Investing in precious metals 101

Seeking Community Support for My Personal Weight-Loss Goals

Login or register to post comments Last Post 5704 reads   79 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 79 total)
  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 04:15am

    #21
    dryam2000

    dryam2000

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 06 2009

    Posts: 241

    count placeholder

    Fructose

Both high fructose corn syrup and simple sugar contain about 50% fructose.  Fructose has now been shown in several good studies that it paradoxically increases appetite the more people eat.  It's pretty much accepted fact at this point.  For this reason alone, fructose should be avoided all together.  It will trick your mind into thinking you haven't eaten enough & cause you to overeat.  Most people are completely oblivious to how much fructose permeates almost every processed food in the grocery stores.

 

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 07:52am

    #22

    davefairtex

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 3109

    count placeholder

    diets and exercise and…

So many good suggestions here.  My body type likes to gain weight too, and ever since I hit 20 I was perennially 15 pounds overweight (I am 5-9 and was 175-180).  Now I range between 160-165, which is pretty reasonable given my build.  My "fighting weight" would be about 155 – pretty easy to obtain if I run every day for 3 weeks.  But that takes work, and running is boring, so I hover around 163 most of the time.

I've tried lots of diets and different types of exercise, and with enough application most of them do work to take fat off.

As for exercise, the thing I eventually concluded is, do whatever form of exercise that is the most fun for you.  Seriously.  If its a life change, it has to be fun or else you won't keep doing it.  Running is effective, swimming too, but they aren't fun for me.  I do a bit of weight lifting in the park (when its not raining) and an hour of muay thai a few times a week because I think both of those are fun.  One important thing for me: after muay thai (which is very intense cardio), its important to get a protein shake, electrolytes, a couple quarts of water, and – some milk.  Otherwise I come home, eat everything in sight, and then crash.  For some reason, milk helped the post training cravings a lot in a way no other food I've tried worked.  Apparently that's a well-known fighter routine, something I learned it from my trainer.

Another thing that really helped was guided meditation.  It sounds funny, because it has nothing to do with eating or exercise, but getting to the root cause of overeating was quite important, as was a daily clearing-out of emotional crap buildup.  In the old days I could eat like a pig and stuff myself, but these days I get quite uncomfortable if I overeat, and while a part of me still enjoys the fried chicken (and I do get a piece or two every month or so), I can tell that my body really doesn't enjoy it so much.  I now listen to my body; I can tell it likes vegetables a lot, so I try and make it happy.  It likes meat too, but not quite as often as I was eating it before.  Rather than a piece of machinery or just the vehicle that carts my consciousness around, I now try to view my body as my partner so I try to be considerate of what it wants.  How do you know what it wants?  If you listen, it will let you know.  Likewise, I can tell now after doing this for several years when I have emotional crap buildup that needs to be released.  If I don't attend to it, I will likely try and self-medicate through eating or drinking something bad!

I still eat sweets, but not often, and not as sweet as before – and I notice that I usually want them when I haven't cleared away the negative emotions.  And not all sweets are created equal.  A butter cookie with your tea doesn't give you the same physical effect that a coke does, for instance.  Portion control is important too.  If you must have a coke, buy the small bottle, not the big one.

Oh, and there's one other thing, something I picked up from this two-week desert survival class I took: drink a quart of water every morning, before eating.  It really helps a lot.  Turns out at least some percentage of "hunger" signals are really "thirst" signals.

So my diet: meditation, exercise I consider fun, a quart of water in the morning, listening to my body, and I'm good to go.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 09:38am

    #23
    kelly13

    kelly13

    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jan 02 2012

    Posts: 1

    count placeholder

    I know many of you won’t

I know many of you won’t agree with this post – but I think that sometimes cutting out wheat is not the answer.  I turned 40 this year, my husband is 52 and we have two small boys, and I get through a lot of flour every week.  I think the reason that we don’t have a problem with wheat is because I make everything from scratch.  I used to think that my husband had a problem with wheat, but that was when we bought our bread, pasta etc.  I make brioche for breakfast, sourdoughs for general eating, and I often have tarts for when the kids get home from school.  I fill the tarts with seasonal fruits.  I think one of the things which has helped my husbands weight is portion control.  Since I make everything I tend to decide how much is going to be eaten before it hits the table, so snacking has gone, so too has overeating. 

