo food has "normalized" my relationship with what i eat, i believe. I concentrate on subjects i study without visions of snacks intruding themselves. I go about my everyday tasks without meal-timing being an issue. I'm not limited by frequent calls by my body and gut-bugs to energy replenishment, because my food is built in, so to speak. And considering my genetic heritage and time of life, the chance that i'll get so thin that this will all change is small-to-none.
So when people say, "it IS possible to gain weight by eating a low-carb diet," i have to wonder WHAT and HOW MUCH they are eating! No doubt -- yes, it is possible. But if one isn't trying to maximize the amount they CAN eat -- not trying to eat the most elaborate dishes, comprised of things like nuts and cream -- it'll be darned hard. If most every day, one is eating normal-sized meals of REAL FOOD, it's not likely to happen, even with an occasional FEAST. (And when i say "feast" i'm thinking of the Commander's Palace.... OMG, how i miss N'Orleans!)
_____
* in my humble opinion! ;-)
Thursday, April 5, 2012
rolling in his grave
Poor Dr. Atkins! What has happened to his company since he died.... The man wasn't perfect, for heaven's sake -- but the good he did in spreading the low-carb word is being DESTROYED by the greedy idiots who have been directing the course of his legacy since he went to his reward.
Before i discovered the "metabolic advantage," i tried to manage my weight by means of "conventional wisdom" -- that is to say, i starved myself till i couldn't stand it any more, then lost ground when i started to eat like everyone around me. As with everyone else, every attempt at weight loss was less productive than the time before. I don't remember what inspired me to pick up his book, but it changed my life, and for the better.
I used to be constantly hungry on low-fat, even when my stomach was full; low-carb solved that. I realize now, from all i've read over the past few years, that i may have been replete with water-soluble vitamins, but woefully lacking in the rest -- not to mention minerals! I began supplementing a few things RA recommended (and my physician added Iodoral as well), and my health improved as my waistline contracted.
He died only a year or two after i started his diet plan -- before i learned that a lot of ingredients in his shakes and bars were things i didn't want in my body. I like to think that he would have authorized a reformulation of them, had he lived: who knows! But i'm reasonably certain he would NOT have gone down the popularization/inclusivism road which the company has followed, since. Really: the new Atkins "revolution" not only makes it look like all the others ("you CAN have cookies!") ... or maybe even worse.
What foils the usual low-carb dieter, if s/he gets past Induction in the first place, is playing with all the "toys" which give them the illusion of eating their cake and having it too -- and i'm using this expression advisedly. All the treats, snacks and faux meals are NOT going to fix the broken behaviors and metabolisms that most dieters of ALL SORTS bring to the table (pun intended).
The big difference between "paleo low-carbing" and Atkins-style LC is not just the latter's inclusion of chemical cheats (including all the soy), or that the treats keep alive the perceived "need" of cookies, candy, etc. Really -- this is the shortcoming of lots of other diets (**cough**WW**cough**) my friends have tried and ultimately failed with: they don't retrain the appetite and personal habits.
PaleoLC's advantage is the lack of ravenous appetite which is spurred by the semi-carb shortcuts. Eating natural food helps restore a natural appetite -- and i'm not talking about natural almonds ground up and mixed with natural honey and natural eggs and natural mineral salts to make a natural CAKE....
(GRRRRR!)
Before i discovered the "metabolic advantage," i tried to manage my weight by means of "conventional wisdom" -- that is to say, i starved myself till i couldn't stand it any more, then lost ground when i started to eat like everyone around me. As with everyone else, every attempt at weight loss was less productive than the time before. I don't remember what inspired me to pick up his book, but it changed my life, and for the better.
I used to be constantly hungry on low-fat, even when my stomach was full; low-carb solved that. I realize now, from all i've read over the past few years, that i may have been replete with water-soluble vitamins, but woefully lacking in the rest -- not to mention minerals! I began supplementing a few things RA recommended (and my physician added Iodoral as well), and my health improved as my waistline contracted.
