Doctor approved diet plan...opinions?

Buddy's Girl said:

Went to the doctor the other day with a diet plan that (hopefully) can be followed.

He stated that it was okay, but this is also the man who scared me half to death with ms.

Diet: (I am currently 280)
600 cal for 3 days
800 cal for 4 days
1000 cal for 7 days
1200 cal for 3 days
1400 cal for 4 days
1600 cal for 7 days
1800 cal for 3 days
2000 cal for 4 days
1800 cal for 2 days
1600 cal for 2 days
1400 cal for 2 days
1200 cal for 2 days
1000 cal for 2 days
800 cal for 2 days

repeat until 240 - 1st cycle has < or = 5 carbs per meal, 2nd cycle has between 5-10 carbs, 3rd cycle has between 10-15 carbs, 4th cycle has between 15-20 carbs and 4th cycle has between 20-25 carbs

Then from 240-220 max calorie is 1800
from 220-180 max calorie is 1600
180-135 (goal) max calories 1400

fat is always less than 15% of calorie count

well..opinions (beside the fact that I must now be an expert with Mastercook 🙂

--
Ellyn M.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Holy Moly that sounds complicated!!! How do YOU feel about it?
lissa

Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an average of 1306
cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low calorie
days would be hard to stick to.

Buddy's Girl wrote:
| Went to the doctor the other day with a diet plan that (hopefully)
| can be followed.
|
| He stated that it was okay, but this is also the man who scared me
| half to death with ms.
|
| Diet: (I am currently 280)
| 600 cal for 3 days
| 800 cal for 4 days
| 1000 cal for 7 days
| 1200 cal for 3 days
| 1400 cal for 4 days
| 1600 cal for 7 days
| 1800 cal for 3 days
| 2000 cal for 4 days
| 1800 cal for 2 days
| 1600 cal for 2 days
| 1400 cal for 2 days
| 1200 cal for 2 days
| 1000 cal for 2 days
| 800 cal for 2 days
|
| repeat until 240 - 1st cycle has < or = 5 carbs per meal, 2nd cycle
| has between 5-10 carbs, 3rd cycle has between 10-15 carbs, 4th cycle
| has between 15-20 carbs and 4th cycle has between 20-25 carbs
|
| Then from 240-220 max calorie is 1800
| from 220-180 max calorie is 1600
| 180-135 (goal) max calories 1400
|
| fat is always less than 15% of calorie count
|
| well..opinions (beside the fact that I must now be an expert with
| Mastercook 🙂

"FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an average
of 1306

Quoted message said:

cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low calorie
days would be hard to stick to.

No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

"Pat" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
average of 1306

Quoted message said:

cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
calorie
days would be hard to stick to.

No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

Indeed, the biggest problem with the plan is that it exceeds the human
capabilities of most people.

"Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Indeed, the biggest problem with the plan is that it exceeds the human
capabilities of most people.

Take away the calories, limit the carbs, take away most of the fat - I'd
STARVE! Give me my fat and I eat less than half as much...take it away and
I feel like I can't get enough food

--
His,
Shrinkin' Sherry
lowcarb.owly.net

Pat wrote:
:: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
:: average of 1306
::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
::: calorie days would be hard to stick to.
::
:: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper calories
down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it will be harder to
follow as outlined.

Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.

Roger Zoul said:

Pat wrote:

:: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
:: average of 1306
::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
::: calorie days would be hard to stick to.
::
:: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper calories
down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it will be harder to
follow as outlined.

Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.

I don't understand what the concept of varying the calories is
supposed to accomplish. With a limit of 15% of calories from fat, as
well as the limitation on carbs you're going to be eating mostly
protein. The fat works out to 15 to 35 grams a day, which sure isn't
much. I would think you could wind up hungry and unable to stay on
it. And I wonder what foods you can eat that will meet those tight
restrictions.