What I am trying to explain is that by making food MORE important, and giving it the respect that it deserves can help you eat better, lose weight and have a healthy range of everything your body needs. For example, when I am making a fresh pasta dish I used a lot more vegetable in the sauce than I would if I was working with dry pasta from a shop.  

I am fairly obsessive about eating the best possible quality of foods, and knowing absolutely everything which is eaten in this house.  Food is very important, even if the kids just want a biscuit, it will be a homemade biscuit, served with milk or water, and they will have to sit at the table to eat it – controlling your weight is about giving your body time to process what you have eaten before deciding what next to put in your body.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 10:42am

    #24

    Lisa Melgoza

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 13 2010

    Posts: 32

    count placeholder

    Biggest obstacle

You have a detailed handle on this “project” with goals, activities, time frame, eating plan, & excellent community support. You said sitting in front of your computer handling the PP.com site is your biggest obstacle. Can you place a treadmill in your office, elevate your computer, and slowly walk while you work? Temporarily delegate some PP.com monitoring tasks to trusted community members? What’s your time drains? 24 hours in a day, you sleep 5-8 hours… plot out your typical day. How can you use your time more efficiently? Stop (for awhile) the things that will not help you reach your goals. jgarma & ao had excellent suggestions about a timer & short bursts of exercises to do in your office. Prep your space for exercise: a mat, hand weights, towel, & water. After a short exercise burst, center yourself for a few seconds-close your eyes, take slow breaths & imagine yourself at your desired goal: healthier, happier, & calm.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 11:05am

    #25
    ao

    ao

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 04 2009

    Posts: 882

    count placeholder

    yes, it is an oversimplication

Jim,

Of course it was an oversimplification.  I could write hundreds, maybe thousands of pages on the subject.  Just like Wheat Belly is an oversimplification, typically of the reductionist view so-called medical books that permeate the marketplace.  Very simply, it depends upon your metabolic type (if you're not a carbo type, you probably shouldn't eat wheat), the type of wheat (heirloom, pre-industrial versus highly bred and GMO), sprouted vs. unsprouted, what the wheat has been treated with, etc. 

Jim, I've studied this area up and down and inside out and FWIW, I have personally refrained from unhealthy grain products for 35 years.  Again, on a very simple level, I've noted a directly proportional relationship between the consumption of conventional baked goods (largely wheat but including other types of grains) and poor health so I am largely in agreement with you and have proven it by having exceptional health and vigor for my entire adult life.  Plus, my kids never got the colds, flus, and other illnesses that many, if not most of their friends did.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 11:14am

    #26
    ao

    ao

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 04 2009

    Posts: 882

    count placeholder

    dryam2000 wrote:Both high

[quote=dryam2000]

Both high fructose corn syrup and simple sugar contain about 50% fructose.  Fructose has now been shown in several good studies that it paradoxically increases appetite the more people eat.  It's pretty much accepted fact at this point.  For this reason alone, fructose should be avoided all together.  It will trick your mind into thinking you haven't eaten enough & cause you to overeat.  Most people are completely oblivious to how much fructose permeates almost every processed food in the grocery stores.

[/quote]

dryam2000,

Your other post will require a lengthy reply and I don't have the time now but regarding the above, I will pose you a question.

Why is it that the Gracie family, who are huge fruit eaters (i.e. containing fructose), are extremely lean and extremely healthy.  For example, the patriarch of the family, Helio Gracie, lived to 95 and was teaching and practicing jui-jitsu up until 10 days before his death.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gracie_family

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H%C3%A9lio_Gracie

The answer to the question explains why your statements above are not completely accurate and need to be qualified.

