Atkins Diet

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
...
Lictor wrote:
Well, I've been on all kinds of "weird diets", from vegan to vegetarian,
to "no this" and "no that", and I've never had a problem enjoying life
with friends!

Here, people on a diet tend to just lock themselves and diet until they
experiment some kind of transformation and the ugly worms turns into a
beautiful butterfly that can go shine into the outside world. Anyway, that
seems to be the common process among women dieters in my country. Male
dieters, on the other hand, just go sulk with their friends where they
remind everyone of how much they are NOT enjoying themselves and how hard it
is to be on a diet, until they either manage to ruin the party for everyone
OR managed to get "convinced" that the doctor actually told them not to diet
at parties (then, they get drunk, eat a bunch and then spend the next few
days complaining). Another male behaviour is to throw up a party to
celebrate each lost couple of pounds - well managed, this provides an
endless supply of parties as you yo-yo around the very same weight forever.

I'm not saying it's sane (it's not), but it's just the way people do it.
That also explains dieters don't get invited to parties. In the case of
females, it would be rude to tempt them while they're turning into nuns, and
it the case of males, they just ruin the party with their bad mood.

Otherwise, the polite way to do things is just in reverse. You're not
supposed to bother your host with your own peculiarities, and likewise, when
the host comes to eat at your home, he's the one who won't bother you.

I've been at wonderful gatherings with friends where an abundance of
delicious food was served, and I didn't know attending said party had an
admission fee of eating a food you don't like... grin. I just go
without. And I do so happily while respecting my friend's rights to eat
whatever they want.

It's more like *tasting* and showing that the food is well cooked. If you're
a vegan, noone will ask you to eat the meat of course, though you can earn
cookie point by commenting on it - even if you don't eat it, you might say
it looks good, that it smells so good you would *almost* wish you weren't
vegan... If you're dieting, people will understand that you don't three tons
of food. They might understand that you don't eat some food too. But if you
don't eat anything at all *and* bring your own food, the host will just
conclude that you think his cooking sucks and that you are telling it in the
rudest way...

See that is the thing. Respect. I go out of my way to cook things for
my friends "weird eating habits", even if I don't eat it. It's called
give and take. It's one of the things that hold friends together.

Well, I go out of my way to *taste* what my weird friend cook for me...
Including disgusting things like kidneys... I even managed some nice
commenting while repressing the gag reflex...

And if a woman has just a "starter" at a restaurant... so what? I've
seen the portion size of some "starters", and that's enough for a whole
entire meal! Maybe she is actually enjoying the taste of her starter,
and is exercising real self control by *stopping when full*

That's not in the USA, starters are *small* here You don't do a whole
meal with one of our starters, even if you had gastric surgery. Actually, I
do practice the stopping when "full" thing, that's my only mean of dieting.
This doesn't prevent me from eating the whole menu at restaurants - I just
eat about half the portions I'm served, and eventually do not have a
dessert. That way, I eat in sync with the other people (which is the polite
thing to do) and I experience a bit of each tastes... I just wish we had
doggy bags
Besides, she doesn't really enjoyed her starter, she seemed a lot more
interested in what we were eating. And she's even underweight. Besides,
she's the kind of person who has a kitchen I would kill for, fully featured
with the best cooking technologies, yet *never* cooks in it because it would
*dirty* it. Actually, she doesn't know how to cook, even pasta or rice.
That's a sure sign of a troublesome relationship with food.

So which is it? It just seems there's no pleasing anybody (which is now
why I stop trying, where my own body is concerned). If a person is too
fat, they're looked upon with disgust with a sneering upturned nose, and
the person (sometimes verbally saying) "Ewww doesn't this woman have ANY
self control???" OR, when they are thinner and more energetic and
healthier due to their eating habits it's "Look at this chick, she's
gone all weird and will not eat anything we offer!!"

Well, I never claimed society is rationnal... But since we have to live in
it, there is some level of adaptation to have. One is to find a way to make
your eating habits society friendly and another is to try to change society
(through fat acceptance for instance).

But what else is new, life is full of double standards.

Yup. But they're not that hard to manage actually. Besides, some of these
standards are actually what keeps cooking tradition alive - over the course
of your life, it makes sure you will eat plenty of different cooking
traditions. In a country where you have different cooking styles every
100km, it's an important way of keeping diversity alive. It also means kids
have a hard time living on a burger and fries only diet, since they too are
expected to eat what is given to them instead of bringing their own food
with them.

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
...
Lictor wrote:
Well, I've been on all kinds of "weird diets", from vegan to vegetarian,
to "no this" and "no that", and I've never had a problem enjoying life
with friends!

