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!
Showing posts with label effectiveness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label effectiveness. Show all posts
Thursday, July 19, 2012
Friday, June 29, 2012
low-carb diets get a boost in reputation
The recent news of the small-but-significant randomized controlled trial is being celebrated amongst believers in low-carb lifestyles. A few major media sources have published things with the usual uninformed comments against, but so far the "insulin deniers" in the blogosphere haven't said an awful lot. (But i have every confidence they will, as soon as they quit scratching their heads.)
The big reason this makes me happy is, "nonresidents of the blogosphere" such as my mother, neighbor, sisters, and some friends may now hear from an "authoritative" source that LC ways of eating are not just fads and gimmicks, but are scientifically sound. To ME, it doesn't matter in the least.
I don't need official confirmation of what i already know to be true: VLC is the only healthful diet for me at this time in my life. Having the NIH study and JAMA publication is convenient, so i have someplace to refer people, that's all. Even IF the low-GI arm of the study had been shown to be more effective, i wouldn't change my ways.
I know what works for ME. That's all that's important ... to me. ;-) If other people add in potatoes and are suddenly able to lose more weight, hurrah for them. For me, it doesn't work that way.
It's not like we haven't known for a long time that higher-protein diets are more thermogenic -- some of Peter's old postings that i've been re-reading lately stated that clearly (and in passing, as though this is information EVERYBODY KNOWS). It's just that this is a nicely-done (by all accounts) study that is harder to pick apart than something that might have been financed by the Atkins Foundation, for example.
So i'm not gonna crow, but i WILL be quietly satisfied by this small victory. WE probably won't be helped by it, and THEY won't be swayed from their potatoes by it, but the ordinary person-on-the-street who has been failing to make progress via CW will have a better chance for rethinking his/her path now, as a result of it. Those are the people who need it.
The big reason this makes me happy is, "nonresidents of the blogosphere" such as my mother, neighbor, sisters, and some friends may now hear from an "authoritative" source that LC ways of eating are not just fads and gimmicks, but are scientifically sound. To ME, it doesn't matter in the least.
I don't need official confirmation of what i already know to be true: VLC is the only healthful diet for me at this time in my life. Having the NIH study and JAMA publication is convenient, so i have someplace to refer people, that's all. Even IF the low-GI arm of the study had been shown to be more effective, i wouldn't change my ways.
I know what works for ME. That's all that's important ... to me. ;-) If other people add in potatoes and are suddenly able to lose more weight, hurrah for them. For me, it doesn't work that way.
It's not like we haven't known for a long time that higher-protein diets are more thermogenic -- some of Peter's old postings that i've been re-reading lately stated that clearly (and in passing, as though this is information EVERYBODY KNOWS). It's just that this is a nicely-done (by all accounts) study that is harder to pick apart than something that might have been financed by the Atkins Foundation, for example.
So i'm not gonna crow, but i WILL be quietly satisfied by this small victory. WE probably won't be helped by it, and THEY won't be swayed from their potatoes by it, but the ordinary person-on-the-street who has been failing to make progress via CW will have a better chance for rethinking his/her path now, as a result of it. Those are the people who need it.
Thursday, June 14, 2012
theory and practice
The important thing, in so many different areas and on so many different levels is ... what WORKS?
That's what my blog is all about. Doesn't matter what the researchers (and dilettantes) philosophize -- if theory (actually, hypothesis) doesn't fit what happens in real life, it ain't true. And i'm not calling genetically-engineered rodents "real life." For flesh-and-blood humans who want to shed a few pounds, what WORKS?
What kind of alternate universe do some "scientists" inhabit? My guess is, it's one where there are no actual physical NEEDS -- just ***ideas*** tra la la....
How many times has a certain philosophy "made sense" and yet turned out to be 180-degree WRONG? [cough **lipid hypothesis** cough...] "Just logical" reasoning put us in the position we now inhabit: ELMM! CICO!
Raspberries. The shoe doesn't fit.
That's what my blog is all about. Doesn't matter what the researchers (and dilettantes) philosophize -- if theory (actually, hypothesis) doesn't fit what happens in real life, it ain't true. And i'm not calling genetically-engineered rodents "real life." For flesh-and-blood humans who want to shed a few pounds, what WORKS?
