Eric Blackway: Weight-Loss Program

Day 2 with very little loss: 270.0, 40.0% fat, 45.0% water. I am quite
relieved.

Now let's take a look at what happened today.

em said:

Hi Eric,

I hear a lot of self pity in your post.

Well, I don't really feel that way, but thank you for your concern.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If I backslide even once, I'll probably
stop too.

[censored]. If you're going to get through this, you have to accept the fact
that being perfect is impossible. Failure isn't falling down, its staying
down. Big diff!

I completely agree with you. Let's wait till I backslide and we'll see
what happens then.

On Nov 14, 9:29 am, Hollywood <[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Now that was classy, and I appreciate it very much.

Doug Freyburger said:

Hollywood said:

Eric said:

Hollywood <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Uhm, my edition of the book (same one you have) suggests that
> during the first two weeks, you must consume 2+1 serves of vegetable
> matter daily. So, you're not according to Atkins. Like it makes a
> difference. DANDR isn't the Bible, and even that's less than
> infalible.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Uhm, (no...I'm not going to indulge in your brand of sarcasm tonight,
Hollywood. Maybe another time.)
Atkins uses the Induction diet to get into the Fat Fast. This is done
to avoid the hunger pangs of fasting.

Quoted message said:

My reading (out of date, I'm a protein power life plan person) is that
fat
fast is what you do when induction and ongoing weight loss don't work
for you. I'd submit that you haven't actually gone through the
Induction,
much less an attempt at OWL, so with Robert Atkins as your
cardiologist/weight loss doctor, you wouldn't be where you are. I will
submit page 271 in the 2002 10th printing paperback (I guess I don't
have the same one as you afterall, though it's a 1992 copyright as
well),
under the heading "None of the Above?" That's where the fat fast is
is discussed. After we've discussed extreme metabolic resistance,
a highly disrupted insulin metabolism, prescription drugs, hormone
therapy, anti-depressants of the SSRI category, NSAIDS, Beta blockers,
diurectics, hundreds of other drugs (unnamed at press), thyroid
hormones
and candida as possible explanations for the weight not coming off.
After
all of that, THEN you do the fat fast.

Right. What Eric is doing does include a tiny part of material
from the Atkins books but it isn't Atkins. I strongly object to
calling wierd made up plans "Atkins". Call it the "Eric Blackway:
Weight-Loss Program" as in the subject line and stop calling it
Atkins and that objection goes away.

People making up extreme diets like all bacon double cheese
burgers with no bun and then incorrectly calling it Atkins is a
major source of bad press. Don't call what you're doing Atkins
unless you're following the directions, and you give no hint you
have even considered the long list of requirements for the Fat
Fast. BTW, folks use the Fat Fast to bust stalls and though
that's technically an abuse it works just fine - You haven't been
on enough days to consider stalls.

Quoted message said:

And that gets back to the core issue. Your goal is to lose very large
very
quickly. That's really, well, what everyone wants. It tends not to
happen
for very many. And those who do lose very fast have to maintain or
progressively cut back further on their diets to maintain their
losses.
There's no return to thrice weekly fast food gorging. So, this
mentality of
"I lose fast or I don't lose" is, well, not constructive for the long
term. I'm
sorry, Eric. Someone had to tell you. Without dancing.

Several have repeated it. My version was all-or-nothing tends to
result in nothing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As far as DANDR goes, I am not saying that _New Diet Revolution_ is
the Bible. I have dial-up access, limited time to spare for on-line
research, and I know the book pretty well. A no point have I claimed
that this book is the Bible, but you've got to start from somewhere,
don't you?

Yet you're citing the book while ignoring the requirements for the
Fat Fast. That means you came in with a preconceived notion of
what you want to do and you're using the book as justification.
That's fine if you don't call what you're doing Atkins, but it is
certainly not following the directions for what Atkins actually says
to do.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've never tried what I'm trying now.

That's fine. Has it occured to you that you aren't the first and
that the regulars on ASDLC are reporting to you the results of
the bunch of people who have tried the Fat Fast or variations
before you started? Your body, your science experiment
and all that but don't pretend that the regulars are writing from
your lack of on-topic experience. If you really believe you will
do what others have done before you and you will get different
results, then go ahead and believe it. You discussed that in
another post. But don't also dismiss the fact that regulars are
basing their repsonses on prior experience.

Quoted message said:

What I meant was the "lose fast or not at all" mentality. So, you
haven't done the Cheese-Laxative-Kool-aid diet before. Perhaps
you've done the master cleanse.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Your diet is wacky because:
> 2- you eat half a pound of cheese as your main food

The Fat Fast as described in the book suggests cream cheese.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> 3- Kool Aid seems integral to the variety aspect.