[email hidden] wrote:
:: On May 15, 4:15 pm, "Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::: Pat wrote:
:::
::::: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to
::::: an average of 1306
:::::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very
:::::: low calorie days would be hard to stick to.
:::::
::::: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a
::::: day.
:::
::: I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper
::: calories down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it
::: will be harder to follow as outlined.
:::
::: Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.
::
::
:: I don't understand what the concept of varying the calories is
:: supposed to accomplish.

I think it's merely a way to get the person to eat less on some schedule,
with them having full knowledge that it will only last a fixed period of
time before calories (food) can be increased.

I think it's a rather "beat it hard with a hammer" approach that probably
appeals to some.

:: With a limit of 15% of calories from fat, as
:: well as the limitation on carbs you're going to be eating mostly
:: protein. The fat works out to 15 to 35 grams a day, which sure
:: isn't much. I would think you could wind up hungry and unable to
:: stay on it. And I wonder what foods you can eat that will meet
:: those tight restrictions.

I think the hunger and the desire to eat will make it hard. But if you can
managed to eat mostly protein you can get yourself used to eating way less
food. I would think very simple diet and limited foods would work best
(chicken breast would be one say to get high protein).

Still, I think tapering down to 1300 kcals/day would be just as good.

I think it sounds way too complicated. I also don't frankly see what
you're going to eat if you're going to do low-carb AND try to do low-
fat. All that leaves is protein... and almost all protein foods
contain fat.

If you want a prescribed plan, I would suggest doing Protein Power
(PP). TWO doctors wrote it, so it's twice as good as yours! 😉

PP just counts carbs, not calories. And that is probably fine for the
first 80-120 lbs or so. Maybe later you'll need to count calories
too; a lot of people do need to towards the end. But at the
beginning, you'll probably lose pretty quickly without counting
calories at all.

The other half of the equation is not going too LOW on calories. The
rule of thumb around here for a long time is that calories should be
10-12 times your current weight to prevent metabolic slowdown. A lot
of times people have a hard time getting enough calories and resort to
using a lot of fat to get there: adding mayo and butter to everything,
etc.

As your weight goes down, the number of calories you need decreases
and you can cut out some of the excess fat. So your calories should
decrease gradually as you lose weight.

Given that your goal, maintenance would be at around 1400 - so that's
the lowest I think you should go ever.

But at the start - just cutting the carbs will probably get you most
of the way there. Towards the end you'll probably stall, not see any
loss for a month, and then it's time to start counting calories with
an eye to keeping them low enough.

The reason for the variation in days is that so the body does not get used
to a certain number of calories. I can eat up to 2300 calories a day and
(theoretically) maintain my weight.

I have tried both the T-Factor diet (low/no fat and after 2 weeks I had not
lost any weight but was feeling sick to my stomach and actually felt like so
bad after I cheated and had a BLT I felt I had food poisoning - room
spinning, vomiting, headache - doctor later told me that the body is made to
work with fat - cell walls, healthy hair & nails, etc...then I tried Atkins,
lost a little weight, but also lost some hair and had no energy - actually
passed out after playing a game of racquet ball because I did not wish to
cheat and eat some healthy carbs before hand)...I have a slight case of MS -
what my doctor calls it because while he believes I have had it for several
years It has never really hampered my lifestyle except in small ways and has
not progressed - but I MUST get this weight off.

I can eat basically any food that I want although while watching my fat
rib-eye steaks are not allowed and watching the carbs banana nut bread with
chocolate chips is not allowed. Lowcarb alternatives are substituted
whenever possibly, as long as they are not over processed and full of those
"lovely" preservatives. Lettuce wraps in place of tortillas if no low carb
available. Flaxseed and whey protein have become friends. Used to use
nutrisweet all the time, but doctor felt it was ascerbating my symptoms and
have used splenda for awhile, although I am thinking of changing over to
stevia due to all the chlorine.