What kind of alternate universe do some "scientists" inhabit? My guess is, it's one where there are no actual physical NEEDS -- just ***ideas*** tra la la....
How many times has a certain philosophy "made sense" and yet turned out to be 180-degree WRONG? [cough **lipid hypothesis** cough...] "Just logical" reasoning put us in the position we now inhabit: ELMM! CICO!
Raspberries. The shoe doesn't fit.
Sunday, May 13, 2012
thinking for oneself
It's a sad irony that some of the reasons for people being sick and miserable rest squarely with the specialists trying to "help" us. We're malnourished due to the efforts of food purveyors, we're in debt to the eyebrows as a result of banking practices, and we're obese, diabetic, heart-diseased and mentally out-of-kilter thanks to the doctors and researchers who perseveringly prescribe the wrong diet and exercise advice.
We're dissatisfied with our lifestyles and love-lives as a result of the entertainment industry -- what is designed to be a distraction effectively brainwashes those who watch it, to make them think this is "normal" and that in whatever way the watcher's experience varies, that way is ABNORMAL, an undeserved deprivation of what should be a RIGHT. ...Interspersed, of course, with commercials showing thin and beautiful people downing whole pizzas, beer, and quarts of ice cream.
People need to become far more critical of the messages they accept as "truth." If a visibly sick and overweight doctor tells you that all you need to do is eat less, cut the fat and exercise more, why would you believe him? Because he's "too busy" to follow his own advice? He knows what his own obesity is doing to him, who could have more incentive to do things right? If you HAVE followed his advice, and you're still overweight, why would you assume that it's YOUR FAULT, rather than suspect that the whole paradigm is incorrect?
The whole "n=1" concept floating around the blogosphere is a healthy development, i believe. Sure, the physicians on my blog list look at it with healthy skepticism -- that's good. Just because Supplement X has been very beneficial for me, doesn't mean that it'll do good for EVERYONE. However, if i'm getting good results from it, the evidence is THERE, and the blanket recommendation that "nobody should take it" is arrant BS.
I'm honored that i have readers in demographics different from mine (young, and male) -- i STARTED OUT to principally address others like myself, middle-aged, female and difficult-to-reduce. I think THIS message, though, is pretty much universal: no matter how many people believe in an idea, if it doesn't work for YOU, then it isn't "truth" as defined by a logician. If it DOES work for you, not just in the short term but also down-the-road, THAT is an idea to hold onto.
We're dissatisfied with our lifestyles and love-lives as a result of the entertainment industry -- what is designed to be a distraction effectively brainwashes those who watch it, to make them think this is "normal" and that in whatever way the watcher's experience varies, that way is ABNORMAL, an undeserved deprivation of what should be a RIGHT. ...Interspersed, of course, with commercials showing thin and beautiful people downing whole pizzas, beer, and quarts of ice cream.
People need to become far more critical of the messages they accept as "truth." If a visibly sick and overweight doctor tells you that all you need to do is eat less, cut the fat and exercise more, why would you believe him? Because he's "too busy" to follow his own advice? He knows what his own obesity is doing to him, who could have more incentive to do things right? If you HAVE followed his advice, and you're still overweight, why would you assume that it's YOUR FAULT, rather than suspect that the whole paradigm is incorrect?
The whole "n=1" concept floating around the blogosphere is a healthy development, i believe. Sure, the physicians on my blog list look at it with healthy skepticism -- that's good. Just because Supplement X has been very beneficial for me, doesn't mean that it'll do good for EVERYONE. However, if i'm getting good results from it, the evidence is THERE, and the blanket recommendation that "nobody should take it" is arrant BS.
I'm honored that i have readers in demographics different from mine (young, and male) -- i STARTED OUT to principally address others like myself, middle-aged, female and difficult-to-reduce. I think THIS message, though, is pretty much universal: no matter how many people believe in an idea, if it doesn't work for YOU, then it isn't "truth" as defined by a logician. If it DOES work for you, not just in the short term but also down-the-road, THAT is an idea to hold onto.
Friday, April 6, 2012
"if you really don't want to see it no more ... then don't watch"
Here i go, quoting again. ;-) Extra credit, if you can identify the movie.