And completely switching away from it is extreme. Serving
sizes tend to be selected to just barely qualify to round down
to zero so checking the serving size and calling each serving
0.4 or 0.5 grams is the way to go. Then decide if you want
to continue using the kool-aid, knowing that lower carb isn't
better for loss rates (consider the original study had a group
eating 1000 calories of 90% protein who didn't lose as well
and they were just as low in carbs as the faster losing 90%
fat group, thus lower carb isn't all there is too it).

Quoted message said:

As I've established, by starting with the fat fast, you're essentially
cutting to the end of the plan, without working the steps to see if
that's warranted.

And that's why I object to calling it Atkins. And don't imagine
that Eric is the first to come to ASDLC trying something like this.

Quoted message said:

Behavior Mod: And the Cheese-Laxative-Kool-aid modification serves
how in the big picture of your life?

This was discussed in another post. Starting extremist and
then moving towards less extreme, the real Atkins plan as it
actually appears in the book with 14 days of Induction, moving
on to OWL and so on thorugh the 4 phases starts less extreme
and moves towards much less extreme. Does anyone really
imgine that Dr A failed to try extremist approaches? His plan as
it is in the book is what it is because it works better longer for
more than more extreme approaches.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Even if you did lose 90 lbs of fat in 90 days eating 1000 calories of
> cheese and running 3 miles a day, you are not going to continue
> to eat cheese and run 3 miles a day for any extended period of time,

Rate of ketosis changes after about two weeks. It's extremely
predictable. Folks see dark sticks early, then light beige sticks
in week 3 and think something is wrong. Nope, that's what happens
to almost everyone. Roughly two weeks in the body adjusts and
around the time the water runs out the level of ketosis starts to
closely match the metabolic burn rate. And loss rates become
much harder to sustain.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I know that the losing fat versus muscle issue is difficult to digest.
But pull away from your anger and look at the research.The ketogenic
diet Benoit used made his dieters lose 14 pounds of fat, out of 14.5
pounds total (page 70).

While the mechanism behind lean sparing for high fat low carb is
not well known, the fact of it is well known to the ASDLC regulars.

Quoted message said:

First: when you cite Benoit like gospel, you're citing a
study with 7 subjects. Seven. But forget Benoit. Let's use logic.
Calorie math is junk. But still, you're holding 3500-4000 kcal per
lb of fat. You're looking to dump 90 lbs of fat, so, 315,000 kcals
of deficit/expenditure, at the bottom end. We figure you were
eating 3000 kcals per day when you weren't dieting, and now
you're at 1000. So, 2K/day. 3 miles isn't 1500 kcals.http://www.nutristrategy.com/activitylist3.htm
If you're cranking 10 minute miles, an hour gets you maybe
1200. And if you're cranking 10 minute miles, and running
3 miles, you're not doing an hour. So, you're short on your
pound a day. Never mind the metabolism ramp down or
the loss of thermic effect. I'm sorry, a seven person study
doesn't get you there.

Quoted message said:

Last thing on Benoit vs. you. 10 days. That's what Benoit's
7 subjects (or maybe 3-4 subjects) did. Not a long term
adjustment. So, you can make projections on what would
have happened on day 11 or 15 or 20, but the further out
you get, well, your ability to predict goes down. Remember,
your metabolism makes adjustments. Conserves resources.
Adapts to it's environment.

It's one of many reasons that OWL starts day 15.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Perhaps it is impossible, on the diet I am working on, to duplicate
the fat-loss success of that diet, although everything in Atkins is
essentially to the theory that a ketogenic diet restricted in
carbohydrates is what causes BDK and fat stores to dissolve, not
necessarily a high fat diet.

The original fat fast diet had the 90% protein folks lose less
than the 90% fat folks, and the 90% protein folks lost more
lean. So yes the high fat aspect is a part of the deal. It's the
reason folks who don't get into ketosis at 20 grams per day
get put on the Fat Fast not on the Protein Fast.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's worth testing, isn't it? And since I have only one test
subject...

Quoted message said:

You're only 6 behind Benoit. But it's your science experiment.

And there's the history of folks in the past who tried the same.
Eric gets to repeat there errors by ignoring that the ASDLC
regulars use their lessons, or he gets to learn from thier
experiences. So far, no learning from their experiences.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Well, thank you for your input.

Mark Filice said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Eric says...

