Another Weight Loss thread - Page 2

Imthechamp · #1 01-06-2003, 09:04 PM

Just run.

Two miles a day at least 5 times a week will drop alot of weight. You can pretty much eat whatever you want too. Just drop the useless fatty stuff like butter, mayo, candy.

justamom · #2 01-07-2003, 08:03 AM

Not the greatest, but it works for me. I JUST started the Cabbage Soup diet. Two plans, but I'm on one week to get myself kick started. Then I'll go for a more reasonable plan like LA Weight Loss.
It works on the concept of "negative calories" meaning a food like an apple or a strawberry takes more calories to digest than they offer.

AXOLiz · #3 01-07-2003, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
For your diet: Plan out the same meal at the same times for the next two weeks. Also your diet should be 3-1 fat calories to protein calories. The diet works much better if your fat intake is pretty high.

To give you an idea, a 4oz piece of chicken has 80 calories of protein (20 grams). You would want to eat 240 more calories of fat with it. Some diets recomend 4-1 fat to protein.

Hey James - do you know why that ratio of fat to protein works? I've read that it's counterproductive to eat too much fat (if you're counting calories) because it can be stored more readily by your body (since it's already fat..), so I'm curious to hear the other side of that.

Peaches-n-Cream · #4 01-08-2003, 03:09 AM

You should read Dr. Atkins' book or check out the website here .

James · #5 01-08-2003, 11:21 PM

I am not completely sure why they recomend it, I think it has something to do with making ketosis easier or better. Dan Duchaine writes about it in Dirty Dieting.

If you are counting calories it wouldn't really matter where you got them though would it ? I mean logically?

But in truth given the same amount of calories of protein and carbs or protein and fat you are more likely to lose body fat on the protein and fat diet.

Most women fail on the ketogenic diets because they don't eat enough fat. So shooting for a 3-1 or 4-1 could be useful.

If you are morbidly obese or just want to lose fat quickly they will put you on a "fat fast" where you do 1000-1200 calories a day in just fat. But if you add some protein into that mix you will lose less muscle.

Sorry I don't have a better answer. I'll look around a little on the net.

Quote:

Originally posted by AXOLiz

Hey James - do you know why that ratio of fat to protein works? I've read that it's counterproductive to eat too much fat (if you're counting calories) because it can be stored more readily by your body (since it's already fat..), so I'm curious to hear the other side of that.

Rudey · #6 01-08-2003, 11:32 PM

There are different versions of the keto diets. I don't know if you read testosterone.net but they have an interesting one called the fat fast. I can't ever get myself to do it completely because...well let's just say it messes up your digestive system too much to be enjoyable.

-Rudey

Quote:

Originally posted by James
I am not completely sure why they recomend it, I think it has something to do with making ketosis easier or better. Dan Duchaine writes about it in Dirty Dieting.

If you are counting calories it wouldn't really matter where you got them though would it ? I mean logically?

But in truth given the same amount of calories of protein and carbs or protein and fat you are more likely to lose body fat on the protein and fat diet.

Most women fail on the ketogenic diets because they don't eat enough fat. So shooting for a 3-1 or 4-1 could be useful.

If you are morbidly obese or just want to lose fat quickly they will put you on a "fat fast" where you do 1000-1200 calories a day in just fat. But if you add some protein into that mix you will lose less muscle.

Sorry I don't have a better answer. I'll look around a little on the net.

James · #7 01-08-2003, 11:35 PM

yeah, that one is a modification of the medical "fat fast". A lot more protein.

You are better off, for compliance sake, in varying the calories daily. pyramid up and then drop down . . .

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
There are different versions of the keto diets. I don't know if you read testosterone.net but they have an interesting one called the fat fast. I can't ever get myself to do it completely because...well let's just say it messes up your digestive system too much to be enjoyable.