 

Enjoy!

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 11:15am

    #27

    Amanda Witman

    Status Silver Member (Offline)

    Joined: Mar 17 2008

    Posts: 153

    count placeholder

    A few comments

I've been gluten-free for eight years, as well as mostly dairy-free for 20+.  I still struggle with my weight.  For some people, cutting out wheat or dairy or anything else doesn't correlate with weight or health.  Doesn't mean it isn't the right thing for some people to do, but it isn't a magic answer for everyone. and it certainly isn't a universal weight loss solution.  I do agree that the increased large-scale "domestication" of gluten grains has changed them even in the last century to something less nutritionally useful for many people.

My own experience is that eating sugar causes fat gain in my body more than anything else.  It also causes cravings for more sugar and refined carbs, which my body can more healthily do without, and other undesirable effects such as blood sugar issues and mood swings.  I find that protein and veggies/fruit are my body's ideal mainstays; I supplement with non-gluten whole grains, which helps the budget and doesn't seem to harm us.  I also find that my body needs animal protein, yet I know others who say they are at their healthiest when they are vegetarian.

I want to caution (in general) against assuming that weight loss means improved health.  Muscle mass weighs more than fat.  Weight loss without muscle gain might make a person look thin, but it won't necessarily improve their state of health. We live in a culture where thinness is valued to the point of unhealthiness, yet the two do not always correlate.

That said, the process by which one reassesses one's habits and loses weight — exercise, healthier eating, etc. — can lead to better overall health, and I think those things may be better indicators of health than the numbers on a scale. 

There are too many people who eat unhealthily (by eating too little) and exercise unhealthily (by pushing their bodies too hard and//or exercising obsessively) to lose weight because they think weight loss is the ultimate indicator of health. 

Not to imply that Adam or anyone else here is on that track, but it's unfortunately very common in American culture. (I say this as a woman who has struggled since childhood with weight, fitness, and body image, and as the mother of two preteen girls who frequently need debriefing on the cultural messages they're absorbing about their bodies.)

I think it is important to recognize that the underlying goal is improved health (strength, mobility, metabolism, fitness, whatever that means for you).  Weight loss might be a part of that picture for some people and not others.  For me, it doesn't make sense to step on the scale or measure my weight.  How I feel is far more valuable an indicator to me than that number.  I know when I'm healthy, energetic, sleeping well, relaxed, limber, strong, supple, handling stress well – and I know (all too well, lately) when I'm not. 

It takes us back to "trust yourself" — you know your own body better than anyone else can.  Good luck to everyone with your goals.  Here's to improved health for all of us.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 11:45am

    #28
    ao

    ao

    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Feb 04 2009

    Posts: 882

    count placeholder

    a sad history

[quote=dryam2000]

AO,

One doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to know sugar is a bad thing and it leading to numerous health problems, but the extent of the role played by sugar and high fructose corn syrup is only being born out fairly recently.  Having a concept is one thing, but proving those concepts by very well controlled broad studies is another.  Medicine is replete with people who have some great concepts but well controlled studies later completely refute the great concepts.  Estrogen replacement is on classic example when it made sense that this would dramatically reduce heart disease in women.  Most main stream medicine jumped on the bandwagon and gave hundreds of thousands of women estrogen only to find out later that this caused a dramatic rise in breast cancer and an overall increase in mortality.  Oops!  Anyway, good medicine is all about concepts that are well supported by lots of well controlled studies and hard data.  It really doesn't matter what credentials people have.  If they have the data, they have the data.  Once again, medicine is replete with MD's being laughed out by their peers when they have come up with novel concepts and novel data.  It's the nature of the beast when it comes to medicine or science.  The physician who discovered that stomach ulcers were mainly caused by a bacterial infection was laughed out of the building.  But guess what?, he went out and got the data. Those people you listed could have easily been laughed at if they were M.D./PhD's.  Additionally, those people you listed may have said that sugar was bad, but they did not put all of the pieces of the puzzle together on the why & how it's bad.  Knowledge is power, and I believe people are more apt to heed the message on how bad sugar is if they are able to see how all the pieces of the sugar puzzle fit together.