Here, people on a diet tend to just lock themselves and diet until they
experiment some kind of transformation and the ugly worms turns into a
beautiful butterfly that can go shine into the outside world. Anyway, that
seems to be the common process among women dieters in my country. Male
dieters, on the other hand, just go sulk with their friends where they
remind everyone of how much they are NOT enjoying themselves and how hard it
is to be on a diet, until they either manage to ruin the party for everyone
OR managed to get "convinced" that the doctor actually told them not to diet
at parties (then, they get drunk, eat a bunch and then spend the next few
days complaining). Another male behaviour is to throw up a party to
celebrate each lost couple of pounds - well managed, this provides an
endless supply of parties as you yo-yo around the very same weight forever.

I'm not saying it's sane (it's not), but it's just the way people do it.
That also explains dieters don't get invited to parties. In the case of
females, it would be rude to tempt them while they're turning into nuns, and
it the case of males, they just ruin the party with their bad mood.

Otherwise, the polite way to do things is just in reverse. You're not
supposed to bother your host with your own peculiarities, and likewise, when
the host comes to eat at your home, he's the one who won't bother you.

I've been at wonderful gatherings with friends where an abundance of
delicious food was served, and I didn't know attending said party had an
admission fee of eating a food you don't like... grin. I just go
without. And I do so happily while respecting my friend's rights to eat
whatever they want.

It's more like *tasting* and showing that the food is well cooked. If you're
a vegan, noone will ask you to eat the meat of course, though you can earn
cookie point by commenting on it - even if you don't eat it, you might say
it looks good, that it smells so good you would *almost* wish you weren't
vegan... If you're dieting, people will understand that you don't three tons
of food. They might understand that you don't eat some food too. But if you
don't eat anything at all *and* bring your own food, the host will just
conclude that you think his cooking sucks and that you are telling it in the
rudest way...

See that is the thing. Respect. I go out of my way to cook things for
my friends "weird eating habits", even if I don't eat it. It's called
give and take. It's one of the things that hold friends together.

Well, I go out of my way to *taste* what my weird friend cook for me...
Including disgusting things like kidneys... I even managed some nice
commenting while repressing the gag reflex...

And if a woman has just a "starter" at a restaurant... so what? I've
seen the portion size of some "starters", and that's enough for a whole
entire meal! Maybe she is actually enjoying the taste of her starter,
and is exercising real self control by *stopping when full*

That's not in the USA, starters are *small* here You don't do a whole
meal with one of our starters, even if you had gastric surgery. Actually, I
do practice the stopping when "full" thing, that's my only mean of dieting.
This doesn't prevent me from eating the whole menu at restaurants - I just
eat about half the portions I'm served, and eventually do not have a
dessert. That way, I eat in sync with the other people (which is the polite
thing to do) and I experience a bit of each tastes... I just wish we had
doggy bags
Besides, she doesn't really enjoyed her starter, she seemed a lot more
interested in what we were eating. And she's even underweight. Besides,
she's the kind of person who has a kitchen I would kill for, fully featured
with the best cooking technologies, yet *never* cooks in it because it would
*dirty* it. Actually, she doesn't know how to cook, even pasta or rice.
That's a sure sign of a troublesome relationship with food.

So which is it? It just seems there's no pleasing anybody (which is now
why I stop trying, where my own body is concerned). If a person is too
fat, they're looked upon with disgust with a sneering upturned nose, and
the person (sometimes verbally saying) "Ewww doesn't this woman have ANY
self control???" OR, when they are thinner and more energetic and
healthier due to their eating habits it's "Look at this chick, she's
gone all weird and will not eat anything we offer!!"

Well, I never claimed society is rationnal... But since we have to live in
it, there is some level of adaptation to have. One is to find a way to make
your eating habits society friendly and another is to try to change society
(through fat acceptance for instance).

But what else is new, life is full of double standards.

Yup. But they're not that hard to manage actually. Besides, some of these
standards are actually what keeps cooking tradition alive - over the course
of your life, it makes sure you will eat plenty of different cooking
traditions. In a country where you have different cooking styles every
100km, it's an important way of keeping diversity alive. It also means kids
have a hard time living on a burger and fries only diet, since they too are
expected to eat what is given to them instead of bringing their own food
with them.

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
...
Being on low-carb helped me identify a lot of
things which, if not kept under control, can lead to the urge to binge.

I still believe bingeing is a psychological issue. At least, I believe it
can be sucessfully dealt with by psychological approaches. Though, it's not
that easy to make the distinction. I mean, if you explain the metabolism of
sugar to me, and explain to me that craving is cause by reactive
hypoglycemia, you're also giving me a psychological tool to mentalize the
process of my cravings and deal with them. Your purely biological
explanation is actually helping me on a psychological level. I know have a
model of my craving in my mind that I can manipulate and rationalize - which
is actually the normal way we deal with all our psychological issues and
keep them in control. The fact that the model has any reality at the
biological level is completely irrelevant to the fact that it is helping me.