He died only a year or two after i started his diet plan -- before i learned that a lot of ingredients in his shakes and bars were things i didn't want in my body. I like to think that he would have authorized a reformulation of them, had he lived: who knows! But i'm reasonably certain he would NOT have gone down the popularization/inclusivism road which the company has followed, since. Really: the new Atkins "revolution" not only makes it look like all the others ("you CAN have cookies!") ... or maybe even worse.
What foils the usual low-carb dieter, if s/he gets past Induction in the first place, is playing with all the "toys" which give them the illusion of eating their cake and having it too -- and i'm using this expression advisedly. All the treats, snacks and faux meals are NOT going to fix the broken behaviors and metabolisms that most dieters of ALL SORTS bring to the table (pun intended).
The big difference between "paleo low-carbing" and Atkins-style LC is not just the latter's inclusion of chemical cheats (including all the soy), or that the treats keep alive the perceived "need" of cookies, candy, etc. Really -- this is the shortcoming of lots of other diets (**cough**WW**cough**) my friends have tried and ultimately failed with: they don't retrain the appetite and personal habits.
PaleoLC's advantage is the lack of ravenous appetite which is spurred by the semi-carb shortcuts. Eating natural food helps restore a natural appetite -- and i'm not talking about natural almonds ground up and mixed with natural honey and natural eggs and natural mineral salts to make a natural CAKE....
(GRRRRR!)
Thursday, March 8, 2012
progress assessment point
During the two-plus months i've been writing here, my eating patterns have been far from consistent! To recap:
I began, strictly following the Personal Paleo Code, with very good results. I leaped into a new physical activity after only one week and irritated my weak knee, causing inflammation which hasn't completely left me yet. At the end of four weeks, i began introducing a few foods, because i was on a short holiday and felt entitled/self-indulgent (that's so frequently a bad idea...). For a couple of weeks after that, i experimented with a handful of different foodstuffs, which i had eliminated at the beginning.
Almost three weeks ago, i discovered "Strong Medicine," a book by a retired doctor whose experiences during the first half of the twentieth century taught him a considerable amount about diet and health, and which he decided to share. I chose to try some of Dr. Donaldson's recommendations, but had to tweak them a little to make them work for me. Both ways, they were remarkably effective.
About a week and a half ago i took another trip, and was away from home just over a week. Most of the time i adhered quite well to a dietary pattern which was a hybrid of the two above, but on ONE day, i was VERY naughty.
So here we are, just over nine weeks from my starting point: i've learned a CONSIDERABLE amount ... and lost about ten pounds.
I began, strictly following the Personal Paleo Code, with very good results. I leaped into a new physical activity after only one week and irritated my weak knee, causing inflammation which hasn't completely left me yet. At the end of four weeks, i began introducing a few foods, because i was on a short holiday and felt entitled/self-indulgent (that's so frequently a bad idea...). For a couple of weeks after that, i experimented with a handful of different foodstuffs, which i had eliminated at the beginning.
Almost three weeks ago, i discovered "Strong Medicine," a book by a retired doctor whose experiences during the first half of the twentieth century taught him a considerable amount about diet and health, and which he decided to share. I chose to try some of Dr. Donaldson's recommendations, but had to tweak them a little to make them work for me. Both ways, they were remarkably effective.
About a week and a half ago i took another trip, and was away from home just over a week. Most of the time i adhered quite well to a dietary pattern which was a hybrid of the two above, but on ONE day, i was VERY naughty.
So here we are, just over nine weeks from my starting point: i've learned a CONSIDERABLE amount ... and lost about ten pounds.