[/quote]

One doesn't have to be a rocket scientist to know sugar is a bad thing and it leading to numerous health problems,

Actually, many MDs poo-pooed this concept saying that sugar was just another form of calories.

but the extent of the role played by sugar and high fructose corn syrup is only being born out fairly recently.

Actually, if you are really familiar with the literature, the concept of sugar being a problem was not born out fairly recently but many years ago.  High fructose corn syrup was a later development and its proliferation in food was an even later development so that was not addressed specifically but it's just another form of refined sugar (whether cane sugar, beet sugar, or whatever).

Having a concept is one thing, but proving those concepts by very well controlled broad studies is another.

Let me ask you.  I assume you're a follower of the 3Es?  Do you have very well controlled broad studies to substantiate your beliefs regarding them.  No, I didn't think so.  One can act on something before studies (or an overwhelming number of studies are generated).  Empiricism adjusts the path of science behind it.

Medicine is replete with people who have some great concepts but well controlled studies later completely refute the great concepts.

And so called well controlled studies have also been refuted.  Remember how the polyunsaturated fats were recommended for heart disease and all the studies supported that contention.  And now, those studies have been refuted and the flaws revealed.  How about low fat diets?  How about Vioxx?  I could go on and on. 

Estrogen replacement is on classic example when it made sense that this would dramatically reduce heart disease in women. 

It is indeed.  There were more holes in the woman's health initiative than a block of Swiss cheese. 

 Most main stream medicine jumped on the bandwagon and gave hundreds of thousands of women estrogen only to find out later that this caused a dramatic rise in breast cancer and an overall increase in mortality.  Oops! 

Oops, indeed.  A classic mistake of medicine.  Like the vitamin E study in Finland.  Medicine prescribed synthetic analogs, not bio-identical hormones.  They don't work the same.

Anyway, good medicine is all about concepts that are well supported by lots of well controlled studies and hard data.

It's also about common sense and not being paid off by pharmaceutical industry money or lured to the dark side by other forms of grant money. 

It really doesn't matter what credentials people have. 

Well, it does to some degree but it's not the final word.

If they have the data, they have the data.

If the data isn't fudged (as it has been on occasion), if it isn't statistically slanted in a desired way, and if it is complete, not partial.

Once again, medicine is replete with MD's being laughed out by their peers when they have come up with novel concepts and novel data.

Like the doctor who developed the concept of washing hands between patients and was persecuted by his jealous peers who drove him out of the profession and into poverty and insanity.  Very sad, like the sugar saga.

It's the nature of the beast when it comes to medicine or science.  The physician who discovered that stomach ulcers were mainly caused by a bacterial infection was laughed out of the building.  But guess what?, he went out and got the data.

But what they still haven't established the data on fully is what type of lifestyle creates the environment for that type of bacteria to flourish in the first place.  They treat it with anti-biotics rather than getting to the source of the problem.

Those people you listed could have easily been laughed at if they were M.D./PhD's.

They were PhDs and EdDs.  They were attacked by medical professionals who were jealous of their results and their own lack of comparable results.  This process has been repeated over and over again in medicine and science, throughout history.  Pasteur and Tesla are two prominent examples.

Additionally, those people you listed may have said that sugar was bad, but they did not put all of the pieces of the puzzle together on the why & how it's bad.

They put enough pieces together to know it was a problem but the medical profession, by and large, was behind the curve and refused to acknowledge what they were saying.

Knowledge is power, and I believe people are more apt to heed the message on how bad sugar is if they are able to see how all the pieces of the sugar puzzle fit together.

FWIW, they still don't understand all the pieces of the puzzle.

Enjoyed the discussion.  Thanks.

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 02:05pm

    #29
    liz cowen

    liz cowen

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 14 2009

    Posts: 132

    count placeholder

    boy reading all that makes me

boy reading all that makes me want to eat a whole cake!