You can do lovely things with sausage made with chicken breasts - have a
great recipe - and will use in place of several foods - thinkly pressed with
an egg white for a binder, the sausage makes a great "wrap" for morning egg
(1 egg, 1 egg white, lowfat cheese, salsa and bell pepper omelet)...will
experiment more.

-Maybe I have posted in the wrong group.-

Oh well...thanks for the opinions.

--
Ellyn M.
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Roger Zoul said:

Pat wrote:

:: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
:: average of 1306
::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
::: calorie days would be hard to stick to.
::
:: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper calories
down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it will be harder to
follow as outlined.

Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.

I don't understand what the concept of varying the calories is
supposed to accomplish. With a limit of 15% of calories from fat, as
well as the limitation on carbs you're going to be eating mostly
protein. The fat works out to 15 to 35 grams a day, which sure isn't
much. I would think you could wind up hungry and unable to stay on
it. And I wonder what foods you can eat that will meet those tight
restrictions.

of a few more things...

1. once weight is off maintenance calorie count is about 1800 cals a day
with 30 minutes of exercise daily

2. except in extreme circumstances the body can withstand a diet of
extremely low calories for several days - hence the 3 600 calorie days are
find. calorie rotation does not affect the body the same way that yo-yo
dieting does. with yo-yo dieting the body loses weight and then gains it
back with (mostly) additional weight the body did not already have. so
first your system adjusts to a lower weight than you "flood" your system
with fats and carbs and gain back the weight+ - so your system and joints
have to deal with the additional weight...then you diet again...etc....

In the past I would have agreed with anyone out there that stated that
calorie rotation was a crock of beans...but several friends tried a modified
version of this plan and not only did they lose weight in a reasonable short
period of time, but their body's suffered no harmful effects while on or
after this regimen...bp went down, triglycerides went down, cholesterol (?)
went both up-good kind and down-bad kind..so I am extremely hopeful.

3. I would think it would be actually harder to start high and go low with
the calorie count - at least psychologically speaking - rather than knowing
that you only have to eat a small calorie count for a few days and than
increase the amount, you start off knowing that in a few days you won't be
able to eat as much as you just did.

am I making any sense?...oh well it's early in the morning and the green tea
with peach and almond has not kicked in

all I can say is that as a lurker for sometime, I have enjoyed both the
tidbits of knowledge and the recipes I have gotten from this group

a few thoughts...

I can say with all certainty that DaVinci is a wonderful savior - this from
a person who was drinking about a 2 liter of pepsi a day (no comments
please, I'm aware that this is if not mostly than at least half of the
reason why I am overweight).

eggs are the wonderfood (if not the cholesterol joy)

and whoever decided to combine eggs, cream cheese - lowfat, and sugar
substitute is a genius -

but I miss my ritz crackers with peanut butter and apple and french toast
made from challah bread...oh well...If I can finally lose the weight I won't
really die without them

--
Ellyn M.
"Buddy's Girl" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

The reason for the variation in days is that so the body does not get used
to a certain number of calories. I can eat up to 2300 calories a day and
(theoretically) maintain my weight.

I have tried both the T-Factor diet (low/no fat and after 2 weeks I had
not lost any weight but was feeling sick to my stomach and actually felt
like so bad after I cheated and had a BLT I felt I had food poisoning -
room spinning, vomiting, headache - doctor later told me that the body is
made to work with fat - cell walls, healthy hair & nails, etc...then I
tried Atkins, lost a little weight, but also lost some hair and had no
energy - actually passed out after playing a game of racquet ball because
I did not wish to cheat and eat some healthy carbs before hand)...I have a
slight case of MS - what my doctor calls it because while he believes I
have had it for several years It has never really hampered my lifestyle
except in small ways and has not progressed - but I MUST get this weight
off.