Quoted message said:

Where do you people get your staunch certainties that I will never be
able to sustain this austere diet for long? That no one can, and that
it lies outside the realm of human endeavor, is the general sense of
what I've been reading.

Quoted message said:

Sometimes, when I'm not feeling too strong, I'm halfway to agreeing
with you, but in the past, occasionally on even more austere diets
than this one, I've lost plenty of weight. So every time one of you
tells me that no one can lose a pound a day for months at a time, no
way, no how, it's a compliment, even if I don't make it this time.

Because a lot of us have "been there, done that" on virtually every diet out
there.

In the mid 90s, I went to the gym every weekday morning for about 10 months. My
workouts were 30-40 mins of cardio, and then weights. I drank a protein shake
for breakfast, another for lunch, and ate a "sensible" dinner.

In those 10 months, I lost approximately 30 lbs. of fat and my BMI was about 19.
However, I injured my leg at the gym. I lost the motivation to start back after
it healed. I started eating [censored] again and gained back way more weight than the
amount I lost.

I've got 3 other examples where I lost significant (40+ lbs) amounts of weight
in my life on different diets. But I always gained it back.

It appears that you too have crash dieted in the past and then reverted back to
your previous lifestyle and gained it back. Now you are trying to do the same
crash diet thing again.

It doesn't work for the long haul. A diet is only successful if you can stay on
it and not regain the weight that was lost. Or in my case, to reverse a medical
condition that could shorten my life.

My motivation this time is totally different. My glucose level had been rising
over the years and in August the doctor started talking about Type 2 diabetes
and putting me on medication.

I did some reading and study and started LCing. I didn't do the Atkins induction
phase, I eat vegetables and salads and lots of meat and cheese. I've lost over
35 lbs in a little over 3 months. My glucose level has dropped to normal levels
and my doctor is no longer talking about diabetes for me.

Unlike you, I can't allow myself to say "if I don't make it this time." This is
something I have to do to give myself the best shot at living a full life.

With this LC diet I've lost weight. But more importantly, my glucose,
trygliceride level, my blood pressure have all dropped into the normal ranges.

I simply can't change the way I'm eating now. My life depends on it.

I wish you the best.

Mark

And thank you for your courteous and informative input.

And one last thank you to everyone: some of the stuff here has been
exceptionally important and I will pay close attention to it. This is
not lip service but a promise, and I appreciate the time, effort,and
courtesy that went into writing these posts.

Hi Eric,

Just like everyone else, when I started "dieting", I just wanted to lose the
weight right away and be done with it. Of course, that doesn't just happen,
not for anybody I know and certainly not for me. Anyway, though, I started
out all gung-ho and the weight started coming off, slowly but surely. Not
quickly, but at least I could see the progress.

After a while I had to accept that it was going to take me a long time to
lose the weight. I've backslid a few times, too. Hey, it happens, and I do
manage to get back on-track without causing any serious damage.

So, where I'm at now is that I'm trying to create a healthy lifestyle for
myself. Not a "diet plan and exercise chart", but a way of life. I have
certain foods that I eat every day, like veggies and meat; some food that I
eat a lot of days, like eggs, melons and berries; and some foods that I eat
just once or twice a week because otherwise they will screw me up, like
dairy products and nuts. (I tend to go overboard on those kinds of things,
so I really have to watch myself.)

I don't a lot of counting, though. I know which foods fit within my eating
plan and I mostly eyeball portion sizes (I do weigh things out sometimes). I
know that ten or twelve oz of melon is like twenty-plus carbs, so on days
when I eat melons I don't do dairy or nuts, and I may have something like a
couple cups leafy veggies like cole slaw or lettuce. Other days I'll have
things like green beans, snow peas, broccoli, carrots... I consider these
kinds of things "medium carb". I'm not too much into salad dressings and the
like, my diet is plain and simple.

I'm starting to ramble! Anyway, the point is that for me, and for pretty
much everyone I think, once you're past the denial/anger/bargaining/etc.,
you have to settle down with a long-term lifestyle plan that will allow you
to lose weight until you hit your goal, and then maintain your weight where
you want it to be rather so that you don't yo-yo.

That's my 1 1/2 cents, anyway.

Keep posting, guy. I think I speak for everyone when I say that we all look
forward to seeing you succeed.

Mike

em said:

Anyway, the point is that for me, and for pretty
much everyone I think, once you're past the denial/anger/bargaining/etc.,
you have to settle down with a long-term lifestyle plan that will allow you
to lose weight until you hit your goal, and then maintain your weight where
you want it to be rather so that you don't yo-yo.