- the Personal Paleo Code WORKS. It's a powerful tool for determining what foods promote well-being, as well as weight-loss. Without even giving up ALL the "autoimmunity compromising" foods he listed, and despite the injury to my knee, i felt incredibly WELL -- considerably younger;
- rice seems to be a harmless food for me -- but not for breakfast. I must eat a fat-protein breakfast, or i'm hungrier all day. My body agrees with the studies about meal composition and metabolic flexibility (for a change);
- alcohol is NOT harmless, though i tolerate sake much better than wine. I'll need to do the same sort of introduction as with the former, before i can make a comparative judgement about spirits. The difference in joint pain and stiffness (between the beginning of February and now), i believe, can be attributed to the alcohol i used;
- the "Strong Medicine" prescription also works, but doing without salt is out of the question for me -- my digestion apparently needs it. It seems to work well, past that one-week point during which one is losing the easy stuff, and after which most eating plans don't render much progress. It's not for the weak, though; you've got to be determined and motivated to forgo variety in the diet, even though hunger is not a problem;
- the book "Deep Nutrition" made a big impression on me, and i'll be keeping Dr. Cate's viewpoints in mind while formulating my menus from now on. Meat on the bone, organ meats, bone broths, fermented vegetables, etc., will be more heavily used in my house!
- i have suspicions about eggs and many nuts as allergens for me -- they no longer get a free ride. I also seem to have a fructose malabsorption issue;
- i've decided to add tyrosine to my list of supplements. That amino acid is not heavily present in the foods i customarily eat, so my body is only getting significant quantities through conversion from phenylalanine. Since it's a building-block of thyroid hormone, and i've craved protein all my life, and i know i have absorption issues, i'm postulating that this may be something i need to consciously supplement. My uneven energy levels MAY improve: we'll see, and i'll let you know later.
Friday, February 24, 2012
yes, it still works
The scale was down about the amount i predicted yesterday (it measures in 0.2 pound increments, so "half a pound" is a ballpark figure, not "documentable"). Success! I'll continue being (almost) "perfect" today.
I confess to have had some concerns -- are you familiar with the concept of the One Golden Shot? :-) It's when something-or-other worked GREAT the first time, but you can never seem to replicate the success. The first time you tried the diet it went swimmingly, but another time it totally let you down; the first time you made the recipe or sewed the pattern it turned out spectacular, but when you tried to do it again (for "company"!) it was a flop. You know....
In the weight-loss realm, i suspect this happens because when we first learn about it our excitement level boosts our metabolism a bit, making it easier to lose, AND we are absolutely faultless in our application of the guidelines. Later, we tweak (i'm BIG on this myself). We remember what we were able to get away with the first time, and we start at that point, instead of at the prescribed beginning. Furthermore ... we're older! At this time of our lives, a LOT changes, and FAST. I've already warned my daughter that she needs to be careful to maintain her normal weight, because losing it later is much harder.
So after the rule-bending i did yesterday (salting my meat, having full instead of half-cups of coffee with my meals, even drinking the last 3 tablespoons of wine that didn't QUITE get finished last week), i was pleased and yes, a little relieved to find that the formula still worked. I'm counting my blessings, and vowing to be even better today. Now that i'm caught up on my salt, i'm scaling it back (not omitting it -- that didn't work so well). I'm continuing to use the stationary bicycle because it's kinder to Ralph while still elevating my heart-rate. And since that wine bottle is now safely empty and residing in the recycle bag, i won't be teased by it sitting unfinished on the kitchen counter any more. :-)
I confess, i WILL still indulge myself with the full cups of coffee. ...Since beginning to drink it without even coconut milk, i'm dumbfounded to find that i prefer my black coffee without the single drop of liquid sucralose that i tried last week -- who would have thought! Am i going to end this experience by finding that only simple, plain foods suit me anymore???
I confess to have had some concerns -- are you familiar with the concept of the One Golden Shot? :-) It's when something-or-other worked GREAT the first time, but you can never seem to replicate the success. The first time you tried the diet it went swimmingly, but another time it totally let you down; the first time you made the recipe or sewed the pattern it turned out spectacular, but when you tried to do it again (for "company"!) it was a flop. You know....
In the weight-loss realm, i suspect this happens because when we first learn about it our excitement level boosts our metabolism a bit, making it easier to lose, AND we are absolutely faultless in our application of the guidelines. Later, we tweak (i'm BIG on this myself). We remember what we were able to get away with the first time, and we start at that point, instead of at the prescribed beginning. Furthermore ... we're older! At this time of our lives, a LOT changes, and FAST. I've already warned my daughter that she needs to be careful to maintain her normal weight, because losing it later is much harder.