I can eat basically any food that I want although while watching my fat
rib-eye steaks are not allowed and watching the carbs banana nut bread
with chocolate chips is not allowed. Lowcarb alternatives are substituted
whenever possibly, as long as they are not over processed and full of
those "lovely" preservatives. Lettuce wraps in place of tortillas if no
low carb available. Flaxseed and whey protein have become friends. Used
to use nutrisweet all the time, but doctor felt it was ascerbating my
symptoms and have used splenda for awhile, although I am thinking of
changing over to stevia due to all the chlorine.

You can do lovely things with sausage made with chicken breasts - have a
great recipe - and will use in place of several foods - thinkly pressed
with an egg white for a binder, the sausage makes a great "wrap" for
morning egg (1 egg, 1 egg white, lowfat cheese, salsa and bell pepper
omelet)...will experiment more.

-Maybe I have posted in the wrong group.-

Oh well...thanks for the opinions.

--
Ellyn M.
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Roger Zoul said:

Pat wrote:

:: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
:: average of 1306
::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
::: calorie days would be hard to stick to.
::
:: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper calories
down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it will be harder
to
follow as outlined.

Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.

I don't understand what the concept of varying the calories is
supposed to accomplish. With a limit of 15% of calories from fat, as
well as the limitation on carbs you're going to be eating mostly
protein. The fat works out to 15 to 35 grams a day, which sure isn't
much. I would think you could wind up hungry and unable to stay on
it. And I wonder what foods you can eat that will meet those tight
restrictions.

Buddy's Girl wrote:
:: of a few more things...
::
:: 1. once weight is off maintenance calorie count is about 1800 cals
:: a day with 30 minutes of exercise daily
::
:: 2. except in extreme circumstances the body can withstand a diet of
:: extremely low calories for several days - hence the 3 600 calorie
:: days are find. calorie rotation does not affect the body the same
:: way that yo-yo dieting does. with yo-yo dieting the body loses
:: weight and then gains it back with (mostly) additional weight the
:: body did not already have. so first your system adjusts to a lower
:: weight than you "flood" your system with fats and carbs and gain
:: back the weight+ - so your system and joints have to deal with the
:: additional weight...then you diet again...etc....

I agree that they body can withstand a few days of extremely low calories.
It can withstand a few days of extremely high calories too. One can even
balance the two.

Most of the other stuff about yo-yo vs calorie rotation is just a notion.
Keep that in mind. Most any method that gets one to eat less will lead to
weight loss.

::
:: In the past I would have agreed with anyone out there that stated
:: that calorie rotation was a crock of beans...but several friends
:: tried a modified version of this plan and not only did they lose
:: weight in a reasonable short period of time, but their body's
:: suffered no harmful effects while on or after this regimen...bp went
:: down, triglycerides went down, cholesterol (?) went both up-good
:: kind and down-bad kind..so I am extremely hopeful.
::

People have used about a zillion different methods to lose weight..most of
them work if they somehow involve eating less food...the question is,
though, what helps them keep it off.

:: 3. I would think it would be actually harder to start high and go
:: low with the calorie count - at least psychologically speaking -
:: rather than knowing that you only have to eat a small calorie count
:: for a few days and than increase the amount, you start off knowing
:: that in a few days you won't be able to eat as much as you just did.
::

I've done this personally both ways. Going "cold turkey" to 600 kcals from
who knows what is hard. If you make it, great. Doing two days is even
harder. OTOH, taper down is easier because the body gets used to reduced
calories after a while. Eventually, you'll start to get hungry either way,
however. Tapering to an average calorie level while doing exercise leads to
weight loss no matter what as long as you're using more than you take in.
Even though your body get used to it, it still can't deny the laws of
physics (for most people, anyway).

Buddy's Girl said:

The reason for the variation in days is that so the body does not get
used
to a certain number of calories. I can eat up to 2300 calories a day and
(theoretically) maintain my weight.