Am i the only one who would rather not watch videos and listen to podcasts? In blogs and on facebook, the damned links are everywhere ... frequently without any description of what it's about. I have to say, i'm deeply grateful to the bloggers who offer transcripts of the talk, or at least list topics with timestamps so i can fast-forward to the good stuff.
I HATE sitting around listening to the slow pace of non-professional talkers and their "UH"s!!! Of course, some people are a delight to watch/listen to; Lustig or Naughton, i'll attend-to all day.
In the Vimeo recordings of the Ancestral Health Symposium lectures last year, people with interesting and important things to say spoiled their messages with horrendously bad delivery. (I hope they'll improve themselves before this year's presentations.) What a pleasure it was when a few of them could combine significant information with good style, though!
Rant over! ;-) Starting "irony alert":
Here's the film clip.
Am i the only one who would rather not watch videos and listen to podcasts? In blogs and on facebook, the damned links are everywhere ... frequently without any description of what it's about. I have to say, i'm deeply grateful to the bloggers who offer transcripts of the talk, or at least list topics with timestamps so i can fast-forward to the good stuff.
I HATE sitting around listening to the slow pace of non-professional talkers and their "UH"s!!! Of course, some people are a delight to watch/listen to; Lustig or Naughton, i'll attend-to all day.
In the Vimeo recordings of the Ancestral Health Symposium lectures last year, people with interesting and important things to say spoiled their messages with horrendously bad delivery. (I hope they'll improve themselves before this year's presentations.) What a pleasure it was when a few of them could combine significant information with good style, though!
Rant over! ;-) Starting "irony alert":
Here's the film clip.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
same as it ever was
I just finished reading about YET ANOTHER big trial of the SAME old low-calorie formula diet. Why is this poor dead horse still being beaten on -- he's nothing but bones and hide anymore!
Nothing new was learned. A great many participants dropped out, as usual. The results reported were positive -- AFTER they massaged the data with the same old "intent to treat" BS*. In six months to a year, i have no doubt that many will have regained the weight.
At the risk of being redundantly redundant, ;-) ... Einstein is supposed to have said that insanity can be defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. GIVE UP ON CALORIES-IN-CALORIES-OUT, kids. OF COURSE you can starve weight off people, but it brings in its wake a whole hospital-ful of repercussions.
There's a reason you studied inanimate objects in Physics lab. There's a reason you handled the bodies of animals in Zoology. BIOLOGY drives human bodies, not mathematical formulae. Trying to manipulate weight loss by means of what is currently "known" to science is destined for failure, because science doesn't know nearly as much as it thinks it does.
What we have, which has proven an effective tool, is WHAT HAS WORKED IN THE PAST. Go back to real practicing physicians who succeeded in getting weight off their patients, Ignore the theoreticians and lab-rats whose "research" has never been within a hundred miles of a real overweight human body -- those guys (hello, "Dr." Ancel Keys!) have given us the obese, fat-livered, insulin- and leptin-resistant world of sickness all around us.
___
* "intent to treat" is a researcher's con game, in which people who drop out are counted anyway, with the assumption that they'd get the same good results as anyone else. if they were getting good results, they wouldn't have dropped out. bad science.
Nothing new was learned. A great many participants dropped out, as usual. The results reported were positive -- AFTER they massaged the data with the same old "intent to treat" BS*. In six months to a year, i have no doubt that many will have regained the weight.
At the risk of being redundantly redundant, ;-) ... Einstein is supposed to have said that insanity can be defined as doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. GIVE UP ON CALORIES-IN-CALORIES-OUT, kids. OF COURSE you can starve weight off people, but it brings in its wake a whole hospital-ful of repercussions.
There's a reason you studied inanimate objects in Physics lab. There's a reason you handled the bodies of animals in Zoology. BIOLOGY drives human bodies, not mathematical formulae. Trying to manipulate weight loss by means of what is currently "known" to science is destined for failure, because science doesn't know nearly as much as it thinks it does.
What we have, which has proven an effective tool, is WHAT HAS WORKED IN THE PAST. Go back to real practicing physicians who succeeded in getting weight off their patients, Ignore the theoreticians and lab-rats whose "research" has never been within a hundred miles of a real overweight human body -- those guys (hello, "Dr." Ancel Keys!) have given us the obese, fat-livered, insulin- and leptin-resistant world of sickness all around us.