So after the rule-bending i did yesterday (salting my meat, having full instead of half-cups of coffee with my meals, even drinking the last 3 tablespoons of wine that didn't QUITE get finished last week), i was pleased and yes, a little relieved to find that the formula still worked. I'm counting my blessings, and vowing to be even better today. Now that i'm caught up on my salt, i'm scaling it back (not omitting it -- that didn't work so well). I'm continuing to use the stationary bicycle because it's kinder to Ralph while still elevating my heart-rate. And since that wine bottle is now safely empty and residing in the recycle bag, i won't be teased by it sitting unfinished on the kitchen counter any more. :-)
I confess, i WILL still indulge myself with the full cups of coffee. ...Since beginning to drink it without even coconut milk, i'm dumbfounded to find that i prefer my black coffee without the single drop of liquid sucralose that i tried last week -- who would have thought! Am i going to end this experience by finding that only simple, plain foods suit me anymore???
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
appetite still down
The scale read 3/4 pounds lower AGAIN today -- not that i'm complaining! :-) I DO find it exceptionally interesting.
It has occurred to me recently, how artificial are our eating cues these days. If a paleo/primal outlook should do anything, it's to bring to our attention what natural human behavior really is, and how we have perverted it. Not only is WHAT we're eating out-of-phase with the natural: HOW we're eating is just plain WARPED.
"I'll eat when i'm hungry, i'll drink when i'm dry,
and if the moonshine don't kill me, i'll live till i die!"
:-D
Except ... we DON'T. We eat by the clock, and we eat what is lying around handy, and we try to eat as much as we can get away with. WHY? Why do we feel compelled to eat when we're not hungry? If a certain foodstuff is labelled "healthy," why do we feel like we have to consume it, even if we don't have an urge to do so?
The ancient peoples whose health and fitness we want to duplicate would not feel inclined to find something to eat if they were already satisfied, unless it were stuffing on fruit in autumn, to put on weight to last the winter (which is apparent from our disinclination to stop eating glucose-supplying foods when we once start). The other day, when i was overfilling myself on meat, this was a prominent thought. As an experiment, this behavior might be interesting and instructive, but as an everyday occurrence, i can only believe that it undermines health.
Now, here's where someone with decades of experience has a breadth of understanding that young "obesity experts" may never obtain! I clearly remember being constantly unsatisfied on a low-fat regimen, and the bliss of Atkins lay in the ability to eat to appetite and still lose weight. Perhaps this is why some "new" low-carbers overdo (and fail ultimately) -- they are so hungry from before, and their bodies react so gratefully to consuming animal fats, they lose track of their natural appetites when they have permission to eat these traditional foods.
That, and all the low-carb treats which seduce one into thinking one CAN eat one's cake and have it, too -- quite literally. [shaking head] superfluous foods -- junk calories -- are something to avoid no matter what they're made of.
Appetite is something we need to listen to very carefully. You have to be able to distinguish belly-hunger from mouth /imagination-hunger. If we ignore it and restrain our eating to save calories, we set ourselves up for mistakes later -- i think this applies to pretty much everybody! Beyond that, i believe one has to know one's body very well indeed, because they DON'T always perform predictably. THIS is the problem with the medical business' "one size fits all" prescriptions.
If you're belly-hungry, EAT (that is, eat something which YOU have found truly nourishes YOU). If you're not, DON'T. I'm going to eat within Donaldson's guidelines, but not more than appetite allows -- that should improve the program. I'll let you know....
It has occurred to me recently, how artificial are our eating cues these days. If a paleo/primal outlook should do anything, it's to bring to our attention what natural human behavior really is, and how we have perverted it. Not only is WHAT we're eating out-of-phase with the natural: HOW we're eating is just plain WARPED.
"I'll eat when i'm hungry, i'll drink when i'm dry,
and if the moonshine don't kill me, i'll live till i die!"