I have tried both the T-Factor diet (low/no fat and after 2 weeks I had
not
lost any weight but was feeling sick to my stomach and actually felt
like so
bad after I cheated and had a BLT I felt I had food poisoning - room
spinning, vomiting, headache - doctor later told me that the body is
made to
work with fat - cell walls, healthy hair & nails, etc...then I tried
Atkins,
lost a little weight, but also lost some hair and had no energy -
actually
passed out after playing a game of racquet ball because I did not wish to
cheat and eat some healthy carbs before hand)...I have a slight case of
MS -
what my doctor calls it because while he believes I have had it for
several
years It has never really hampered my lifestyle except in small ways and
has
not progressed - but I MUST get this weight off.

I wouldn't worry too much about eating carbs before your workout. I bike
three days a week and lift weights twice a week and take in carbs before
and after workouts. I still eat well less than 100 grams of carbs a day,
with no ill effects.

--
Bob in CT

If you're terrified of the "chlorine" in Splenda you should also quit eating
salt which is sodium chloride. Once the chlorine atoms are bonded into the
Splenda atoms they are no more harmful than they are in salt.

Buddy's Girl wrote:
| The reason for the variation in days is that so the body does not get
| used to a certain number of calories. I can eat up to 2300 calories a
| day and (theoretically) maintain my weight.
|
| I have tried both the T-Factor diet (low/no fat and after 2 weeks I
| had not lost any weight but was feeling sick to my stomach and
| actually felt like so bad after I cheated and had a BLT I felt I had
| food poisoning - room spinning, vomiting, headache - doctor later
| told me that the body is made to work with fat - cell walls, healthy
| hair & nails, etc...then I tried Atkins, lost a little weight, but
| also lost some hair and had no energy - actually passed out after
| playing a game of racquet ball because I did not wish to cheat and
| eat some healthy carbs before hand)...I have a slight case of MS -
| what my doctor calls it because while he believes I have had it for
| several years It has never really hampered my lifestyle except in
| small ways and has not progressed - but I MUST get this weight off.
|
| I can eat basically any food that I want although while watching my
| fat rib-eye steaks are not allowed and watching the carbs banana nut
| bread with chocolate chips is not allowed. Lowcarb alternatives are
| substituted whenever possibly, as long as they are not over processed
| and full of those "lovely" preservatives. Lettuce wraps in place of
| tortillas if no low carb available. Flaxseed and whey protein have
| become friends. Used to use nutrisweet all the time, but doctor felt
| it was ascerbating my symptoms and have used splenda for awhile,
| although I am thinking of changing over to stevia due to all the
| chlorine.
|
| You can do lovely things with sausage made with chicken breasts -
| have a great recipe - and will use in place of several foods -
| thinkly pressed with an egg white for a binder, the sausage makes a
| great "wrap" for morning egg (1 egg, 1 egg white, lowfat cheese,
| salsa and bell pepper omelet)...will experiment more.
|
| -Maybe I have posted in the wrong group.-
|
| Oh well...thanks for the opinions.
|

FOB said:

If you're terrified of the "chlorine" in Splenda you should also
quit eating salt which is sodium chloride. Once the chlorine atoms
are bonded into the Splenda atoms they are no more harmful than they
are in salt.

I've always gotten a kick out of the people who avoid salt because
they think sodium is harmful. And chlorine isn't? Do schools even
try to teach chemistry anymore?

--
Aaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz

FOB said:

If you're terrified of the "chlorine" in Splenda you should also quit eating
salt which is sodium chloride. Once the chlorine atoms are bonded into the
Splenda atoms they are no more harmful than they are in salt.

Well, it *is* different, salt being an ionic bond rather than a
covalent bond like in sucralose.

That being said, I haven't seen any evidence that sucralose is
dangerous.

Aaron Baugher said:

FOB said:

If you're terrified of the "chlorine" in Splenda you should also
quit eating salt which is sodium chloride. Once the chlorine atoms
are bonded into the Splenda atoms they are no more harmful than they
are in salt.

I've always gotten a kick out of the people who avoid salt because
they think sodium is harmful. And chlorine isn't? Do schools even
try to teach chemistry anymore?