___
* "intent to treat" is a researcher's con game, in which people who drop out are counted anyway, with the assumption that they'd get the same good results as anyone else. if they were getting good results, they wouldn't have dropped out. bad science.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
magical Medicine
Here i go ... getting carried away with my own cleverness, and formulating a Personal Theory -- hear those echo-chamber sound effects! ;-) I've always been opinionated, but i'll try not to fall into the "it works for me so it must be UNIVERSALLY APPLICABLE" trap.
No. NO. I'm too put off by others who think that THEIR dietary path is The Only Path; i would despise myself if my ego let me sink into the same quagmire. Now, where was i?
"The 'magic resetting' aspect of the SMD regimen".... These are just speculations, mind you -- i have none of the credentials which a lot of COMPLETELY MISTAKEN "experts" do. i just enjoy thinking about old ideas in the light of new science, and modern ideas from a vintage point of view.
Dr. Donaldson tells us that 75% of his patients stuck with the weight-reduction instructions he gave them and did a great job (25% are non-compliant from the starting line). He doesn't tell us outright that they all reach their goal weights but he kinda implies it. Nor does he claim that they all maintain their losses afterward, but we know he had an enviable record -- i.e., better than the 2-5% successful dieters these days.
My thoughts about the mechanism of success:
It takes a lot of energy to metabolize protein, and it takes awhile to do it. Add those yummy animal fats, and the situation spells S-A-T-I-A-T-I-O-N (and satiety) in big letters. This is how someone can lose a lot of fat without hunger.
Enthusiasts of the "food reward hypothesis" will say that the limitation of foods bolsters their argument; i contend that it goes much further.
This diet breaks carbohydrate addictions and de-conditions snacking/craving behaviors. More important, it EMPOWERS the person who employs it. You feel you could conquer the world, it's so easy, mindless and effective. Fast, too -- losing more than one plodding pound per week is encouraging. I can't speak for everyone, but MY mood is great on this program. And you don't have to spend hours carefully planning meals, shopping for arcane grocery items, and cooking.
You can easily avoid allergens and toxins on a mostly-meat diet, too -- just choose meats you don't have a problem with! ;-) Duh.
We know that one can get every required nutrient from "fresh fat meat" as Dr. Donaldson repeatedly expressed it ... with the caveat that organ meats are occasionally necessary for certain vitamins and minerals. Therefore, the "Strong Medicine" prescription could easily be resolving nutrient deficiencies that people don't even know they have. As a result the overeating-in-an-attempt-to-become-properly-nourished (well covered in The Perfect Health Diet -- lets call it OIATBPN) is solved -- there is much less temptation to overeat. Your nutritional needs are thoroughly satisfied.
Chronic low-grade malnutrition (and i'd argue that most people in the western world suffer from it) MAY be behind the recidivism problem that dieters have. Going off a low-carb or low-fat or low-calorie diet, one is extremely likely to progress to a diet that is not "perfect" -- people are too eager to be able to eat things they've denied themselves during the weight-loss process! Going from a limited diet to a doubtfully-nutritious one WILL be problematic: one has loosened one's inhibitions, and one will be missing dietary necessities -- how can this NOT be a recipe for OIATBPN?
Yeah -- i'm happy with THIS hypothesis, Strong Medicine works because it's:
hunger-free
simple
effective
empowering
non-toxic
nutritionally replete during weight loss
nutritionally replete after weight loss
=reset fat/weight setpoint
No. NO. I'm too put off by others who think that THEIR dietary path is The Only Path; i would despise myself if my ego let me sink into the same quagmire. Now, where was i?
"The 'magic resetting' aspect of the SMD regimen".... These are just speculations, mind you -- i have none of the credentials which a lot of COMPLETELY MISTAKEN "experts" do. i just enjoy thinking about old ideas in the light of new science, and modern ideas from a vintage point of view.
Dr. Donaldson tells us that 75% of his patients stuck with the weight-reduction instructions he gave them and did a great job (25% are non-compliant from the starting line). He doesn't tell us outright that they all reach their goal weights but he kinda implies it. Nor does he claim that they all maintain their losses afterward, but we know he had an enviable record -- i.e., better than the 2-5% successful dieters these days.