:-D
Except ... we DON'T. We eat by the clock, and we eat what is lying around handy, and we try to eat as much as we can get away with. WHY? Why do we feel compelled to eat when we're not hungry? If a certain foodstuff is labelled "healthy," why do we feel like we have to consume it, even if we don't have an urge to do so?
The ancient peoples whose health and fitness we want to duplicate would not feel inclined to find something to eat if they were already satisfied, unless it were stuffing on fruit in autumn, to put on weight to last the winter (which is apparent from our disinclination to stop eating glucose-supplying foods when we once start). The other day, when i was overfilling myself on meat, this was a prominent thought. As an experiment, this behavior might be interesting and instructive, but as an everyday occurrence, i can only believe that it undermines health.
Now, here's where someone with decades of experience has a breadth of understanding that young "obesity experts" may never obtain! I clearly remember being constantly unsatisfied on a low-fat regimen, and the bliss of Atkins lay in the ability to eat to appetite and still lose weight. Perhaps this is why some "new" low-carbers overdo (and fail ultimately) -- they are so hungry from before, and their bodies react so gratefully to consuming animal fats, they lose track of their natural appetites when they have permission to eat these traditional foods.
That, and all the low-carb treats which seduce one into thinking one CAN eat one's cake and have it, too -- quite literally. [shaking head] superfluous foods -- junk calories -- are something to avoid no matter what they're made of.
Appetite is something we need to listen to very carefully. You have to be able to distinguish belly-hunger from mouth /imagination-hunger. If we ignore it and restrain our eating to save calories, we set ourselves up for mistakes later -- i think this applies to pretty much everybody! Beyond that, i believe one has to know one's body very well indeed, because they DON'T always perform predictably. THIS is the problem with the medical business' "one size fits all" prescriptions.
If you're belly-hungry, EAT (that is, eat something which YOU have found truly nourishes YOU). If you're not, DON'T. I'm going to eat within Donaldson's guidelines, but not more than appetite allows -- that should improve the program. I'll let you know....
Monday, February 20, 2012
shades of Stefansson....
Even though i've been a "locarber" for years now, i seem to be following the classic pattern old Vilhjalmur described in his men: they take to the fatty meat-eating enthusiastically enough, but soon have a lapse in appetite for a couple of days before regaining their relish. I'm in that middle phase. The first day i easily ate and drank the quantities prescribed, but yesterday i had a heck of a time choking it all down!
I was tempted to reduce the volume, and wondered if Donaldson's recommendation of half-pound-beef-eating might have been the male version of the diet -- one case history he discussed was a stout young woman, whom he directed to eat two two-rib frenched lamb chops three times a day -- exactly how many ounces would that be? Tempting to do exactly the same, but EXPENSIVE. Other women cited DID have comparable prescriptions to that of the men, though....
Soldiering on, i managed to consume 1/2 pound of home-made pork sausage for breakfast, another patty of my home-ground chuck/liver/parsley/green-peppercorn burger, and an appropriate amount of the over-large KC strip steak, each meal accompanied by a short cup of coffee, interspersed with the six total cups of water. Damn, i felt my stomach was overloaded all day!
This morning i woke with a reasonable appetite and the scale a pound lower than yesterday. The before-breakfast exercise took a goodly amount of my appetite away, though, and i had little enthusiasm for the half-pound of leftover pot roast i ate. Stuffed again! ...On the other hand, it beats hell out of my low-fat days, when my stomach could be overloaded but my satisfaction level inadequate.
Allergy symptoms are lower than they were yesterday, but not gone. I'll be sticking to ruminant meat today (i have goat and lamb in my freezer as well as beef), and if i decide to sneak in a little starch at supper, it'll be white rice. I predict less sinus inflammation tomorrow.
This remains an interesting experiment! Like the Atkins "fat fast," i think it makes for a reasonable method of getting past a frustrating plateau.
Bette Davis (LOVE that actress...) once said, "Getting old is not for sissies." I'll go a step further and say, losing weight WHILE you're getting old isn't for the weak, either!