Mike

Mike, I really appreciate the facts that you spend no time trying to
bandy words with me like a child, make your point clearly and with no
smug insinuations that I'm a simpleton, and, in general, when I read
your posts I get the sense that I'm reading the words of someone who's
comfortable in his own skin and with his own achievements in life.
It's a relief. Thanks for bringing me back to why I'm here in the
group.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I completely agree with you: this is all about putting together a long-
term lifestyle. This ridiculous, tasteless diet that I'm on, as I see
it, is the first stage of that. I want to take away my compulsive
binge-eating, and so I have to think about calories. I have terrible
eating habits, and so I have to establish new ones slowly. I enjoy
food in general far too much, and so I need to take a break from that.
And, of course, I've got to lose this weight without being made of
money.

If it were that simple, people, I'd hire a chef and a fitness coach,
quit my job, and I'd be peachy keen.

But under the circumstances detailed, I am determined to embark on a
course of rigorous behavioral modification. If I could feed myself
with an intravenous drip, I might even try that. One of the things
that I've learned in the things that I've managed to do is that when
it comes to making serious, permanent changes in your lifestyle, you
have to be willing to destroy old habits in yourself in order to begin
building new ones -- you have to create time to focus on the biggest
problem first and take things in step without allowing them to
overwhelm you.

And so now we get to WHY I think I need that instead of allowing the
carbohydrate-restriction = appetite-restriction equation to work
naturally, as it seems to do well in other people. This is really
difficult, but this is a real opportunity for me to strip it down now
and spit it out through my teeth.

This is wild...can you believe it took me 30 minutes to write the
previous sentence?

I think it's psychotropic medication. It may be true that a regular
Atkins induction diet and OWL plan could have worked for me before I
was stuffed full of pills and shot up to the moon, but I'm not sure
it's true now.

Whew!

Finally, I suspect carbohydrate-restriction does not equal fully-
successful appetite restriction in quite a number of people who don't
have my particular problem, that Atkins and anyone else who makes the
claim that it really is that simple is playing on our insecurity to
sell us a bucket of [censored] and get the bucket back.

Mike, thanks again.

Eric said:

On Nov 14, 9:29 am, Hollywood <[email hidden]> wrote:

<snip>

Now that was classy, and I appreciate it very much.

You're welcome.

As with probably everyone in this thread, I wish you success in
your attempt to lose weight permanently. I hope that your program
works well and is everything you need it to be. We've shared
concerns about your approach, but ultimately, you're gonna do
what you're gonna do and we all hope for the best.

We had some movement on the scale today:
268.6/Fat:38.0%/Water Mass 45.5%

FOB pointed out earlier in this thread that no scale exists that can
provide consistent fat percentage readings. Yet another bit of proof
for that.

There were two exceptional responses yesterday that I have to study
carefully. In case anyone's trying to contact me personally, well, I
haven't even opened any of the e-mail that goes to this address since
the day I set up the gmail account.

The worst of the process of entering ketosis is over, it seems. I've
also switched my feeding times, so-called because I wouldn't strip the
word "eat" of its inherent dignity and vitality. Even the expression
"eat me" involves less contempt than what I'm doing now.

This is how the schedule goes:

In the mornings I eat absolutely nothing and just drink coffee, which
is far less shocking in Europe than it is here, but the acids are
wearing on my stomach.

At 2:00 pm, I eat my cheese, today the most disgusting variety
available to me, an unbelievably inferior grade of mild cheddar sold
at my local supermarket for 1.69 per 8 oz. bar as the "value" brand.
The funny thing is that the other stuff sold as the store brand and
the standard brand are not much better, while the top-line non-deli/
non-specialty brand goes for three bucks for a 10 oz bar and is still
nothing to write home about.

On the other hand, if I go to Aldi, I get a slightly better 8 oz. bar
of cheese than the supermarket's standard brand and pay 1.79 for it.
I'm buying by the bar every day as a psychological trick to keep the
cupboard at home bare, so that getting more food will involve taking
the second walk of the day in the fall weather. I really, really
should go to my supermarket and buy crappy mild cheddar every day of
the week, but it's a 2.5 mile walk there-and-back-again and I haven't
the stomach to make the trek for cheese you couldn't bait rat-traps
with.

At 8:00 pm, I eat my four large-grade eggs, hard-boiled and liberally
seasoned with Lite Salt. I cannot stand hard-boiled eggs and so I can
buy a dozen of them every third trip. That is one food that I will
never binge on.

I used to do it backwards: cheese at 8 pm, protein powder/eggs at 2.
This works much better and helps cut down on the hunger.