--
Aaron -- 285/235/200 -- aaron.baugher.biz

Apparently it's the sodium ions when salt is dissolved in solution
that is supposed to contribute to increased blood pressure. I think
that's why the salt substitutes use potassium instead. Which is kind
of strange, because sodium and potassium have many similar
properties. But I think that's the basis on which people are avoiding
salt because of sodium. So, there is some medical basis for it.

On the other hand, I've always believed that restriciting salt intake
was only necessary to treat a problem that already exists, like high
BP. I haven't seen anything that says it's an accumulated effect
that will cause high BP and that you then have a problem for life. I
always thought that if your BP is OK, then you don't have to do
anything. A gf of mine who's a nurse used to tell me I was putting
too much salt on food and was gonna kill myself, despite that my BP is
normal.

And a couple weeks ago, ran across a pharmacy advice column in the
paper where it was stated that the effect of reducing salt on BP is
questionable. It seems that a salt restricted diet only reduces BP on
average about 3 points. The key is that some people get no benefit
and others obviously more than 3 pts. So, it was suggested that you
could try salt restriction and see if it works for you. If it doesn't
there isn't much point in trying to severly limit salt to try to lower
BP.

Buddy's Girl said:

Went to the doctor the other day with a diet plan that (hopefully) can be followed.

He stated that it was okay, but this is also the man who scared me half to death with ms.

Diet: (I am currently 280)
600 cal for 3 days
800 cal for 4 days
1000 cal for 7 days
1200 cal for 3 days
1400 cal for 4 days
1600 cal for 7 days
1800 cal for 3 days
2000 cal for 4 days
1800 cal for 2 days
1600 cal for 2 days
1400 cal for 2 days
1200 cal for 2 days
1000 cal for 2 days
800 cal for 2 days

repeat until 240 - 1st cycle has < or = 5 carbs per meal, 2nd cycle has between 5-10 carbs, 3rd cycle has between 10-15 carbs, 4th cycle has between 15-20 carbs and 4th cycle has between 20-25 carbs

Then from 240-220 max calorie is 1800
from 220-180 max calorie is 1600
180-135 (goal) max calories 1400

fat is always less than 15% of calorie count

well..opinions (beside the fact that I must now be an expert with Mastercook 🙂

--
Ellyn M.

Here is a simpler aproach. Ignore calories, they don't work anyways.

For the first two weeks keep the carbs to 20 g or less per day. The
carb cravings should go away. For the next several weeks, keep the
carbs to less than 50 or so grams per day. Then maintain ir by keeping
the carbs to less than 100 per day.

For more detailed information read any of Dr Atkins books or any other
low carb diet. They actually work.

On May 15, 5:43 pm, "[email hidden]" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Roger Zoul said:

Pat wrote:

Quoted message said:

:: "FOB" > Any calorie restriction plan will work, this works out to an
:: average of 1306
::: cal/day which would work just as well. I would think the very low
::: calorie days would be hard to stick to.
::
:: No kidding! I would be chewing the chair legs on 600 calories a day.

Quoted message said:

I also think, as a practical matter, that it is easier to taper calories
down rather than start low and taper up. So, I think it will be harder to
follow as outlined.

Quoted message said:

Much easier just to target 1300 kcals/day.

I don't understand what the concept of varying the calories is
supposed to accomplish. With a limit of 15% of calories from fat, as
well as the limitation on carbs you're going to be eating mostly
protein. The fat works out to 15 to 35 grams a day, which sure isn't
much. I would think you could wind up hungry and unable to stay on
it. And I wonder what foods you can eat that will meet those tight
restrictions.

That is because they found that low calorie diets don't work past the
first few pounds. And Very low calories fail that way too, as does
very very low calorie diets. So to try to nudge it to work they vary
the amount of restriction. Unfortunately it stil does not work.

Low carb rules.