I was tempted to reduce the volume, and wondered if Donaldson's recommendation of half-pound-beef-eating might have been the male version of the diet -- one case history he discussed was a stout young woman, whom he directed to eat two two-rib frenched lamb chops three times a day -- exactly how many ounces would that be? Tempting to do exactly the same, but EXPENSIVE. Other women cited DID have comparable prescriptions to that of the men, though....
Soldiering on, i managed to consume 1/2 pound of home-made pork sausage for breakfast, another patty of my home-ground chuck/liver/parsley/green-peppercorn burger, and an appropriate amount of the over-large KC strip steak, each meal accompanied by a short cup of coffee, interspersed with the six total cups of water. Damn, i felt my stomach was overloaded all day!
This morning i woke with a reasonable appetite and the scale a pound lower than yesterday. The before-breakfast exercise took a goodly amount of my appetite away, though, and i had little enthusiasm for the half-pound of leftover pot roast i ate. Stuffed again! ...On the other hand, it beats hell out of my low-fat days, when my stomach could be overloaded but my satisfaction level inadequate.
Allergy symptoms are lower than they were yesterday, but not gone. I'll be sticking to ruminant meat today (i have goat and lamb in my freezer as well as beef), and if i decide to sneak in a little starch at supper, it'll be white rice. I predict less sinus inflammation tomorrow.
This remains an interesting experiment! Like the Atkins "fat fast," i think it makes for a reasonable method of getting past a frustrating plateau.
Bette Davis (LOVE that actress...) once said, "Getting old is not for sissies." I'll go a step further and say, losing weight WHILE you're getting old isn't for the weak, either!
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
cut and dried, and packed in a nutshell
Yesterday i read a blog which caused me to say to myself: THIS IS IT. The tag-team match is over, and Taubes' group wins. I raise my cup of tea with coconut milk in it to Peter at Hyperlipid (i'd raise a glass of good French champagne, but it's not on my diet for at least another couple of weeks)!
Check out this post, and this one, too -- Peter's own words are worth reading. If you want the short version, it goes like this: INSULIN DRIVES FAT STORAGE, ergo obesity. Yes, you can screw with your fat cells' receptivity of insulin via the brain, but that doesn't mean the brain is the key organ of people's weight problems.
Don't want to gain weight, keep your fasting insulin low. Keep your fasting insulin low by keeping your blood sugar low. Keep your blood sugar low by being careful of what carbohydrates you eat, AND HOW YOU EAT THEM*. If you once develop a metabolic handicap you'll have it for years, possibly to the end of your life, whether you lose weight or not.
Oh -- to fine-tune, make sure you don't damage your hypothalamus (brain end of the equation) with the common toxins of aspartame (Equal) or MSG (which hides under many different names on ingredient lists) -- that's one of the ways the researchers screwed with the rat brains.
* Apparently, those who use the Kitavans as poster children for a high carbohydrate diet didn't tell the whole story of HOW the islanders eat: one big meal a day. They store the carb as fat, then live on the fat taken from storage for the next 23 hours. [sarcasm alert] Yeah -- that's similar to how people here eat high carb....
Check out this post, and this one, too -- Peter's own words are worth reading. If you want the short version, it goes like this: INSULIN DRIVES FAT STORAGE, ergo obesity. Yes, you can screw with your fat cells' receptivity of insulin via the brain, but that doesn't mean the brain is the key organ of people's weight problems.
Don't want to gain weight, keep your fasting insulin low. Keep your fasting insulin low by keeping your blood sugar low. Keep your blood sugar low by being careful of what carbohydrates you eat, AND HOW YOU EAT THEM*. If you once develop a metabolic handicap you'll have it for years, possibly to the end of your life, whether you lose weight or not.
Oh -- to fine-tune, make sure you don't damage your hypothalamus (brain end of the equation) with the common toxins of aspartame (Equal) or MSG (which hides under many different names on ingredient lists) -- that's one of the ways the researchers screwed with the rat brains.
* Apparently, those who use the Kitavans as poster children for a high carbohydrate diet didn't tell the whole story of HOW the islanders eat: one big meal a day. They store the carb as fat, then live on the fat taken from storage for the next 23 hours. [sarcasm alert] Yeah -- that's similar to how people here eat high carb....