My thoughts about the mechanism of success:
It takes a lot of energy to metabolize protein, and it takes awhile to do it. Add those yummy animal fats, and the situation spells S-A-T-I-A-T-I-O-N (and satiety) in big letters. This is how someone can lose a lot of fat without hunger.
Enthusiasts of the "food reward hypothesis" will say that the limitation of foods bolsters their argument; i contend that it goes much further.
This diet breaks carbohydrate addictions and de-conditions snacking/craving behaviors. More important, it EMPOWERS the person who employs it. You feel you could conquer the world, it's so easy, mindless and effective. Fast, too -- losing more than one plodding pound per week is encouraging. I can't speak for everyone, but MY mood is great on this program. And you don't have to spend hours carefully planning meals, shopping for arcane grocery items, and cooking.
You can easily avoid allergens and toxins on a mostly-meat diet, too -- just choose meats you don't have a problem with! ;-) Duh.
We know that one can get every required nutrient from "fresh fat meat" as Dr. Donaldson repeatedly expressed it ... with the caveat that organ meats are occasionally necessary for certain vitamins and minerals. Therefore, the "Strong Medicine" prescription could easily be resolving nutrient deficiencies that people don't even know they have. As a result the overeating-in-an-attempt-to-become-properly-nourished (well covered in The Perfect Health Diet -- lets call it OIATBPN) is solved -- there is much less temptation to overeat. Your nutritional needs are thoroughly satisfied.
Chronic low-grade malnutrition (and i'd argue that most people in the western world suffer from it) MAY be behind the recidivism problem that dieters have. Going off a low-carb or low-fat or low-calorie diet, one is extremely likely to progress to a diet that is not "perfect" -- people are too eager to be able to eat things they've denied themselves during the weight-loss process! Going from a limited diet to a doubtfully-nutritious one WILL be problematic: one has loosened one's inhibitions, and one will be missing dietary necessities -- how can this NOT be a recipe for OIATBPN?
Yeah -- i'm happy with THIS hypothesis, Strong Medicine works because it's:
hunger-free
simple
effective
empowering
non-toxic
nutritionally replete during weight loss
nutritionally replete after weight loss
=reset fat/weight setpoint
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???
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
i can't bear eating all this FOOD!
The scale is down 3/4 pound again, and i even allowed myself half a cup of cooked white rice with my beef tenderloin last night.
But my discomfort level has risen: between the lack of salt and the high meat intake (about 50% higher than it was a month ago), my stomach is not at all happy, even with daily use of betaine-HCl. Today is a day for readjusting the formula. (I just took a 1/4 t. of sea salt, washed down with water, as a good beginning.)
I was VERY comfortable on the IF technique of coconut milk in my coffee for breakfast, and only two real meals per day. The only trouble with that was, i wasn't losing any weight, despite consuming fewer calories than i am now. (So THERE, CICO people!) When one of Donaldson's patients reported in without having lost any weight on one occasion, it turned out that he had begun skipping breakfast in hopes of reducing faster....
Yesterday, i DID feel improvement in my bad knee, and the other felt pretty much normal again. I did my half-hour of walking on the treadmill upstairs instead of around the neighborhood, because i suspected the cold was affecting my knee badly. Treadmills aren't perfect walking-machines, though -- posture and muscle use don't mimic REAL walking (see Dr. Wong...). Today i'm going to walk outside at a warmer hour, or use the stationary bicycle; i customarily use it for my Tabata sprints, as it's MUCH kinder to the knee.
...I just resolved to name my knees -- "my once-injured knee" is so unwieldy -- so it'll be Ralph (the "bad" one) and Louie. ;-) I'm so original!
Volume of meat is going down! Instead of 8 ounces, it's going to be 6, and i'm going to put salt on it. Truly, it hasn't been my taste buds that missed the salt, it's been my stomach-acid missing the chlorine! In all the agonizing over sodium in the last few decades, "experts" predictably overlooked the other important ingredient of table salt. Without a good source of chlorine, less stomach-acid is produced -- and contrary to what "everybody knows," an awful lot of indigestion is due to LOW acid, not high. As a hypothyroid, i'm already inclined to have low stomach acid (which is why i keep the betaine supplement on hand), and i've been exacerbating it. That stops now.