I now do eat pretty normally. Not much sugar, not much grain, but more
or less "normal". I don't go out of my way to buy any packaged,
*******ized, polluted foods with 25-syllable additives to it, but there
is a bit more variety in my diet. I stop when satiated and eat slowly.

Same here for the hunger/satiety, except that was the advertised goal of my
"dieting" approach from the start. I tend to stick to real food, but this is
a part where my weird culture is actually helping me ("artificial" food is
still culturally wrong here). Now, if I really want to indulge in some
hydrogenated fat with corn syrup treat, I will, but it's a rare event
anyway.

Actually, it's my (self made) low-carb diet that helped put the cravings
at bay for a good long time, and gave me enough time to discern the
difference between hunger (stomach empty, need to eat soon) and cravings
(I wish I had a [whatever]). I had confused the two for so long that I
NEEDED a physical representation of both in my own body, so I could
discern them both as opposites.

What I find incredible is that NO mainstream dieting method actually tries
to directly accomplish that. I mean, just teach you what is hunger and what
it isn't. People with bulimia or anorexics are taught that, because they
belong to psychiatry. But obese people are not worthy enough to be
psychiatric material, so a purely dietetic approach is used with them. But I
think many obese (especially over-eaters, binger...) are very close to
bulimics and anorexics. It's only a matter of intensity, but the mechanisms
remain the same. Yet, they are treated like completely different diseases.

"Crafting Mom" wrote in message
...
Being on low-carb helped me identify a lot of
things which, if not kept under control, can lead to the urge to binge.

I still believe bingeing is a psychological issue. At least, I believe it
can be sucessfully dealt with by psychological approaches. Though, it's not
that easy to make the distinction. I mean, if you explain the metabolism of
sugar to me, and explain to me that craving is cause by reactive
hypoglycemia, you're also giving me a psychological tool to mentalize the
process of my cravings and deal with them. Your purely biological
explanation is actually helping me on a psychological level. I know have a
model of my craving in my mind that I can manipulate and rationalize - which
is actually the normal way we deal with all our psychological issues and
keep them in control. The fact that the model has any reality at the
biological level is completely irrelevant to the fact that it is helping me.

I now do eat pretty normally. Not much sugar, not much grain, but more
or less "normal". I don't go out of my way to buy any packaged,
*******ized, polluted foods with 25-syllable additives to it, but there
is a bit more variety in my diet. I stop when satiated and eat slowly.

Same here for the hunger/satiety, except that was the advertised goal of my
"dieting" approach from the start. I tend to stick to real food, but this is
a part where my weird culture is actually helping me ("artificial" food is
still culturally wrong here). Now, if I really want to indulge in some
hydrogenated fat with corn syrup treat, I will, but it's a rare event
anyway.

Actually, it's my (self made) low-carb diet that helped put the cravings
at bay for a good long time, and gave me enough time to discern the
difference between hunger (stomach empty, need to eat soon) and cravings
(I wish I had a [whatever]). I had confused the two for so long that I
NEEDED a physical representation of both in my own body, so I could
discern them both as opposites.

What I find incredible is that NO mainstream dieting method actually tries
to directly accomplish that. I mean, just teach you what is hunger and what
it isn't. People with bulimia or anorexics are taught that, because they
belong to psychiatry. But obese people are not worthy enough to be
psychiatric material, so a purely dietetic approach is used with them. But I
think many obese (especially over-eaters, binger...) are very close to
bulimics and anorexics. It's only a matter of intensity, but the mechanisms
remain the same. Yet, they are treated like completely different diseases.

Lictor wrote:
belong to psychiatry. But obese people are not worthy enough to be
psychiatric material, so a purely dietetic approach is used with them. But I
think many obese (especially over-eaters, binger...) are very close to
bulimics and anorexics. It's only a matter of intensity, but the mechanisms
remain the same. Yet, they are treated like completely different diseases.

I have been anorexic, bulimic, binge-eater in cycles for nearly 2
decades, and yes, I agree with you. I consider them all manifestations
of the same disorder.

Lictor wrote:
belong to psychiatry. But obese people are not worthy enough to be
psychiatric material, so a purely dietetic approach is used with them. But I
think many obese (especially over-eaters, binger...) are very close to
bulimics and anorexics. It's only a matter of intensity, but the mechanisms
remain the same. Yet, they are treated like completely different diseases.

I have been anorexic, bulimic, binge-eater in cycles for nearly 2
decades, and yes, I agree with you. I consider them all manifestations
of the same disorder.

On Mon, 9 Aug 2004 23:53:02 +0200, "Lictor"
wrote:

What I find incredible is that NO mainstream dieting method actually tries
to directly accomplish that. I mean, just teach you what is hunger and what
it isn't. People with bulimia or anorexics are taught that, because they
belong to psychiatry. But obese people are not worthy enough to be
psychiatric material, so a purely dietetic approach is used with them. But I
think many obese (especially over-eaters, binger...) are very close to
bulimics and anorexics. It's only a matter of intensity, but the mechanisms
remain the same. Yet, they are treated like completely different diseases.