Friday, January 20, 2012
hungry today!
I woke up with an appetite this morning, pretty much for the first time in MONTHS. Drat.
Two possible reasons leap to mind, and i'm praying it's not this one: my fat cells may be producing less leptin, and leptin (as we know) is the body's own appetite suppressant, the most important signal of energy repleteness. I didn't think this reaction set in till much later in the weight-loss war.... :-( When one loses fat weight, the cells get smaller and they secrete less of this precious hormone (because the fat mass is not inert flesh, as was the theory until very recently -- it is, in fact, your largest endocrine gland). Producing lots of leptin tells the brain that there's enough energy storage on board, thank you very much, and we don't need more.
When the quantity produced by the fat cells significantly decreases, the brain gets the notion that something may be wrong with the food supply; if there's going to be a shortage, we'd better ramp up appetite and store more if possible. THIS IS USUALLY WHY PEOPLE CAN'T KEEP DIETING INDEFINITELY -- they get unmanageably hungry, and the brain causes them to fixate on food. It has nothing to do with willpower -- this is how animals are hard-wired. In starvation (dieting), metabolic and brain changes are triggered, whose purpose in the world is Survival. This is NONCONTROVERSIAL -- how do you think the better research scientists have kept themselves busy recently? ;-)
The other most likely reason for my hunger this morning is the quality of my meals yesterday. There are plenty of animal studies which show that what you eat today influences what you want to eat tomorrow. I'm wondering now if the seafood chowder i had last night might have contained enough carbohydrates to start the blood-glucose-insulin-hypoglycemia-hunger roller-coaster. If so, i'll have to be more careful with that dish in future, which would be a pity because it was REALLY GOOD.
Although i was still in ketosis when i checked first thing today, i'm hoping it's the latter, because that's easily fixed: i eat plenty of good fats and moderate protein today and go light on the carbs, and my body happily continues burning fat and ketones as its main fuels.
Just in case, i'll knock back a couple of ounces of coconut oil later -- doesn't hurt to have the heavy-artillery of the weight-loss war on alert....
Two possible reasons leap to mind, and i'm praying it's not this one: my fat cells may be producing less leptin, and leptin (as we know) is the body's own appetite suppressant, the most important signal of energy repleteness. I didn't think this reaction set in till much later in the weight-loss war.... :-( When one loses fat weight, the cells get smaller and they secrete less of this precious hormone (because the fat mass is not inert flesh, as was the theory until very recently -- it is, in fact, your largest endocrine gland). Producing lots of leptin tells the brain that there's enough energy storage on board, thank you very much, and we don't need more.
When the quantity produced by the fat cells significantly decreases, the brain gets the notion that something may be wrong with the food supply; if there's going to be a shortage, we'd better ramp up appetite and store more if possible. THIS IS USUALLY WHY PEOPLE CAN'T KEEP DIETING INDEFINITELY -- they get unmanageably hungry, and the brain causes them to fixate on food. It has nothing to do with willpower -- this is how animals are hard-wired. In starvation (dieting), metabolic and brain changes are triggered, whose purpose in the world is Survival. This is NONCONTROVERSIAL -- how do you think the better research scientists have kept themselves busy recently? ;-)
The other most likely reason for my hunger this morning is the quality of my meals yesterday. There are plenty of animal studies which show that what you eat today influences what you want to eat tomorrow. I'm wondering now if the seafood chowder i had last night might have contained enough carbohydrates to start the blood-glucose-insulin-hypoglycemia-hunger roller-coaster. If so, i'll have to be more careful with that dish in future, which would be a pity because it was REALLY GOOD.
Although i was still in ketosis when i checked first thing today, i'm hoping it's the latter, because that's easily fixed: i eat plenty of good fats and moderate protein today and go light on the carbs, and my body happily continues burning fat and ketones as its main fuels.
Just in case, i'll knock back a couple of ounces of coconut oil later -- doesn't hurt to have the heavy-artillery of the weight-loss war on alert....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)