On the positive front, allergic symptoms are reduced on my lower-toxin diet. I was surprised to see, under the strict PPC regimen, that i still showed a little cheek-flushing in the evenings -- something that i hitherto blamed on wine. The most likely suspects were nightshades (which i took it very easy with), eggs (eaten in moderation), and nuts (mostly consumed in the form of coconut milk). Last night i took stock, and found the flushing significantly reduced.
Well, today is going to be a low-intake day, just to reset my system. I WILL stick to the approved food list in "Strong Medicine" though! Considering that i lost approximately 3 pounds in three days, there's no doubt that Dr. Donaldson was onto something, even though the medicine seems to be a little TOO strong for ME.
p.s. Despite the dire warnings of reduced thyroid function on a VLC diet, i've noticed no such reaction -- and believe me, i know what it feels like. I hypothesize that: 1) sufficient protein ingestion raises insulin levels enough to allow the receptors to work just fine, and; 2) being well-adapted in ketosis with plenty of glucose made by the liver from protein AND fat (as confirmed with my glucometer) provides all the glucose necessary for T4 conversion. Dare i suggest that the trials where thyroid function was impaired took place in particularly-established glucose burners...?
But my discomfort level has risen: between the lack of salt and the high meat intake (about 50% higher than it was a month ago), my stomach is not at all happy, even with daily use of betaine-HCl. Today is a day for readjusting the formula. (I just took a 1/4 t. of sea salt, washed down with water, as a good beginning.)
I was VERY comfortable on the IF technique of coconut milk in my coffee for breakfast, and only two real meals per day. The only trouble with that was, i wasn't losing any weight, despite consuming fewer calories than i am now. (So THERE, CICO people!) When one of Donaldson's patients reported in without having lost any weight on one occasion, it turned out that he had begun skipping breakfast in hopes of reducing faster....
Yesterday, i DID feel improvement in my bad knee, and the other felt pretty much normal again. I did my half-hour of walking on the treadmill upstairs instead of around the neighborhood, because i suspected the cold was affecting my knee badly. Treadmills aren't perfect walking-machines, though -- posture and muscle use don't mimic REAL walking (see Dr. Wong...). Today i'm going to walk outside at a warmer hour, or use the stationary bicycle; i customarily use it for my Tabata sprints, as it's MUCH kinder to the knee.
...I just resolved to name my knees -- "my once-injured knee" is so unwieldy -- so it'll be Ralph (the "bad" one) and Louie. ;-) I'm so original!
Volume of meat is going down! Instead of 8 ounces, it's going to be 6, and i'm going to put salt on it. Truly, it hasn't been my taste buds that missed the salt, it's been my stomach-acid missing the chlorine! In all the agonizing over sodium in the last few decades, "experts" predictably overlooked the other important ingredient of table salt. Without a good source of chlorine, less stomach-acid is produced -- and contrary to what "everybody knows," an awful lot of indigestion is due to LOW acid, not high. As a hypothyroid, i'm already inclined to have low stomach acid (which is why i keep the betaine supplement on hand), and i've been exacerbating it. That stops now.
On the positive front, allergic symptoms are reduced on my lower-toxin diet. I was surprised to see, under the strict PPC regimen, that i still showed a little cheek-flushing in the evenings -- something that i hitherto blamed on wine. The most likely suspects were nightshades (which i took it very easy with), eggs (eaten in moderation), and nuts (mostly consumed in the form of coconut milk). Last night i took stock, and found the flushing significantly reduced.
Well, today is going to be a low-intake day, just to reset my system. I WILL stick to the approved food list in "Strong Medicine" though! Considering that i lost approximately 3 pounds in three days, there's no doubt that Dr. Donaldson was onto something, even though the medicine seems to be a little TOO strong for ME.
p.s. Despite the dire warnings of reduced thyroid function on a VLC diet, i've noticed no such reaction -- and believe me, i know what it feels like. I hypothesize that: 1) sufficient protein ingestion raises insulin levels enough to allow the receptors to work just fine, and; 2) being well-adapted in ketosis with plenty of glucose made by the liver from protein AND fat (as confirmed with my glucometer) provides all the glucose necessary for T4 conversion. Dare i suggest that the trials where thyroid function was impaired took place in particularly-established glucose burners...?
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
what's working
This day is the last of my second week on the PPC, and the diet is flowing in a comfortable groove. Hunger has not been any kind of problem, and urges to eat forbidden things have been completely manageable.