-Rudey

Lady Pi Phi · #8 01-09-2003, 03:10 AM

I'll admit I don't know much about ketogenic diets or ketosis, but I have a problem with it. According to an article I read about the safety of Ketosis, ketosis and diabetic ketoacidosis are 2 seperate things. ketosis is safe, while diabebtic ketoacidosis is fatal. Ok, so here's my problem. In this article the author says that,

"Dietary ketosis is among the most maligned and misunderstood concepts in nutrition because it is often confused with ketoacidosis, which is a life-threatening condition most often associated with uncontrolled insulin-deficient Type 1 diabetes. In the Type 1 diabetic, the absence of insulin leads to a toxic build-up of blood glucose and an extreme break-down of fat and muscle tissue. This condition doesn't occur in individuals who have even a small amount of insulin, whether from natural production or artificially administered"

I can tell you without a shadow of a doubt that the last sentence in this article is WRONG! Ketones are dangerous in the body. As a diabetic I have had ketones in the body while taking my "artificially administered" insulin. I can tell you it's just as dangerous. Ketones are poison, PERIOD! Even while taking increased amounts of insulin I have still had ketones build up in my body causing me to collapse, be rushed to the ER, have heart problems, and basically could have killed me. I lost 11 pounds in 3 days due to ketones.

If this is the information being supplied about Ketosis, ketongenic diets, and ketones, I strongly urge you to stay away from it or at least speak to your doctor about. Ketones, no matter what are extremely extremely dangerous. It is a toxin in the body and can be fatal.

But if anyone else has any other information about Ketogenic diets or ketosis that they'd like to share, being I'm not an expert, but I don't think it's a good idea, feel free to share.

Oh, here's the link to that article.
http://www.ketosis-ketoacidosis-difference.com/

AXOLiz · #9 01-09-2003, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by James
If you are counting calories it wouldn't really matter where you got them though would it ? I mean logically?

No, I don't think it matters when you're counting calories assuming you're taking in less than you're burning. The study I read - which was a long time ago, so I don't remember as much as I probably should - said in general, extra fat in your diet can be stored more readily since it's already fat, basically. I'm assuming that would only matter if you were eating enough calories to gain weight, however. If your metabolism's burning 2000 calories a day and you're only eating 1500, you'll lose weight whether that's 1500 calories of carbs of protein or pure fat.

That's also ignoring the aspects of the Atkins diet that make it work despite the lack of reduction in calories. I'd guess that's not applicable in ketosis, but it might be the case if you're just on a low calorie diet (or lack thereof).

I think the results that people get from the Atkins diet are amazing, but it's just not for me. I could never stay away from carbs long enough for it to really work. I'll stick to my 1200-ish calories a day and exercise. It's taking longer, but I was fat for almost 20 years, so two months to take off the little tummy I still have isn't going to kill me.

Thanks for all the help though!!

justamom · #10 01-09-2003, 10:26 AM

http://www.diet-i.com/weight_loss/raised-metabolism.htm

This is pretty inclusive and explains why different foods in a diet plan are better than others. Go to the bottom of the page and check out the links. I explored many of the areas, but not all.
It lists the pros and cons of popular/fad/radical and healthy diets.

aephi alum · #11 01-09-2003, 07:48 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by AXOLiz
No, I don't think it matters when you're counting calories assuming you're taking in less than you're burning. The study I read - which was a long time ago, so I don't remember as much as I probably should - said in general, extra fat in your diet can be stored more readily since it's already fat, basically.

I don't think that's quite true... Most diet experts agree that simple sugars are bad - if you're sticking to a 1500-calorie diet and 1400 of those calories come from Snickers bars, you're not doing yourself any favors. The reasons differ - some people talk about insulin spikes, others say that it is very easily broken down by the body, others say all carbs are bad, etc. Same thing for alcohol - most experts agree alcohol should be limited if not done away with entirely, but for different reasons. So it does matter where your calories come from.

Dr. Atkins' argument as for why fat is not "bad" is that your body processes any carbs that you eat, and then goes to fat stored in your body. According to him (for reasons I don't understand) dietary fat is not processed before bodily fat.

The important thing is to decide what you're going to do - low-carb, low-fat, low-calorie, Weight Watchers, whatever - and then stick to it.