This is very true. I've often thought of binge eating disorder as
"bulimia without the vomiting" - in other words, a similar condition
but manifesting itself slightly differently. But there's a world of
difference in the way the world sees the two conditions. I think it's
partly because bingeing is seen as greed and the obesity which it
leads to is regarded with some disgust, whereas bulimics (and
anorexics) are seen as having an "illness" and they are at least
trying to stay thin so they must be commended for that! A very
distorted way of thinking, but I think this is the way some people
view it.

janice
233/179/133

"Lictor" wrote in message ...
"Ignoramus24206" wrote in message
...

Well, a formerly fat person needs to be on some sort of diet for the
rest of his or her life, to maintain weight loss, right?

Why? What's so special in a former fat person vs a normal person?

without surgery, fat cells can shrink but are never lost. And the
current theory is that people who become obese early in life have a
lot more fat cells than those who become overweight later.

(the morbidly obese have grown a lot of fat cells to reach that
condition in either case).

Also I've read that once existing fat cells are 'stretched' they are
more likely to pick up fats out of the blood again. Not sure about
this though.

Plus in losing fat, losing muscle is a side-effect.

Plus the formerly fat person got fat that way either for a physical
reason (metabolism), physical disability or other limitation on
exercise, or of course through bad dietary habits. The causal factors
are still around for a formery fat person.

The normal
person will not need to be on a diet for the rest of her life, she's not
eating anything special to maintain her weight. Actually, most are able to
maintain their weight on whatever cooking style they feel like - including
eat potato chips all day long.

?

So, in essence, you're assuming that there is
something special in that former obese person that prevents her from being
"normal". She's not cured, she's merely on a life long "medication" that
hides her obese condition. Exactly like someone with AIDS who is taking a
tritherapy. The diet has not turned that fat obese person into a slim
person, it has merely turned her into a slim obese.

Actually, this is physically the best way to look at it since fat
cells are not lost, just shrunk.

(rest snipped)

"Lictor" wrote in message ...
"Ignoramus24206" wrote in message
...

Well, a formerly fat person needs to be on some sort of diet for the
rest of his or her life, to maintain weight loss, right?

Why? What's so special in a former fat person vs a normal person?

without surgery, fat cells can shrink but are never lost. And the
current theory is that people who become obese early in life have a
lot more fat cells than those who become overweight later.

(the morbidly obese have grown a lot of fat cells to reach that
condition in either case).

Also I've read that once existing fat cells are 'stretched' they are
more likely to pick up fats out of the blood again. Not sure about
this though.

Plus in losing fat, losing muscle is a side-effect.

Plus the formerly fat person got fat that way either for a physical
reason (metabolism), physical disability or other limitation on
exercise, or of course through bad dietary habits. The causal factors
are still around for a formery fat person.

The normal
person will not need to be on a diet for the rest of her life, she's not
eating anything special to maintain her weight. Actually, most are able to
maintain their weight on whatever cooking style they feel like - including
eat potato chips all day long.

?

So, in essence, you're assuming that there is
something special in that former obese person that prevents her from being
"normal". She's not cured, she's merely on a life long "medication" that
hides her obese condition. Exactly like someone with AIDS who is taking a
tritherapy. The diet has not turned that fat obese person into a slim
person, it has merely turned her into a slim obese.

Actually, this is physically the best way to look at it since fat
cells are not lost, just shrunk.

(rest snipped)

Ignoramus24206 wrote:

What, you are not lowcarbing any more CM? How are you eating? Gaining
or losing weight?

I'm still eating natural food, no junk, and some muesli cereal
(unsweetened oats, added raisins). I'm practicing portion control, and
I am coming down slowly (lost ten pounds so far) from a previous weight
gain. I am starting to feel "normal". LCing gave me a lot of insight
into what is hunger and what is cravings. Knowing the difference has
worked miracles with my attitude toward food.

I'm also practicing the 12-step addiction principles along with it (Like
with alcoholics anonymous only food as my substance of choice). I
stopped low carbing, but still read asdlc, but feel that very few people
low-carb even remotely close to how I used to (I know a few people do
there, but they rarely post enough for there to be a similar wavelength
in conversation). A large percentage of people on asdlc seem more
concerned with how to get lc cereal and lc toast, and lc ice cream, than
with healthy eating. I do credit the asdlc group tremendously for their
myriad of inspiration, and the good and the bad is all part and parcel
of any on-line community.

At least with my modified way of eating, I don't need to look for a
substitute *anything*. I eat it, and then adjust my other food
accordingly.

Crafting Mom