I wake up generally alert (not brain-foggy), i pee, weigh myself, and go make a cup of coffee. The progress has been steady, the only "complication" being the inflammation radiating from my right knee (the one i injured a half-dozen years ago) after the unusual stress i gave it last Wednesday. I may have to re-think that dance class....
On the other hand, THE KNEE PAINS ME LESS THAN IT USED TO. How THAT is happening is an intriguing puzzlement. Is it merely diet-related (cutting irritants that had been on my menu list before), or could the strengthening of the muscles surrounding it (the tabata sprints on the stationary bicycle) have something to do with stabilizing the joint? Can't tell you -- wish i could! My original instinct, to wait till weight loss stalled before adding in exercise, was probably the right decision, but it's too late now -- i'll have another chance to see what happens in Step 2, when i add back some of the foods i eliminated.
I already knew enough to eat most of my carbs for dinner rather than load up at breakfast -- the latter helped me gain a few pounds last summer. By the way: the very word "breakfast" is not used as it once was, and i feel a need to point out a few things! :-) Breaking one's fast doesn't mean eating within a short period of time after waking -- i think we have cereal commercials to blame for the confusion. Break-fasting, etymologically, is eating for the first time after a period of abstention, which for most people is after their night's sleep. Okay? Make sense? So the old saw "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" may be taken from the rubbish-heap and reanalyzed for importance -- for people who do LOOOOONG fasts, there's no doubt that the first meal they eat after it is crucial.
But i digress -- i'm a life-long linguaphile, and hate sloppy mis-use (don't get me started on "goes" and "says"...).
What works!? :-) A high-fat-and-protein breakfast, WHEN I'M PROPERLY HUNGRY, is what works for me. Having my husband around is a difficulty (sorry, baby) when it comes to this point, because he's primed for eating at "mealtimes" rather than "by his stomach" -- or perhaps he just gets hungry sooner than i do! It's easy to get out of the pattern of "eating to hunger," but it's important for MY body. Bacon and eggs (or something with a comparable nutritional profile) will stick to my ribs for HOURS. There have been days when all i wanted after it was a snack before bed.
You see, when your body is accustomed to functioning on fats and ketones, and if you have excess body fat, once your dietary energy has been burnt off your cells seamlessly move to burn stored energy instead. Hunger isn't about an empty stomach -- it's about fuel usage and accessibility. For a comprehensive look at why we get hungry, J Stanton's series of articles ought to receive a Pulitzer prize!
After breaking my fast, i wait until my meal has cleared my stomach, then go for the walk/tabata sprints, depending on which i did yesterday -- anything which challenges your muscles (sprints) shouldn't be done EVERY day; lack of rest (rest is when the tissues recuperate and get built up again, stronger than ever) is why all those fit 30-somethings keel over from heart attacks while out running, you know. Add to the mitochondria-enlivening and neurotransmitter-encouraging effects of exercise, the appetite suppression of it, and you've got something worth getting off your backside for. (Pardon the grammer here -- that sentence was aiming for impact.)
When eventually hungry again, i finally indulge in a dinner with judicious quantities of carbohydrates. This plan is what my body responds to -- yours may vary, but if you're doing it differently and it's not working for you for weight loss, reconsideration might be in order. There's a good rodent study supporting the efficacy of late-day carb intake, but rodent studies should ALWAYS be accepted with a grain of salt -- there are significant differences in their little metabolisms.
During the course of the day, i take various supplements. Some are taken with meals and some on an empty stomach; some are scrupulously taken separately and others together. A lot of minerals, particularly, seem to compete for receptors and absorption, so to me, HOW can a single multivitamin give an across-the-board good result? The things i take are influenced by my particular health challenges, so they're not to be recommended universally -- and it's taken YEARS of experimentation to reach the balance that seems correct. If your body is undamaged, you may not need supplements at all.
As i said in earlier posts, i'm sharing what works for this middle-aged body in hopes that some other woman may find it instructive. With all the contradictory advice out there, people often have no idea what might help them. The point here is, THIS IS NOT HYPOTHESIS, or even theory -- this IS WORKING RIGHT NOW on my perimenopausal, thyroid-challenged, clinically-overweight (bmi 28) body. This is the most effective regimen i've ever found.