 

more simplicity for such a complex topic…

if i don't want to diet and lose weight i won't.

if i do really want to lose weight, i will

and i will go to any lengths to get it done.

once a decision is made that it is something i want , it's a done deal.

asked me in 2 weeks how much wright i have lost.

 

  • Wed, Oct 09, 2013 - 02:11pm

    #30

    Jim H

    Status Diamond Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jun 08 2009

    Posts: 1798

    count placeholder

    Amanda…

I really do agree with everything you say.  I was an early acolyte of Dr. Sears, who wrote the "Zone" diet books, which were arguably the first to scientifically, biochemically explain how carbohydrates and sugars, and the resulting insulin response, was to blame for so many ills.  Wheat is of course just another carb in this view of things.  There is no doubt that one can gain weight even in the absence of wheat, and Dr. Davis is very careful to point out in his book, "Wheatbelly" that the idea is not to go replacing every wheat calorie with an equivalent non-wheat starch based product, i.e. an Udi's bun for your hamburger.  Better you eat the burger with no bun.

As with many folks who find their way to PP.com, I have been ahead of the pack in at least some aspects of my thinking.. I for one was decrying the dangers of partially hydrogenated fats 20 years ago… and of course we don't even talk about that today.. that they are dangerous fats is settled science, and they have been taken out of almost all processed foods, including Dunkin Donuts.  But the wheat remains   : )  ……

I believe wheat needs to be viewed in its own special light.  For many folks, myself included, wheat presents an addictive element beyond what you rightly describe as the cycle of cravings associated with blood sugar highs and lows.  There is science behind this;

Doped

You’ve been cleverly disguising your opiate of choice as muffins, bagels, breakfast cereals, and sandwiches. As with many of the dark and fascinating hidden issues surrounding modern wheat, this is the effect of the gliadin protein of wheat.

Gliadin is digested via stomach acid and pancreatic enzymes to a collection of polypeptides (small proteins) called exorphins, or exogenously-derived morphine-like compounds. The message to take from the research is quite clear: Wheat-derived exorphins bind to the opiate receptors of the brain (the delta class of opiate receptors, for you neuroscience people). Different wheat exorphins, such as the A5 fraction, differ in their binding potency, but as a whole, the wheat exorphins exert an opiate-like effect.

For unclear reasons, wheat exorphins do not provide relief from pain, nor the “high” of other opiates. They “only” cause addictive behavior and appetite stimulation. People who consume wheat increase calorie consumption by around 440 calories per day, every day.

Just as the tobacco industry doped their cigarettes for years with added nicotine to increase addictive potential, so Big Food has likewise been doping their foods by adding wheat to every conceivable processed food. Wheat is in nearly all breakfast cereals, granola bars, canned tomato soup, powdered instant soups, taco seasoning, and licorice. Show me a processed food product and I’ll show you something that contains wheat.

Just as the sleazy drug dealer selling you your next hit of crack or heroin profits from your continued addiction, so Big Food acts as your opiate dealer in the wheat exorphin world of addiction. And, just as the drug dealer knows you will be back, else you will suffer withdrawal, sweating, hallucinating, finally begging for your next hit, so Big Food knows you will be back within hours as you begin the exorphin withdrawal process—tremulous, cranky, and foggy . . . until you get your next hit of a bite of pretzel or bread.

I actually see a pretty strong dietary consensus forming within this thread… I think the ideas actually hang together quite well given that the topic is weight loss;

1)  Glycemic view of diet;  reduce sugars, grains, starches, and processed foods

      a)  concentrated high fructose corn syrup (not fruit itself) as a special case carbo to be avoided

      b)  modern, high yield wheat as a special case carbo to be avoided

What's left on the other side of this avoidance template is basically a more ketogenic, Paleo-like diet.

  

 

 

   

   

     

Viewing 10 posts - 21 through 30 (of 79 total)

Login or Register to post comments