I wake up generally alert (not brain-foggy), i pee, weigh myself, and go make a cup of coffee. The progress has been steady, the only "complication" being the inflammation radiating from my right knee (the one i injured a half-dozen years ago) after the unusual stress i gave it last Wednesday. I may have to re-think that dance class....
On the other hand, THE KNEE PAINS ME LESS THAN IT USED TO. How THAT is happening is an intriguing puzzlement. Is it merely diet-related (cutting irritants that had been on my menu list before), or could the strengthening of the muscles surrounding it (the tabata sprints on the stationary bicycle) have something to do with stabilizing the joint? Can't tell you -- wish i could! My original instinct, to wait till weight loss stalled before adding in exercise, was probably the right decision, but it's too late now -- i'll have another chance to see what happens in Step 2, when i add back some of the foods i eliminated.
I already knew enough to eat most of my carbs for dinner rather than load up at breakfast -- the latter helped me gain a few pounds last summer. By the way: the very word "breakfast" is not used as it once was, and i feel a need to point out a few things! :-) Breaking one's fast doesn't mean eating within a short period of time after waking -- i think we have cereal commercials to blame for the confusion. Break-fasting, etymologically, is eating for the first time after a period of abstention, which for most people is after their night's sleep. Okay? Make sense? So the old saw "breakfast is the most important meal of the day" may be taken from the rubbish-heap and reanalyzed for importance -- for people who do LOOOOONG fasts, there's no doubt that the first meal they eat after it is crucial.
But i digress -- i'm a life-long linguaphile, and hate sloppy mis-use (don't get me started on "goes" and "says"...).
What works!? :-) A high-fat-and-protein breakfast, WHEN I'M PROPERLY HUNGRY, is what works for me. Having my husband around is a difficulty (sorry, baby) when it comes to this point, because he's primed for eating at "mealtimes" rather than "by his stomach" -- or perhaps he just gets hungry sooner than i do! It's easy to get out of the pattern of "eating to hunger," but it's important for MY body. Bacon and eggs (or something with a comparable nutritional profile) will stick to my ribs for HOURS. There have been days when all i wanted after it was a snack before bed.
You see, when your body is accustomed to functioning on fats and ketones, and if you have excess body fat, once your dietary energy has been burnt off your cells seamlessly move to burn stored energy instead. Hunger isn't about an empty stomach -- it's about fuel usage and accessibility. For a comprehensive look at why we get hungry, J Stanton's series of articles ought to receive a Pulitzer prize!
After breaking my fast, i wait until my meal has cleared my stomach, then go for the walk/tabata sprints, depending on which i did yesterday -- anything which challenges your muscles (sprints) shouldn't be done EVERY day; lack of rest (rest is when the tissues recuperate and get built up again, stronger than ever) is why all those fit 30-somethings keel over from heart attacks while out running, you know. Add to the mitochondria-enlivening and neurotransmitter-encouraging effects of exercise, the appetite suppression of it, and you've got something worth getting off your backside for. (Pardon the grammer here -- that sentence was aiming for impact.)
When eventually hungry again, i finally indulge in a dinner with judicious quantities of carbohydrates. This plan is what my body responds to -- yours may vary, but if you're doing it differently and it's not working for you for weight loss, reconsideration might be in order. There's a good rodent study supporting the efficacy of late-day carb intake, but rodent studies should ALWAYS be accepted with a grain of salt -- there are significant differences in their little metabolisms.
During the course of the day, i take various supplements. Some are taken with meals and some on an empty stomach; some are scrupulously taken separately and others together. A lot of minerals, particularly, seem to compete for receptors and absorption, so to me, HOW can a single multivitamin give an across-the-board good result? The things i take are influenced by my particular health challenges, so they're not to be recommended universally -- and it's taken YEARS of experimentation to reach the balance that seems correct. If your body is undamaged, you may not need supplements at all.
As i said in earlier posts, i'm sharing what works for this middle-aged body in hopes that some other woman may find it instructive. With all the contradictory advice out there, people often have no idea what might help them. The point here is, THIS IS NOT HYPOTHESIS, or even theory -- this IS WORKING RIGHT NOW on my perimenopausal, thyroid-challenged, clinically-overweight (bmi 28) body. This is the most effective regimen i've ever found.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)