Whenever I've done food-intake calory restriction in the past, the
pattern has always been exactly the same as regards sticking to
mealtimes. I cannot afford to cheat even one minute on them. If I do,
my diet is as good as over the second time I do it. I've kept records.

Even now, after I get done feeding on my cheese or my eggs, my mind
will spend a good ten minutes throwing up fantasies of eating as much
as I want. Everything else just goes away as the lower mind torments
the higher mind to ease that trembling, crawling NEED.

My head plays the same games on me that it used to do with cigarettes
when I was quitting. What's one cigarette? You can handle just ONE
cigarette. And really, lots of people just have a few cigarettes a
day, and health risks show that is isn't that bad at all, and you
don't have to worryaboutjustonesohaveonehaveoneHAVEONE!HAVEONE!....and
you shut the voice up and leave it to slaver on in the corners of your
mind. The cravings just have to win once, but you have to win every
time, and every minor victory is just a thimbleful more of shining
resolve, while every defeat is a barrel of black despair.

If I eat that bar of cheese at 1:59 pm, it's almost as bad
psychologically as eating it at 9:30 am, because even a miniscule
lapse like that turns it into an sadistic opportunity for the food
demon to torment me. As long as I have that psychological edge of one
minute, and I have the experience of having gained that edge day after
day behind me, I can keep the demon from hooking a claw inside my
chest and tearing at the heart of me.

That's why I threw out that bit about backsliding, Mike. In the end,
justifying my seemingly mad scheme to all of you is just an end to a
means, a weapon in this struggle against what I really do believe is a
demon that possesses me as real as any in history or speculation.

Negative energy has never really won anything for me in the end, but
right now, the challenge that I will post these numbers is going far
to helping make me what I have to become, what I've become to continue
in other struggles. I can't really explain it well, but it involves
become void of emotion or reason or any other purpose save fighting
on, not even because I think I will win, but as a matter of pure
reflex and habit.

So to date, it's six days and 14.4 pounds, but it would be much more
fair to say that the diet really began three days ago and I've lost
two pounds. Let's see if I can make it four days of dieting.

And that's another little trick. Whenever I look way down the road on
anything I'm trying to do or way back, I never take myself seriously.
I can be as full of [censored] as anyone, but tomorrow's numbers are much
more important to me right now than next year's. Which is why I really
don't want to even dream about maintenance diets until I'm much closer
to the end of this round with the food demon.

"Eric" <[email hidden]> say'd

Quoted message said:

One of the things
that I've learned in the things that I've managed to do is that when
it comes to making serious, permanent changes in your lifestyle, you
have to be willing to destroy old habits in yourself in order to begin
building new ones -- you have to create time to focus on the biggest
problem first and take things in step without allowing them to
overwhelm you.

Words of wisdom, for sure!

Everyone has to figure out what works for them. If your plan works, great. I
believe that it will. If not, for any reason, I'm sure you'll figure out why
and what to do about it.

Mike

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

Quoted message said:

We had some movement on the scale today:
268.6/Fat:38.0%/Water Mass 45.5%

The first number's the scale, where do you get the second two?

em said:

"Eric" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

We had some movement on the scale today:
268.6/Fat:38.0%/Water Mass 45.5%

The first number's the scale, where do you get the second two?

Oh, I have this computerized digital scale that I went out and paid
beaucoup bucks for, instead of investing in a quality manual product.
But over in Europe, I had what could be considered a really nice Braun
scale. It was what I call "a happy scale" because it consistently gave
me readings about twelve kilos below my actual weight. But it was all
I had, so I just used it for day-to-day purposes and then went down to
a pharmacy in another municipality for my bi-monthly readings.

This time, I figured that since I've never had an expensive digital
scale, I might as well see what they could do. So I walked down to Bed
and Bath and was confronted by an array from low-end to high-end. I
picked out something in the upper range, paid my money, and am taking
my chances.

I can't find the box, but it apparently shoots a mild shock through
one foot and by calculating how long the juice takes it get to the
other foot and how it changes as it goes through the body, it can tell
you what your body fat percentage and water percentages are. Since you
have to program your height and age, I immediately thought it had
something more to do with preprogrammed actuarial tables than pricey
electrodes and sensors, but I'm a suspicious [censored] in general.

But I bought it and brought it home, and it does seem to be reasonably
accurate weight-wise, so I'm using it. As far as the other numbers go,
I'll take them with a grain of Lite Salt.

Eric said:

We had some movement on the scale today:
268.6/Fat:38.0%/Water Mass 45.5%

Congrats, although at last read you were 38% fat and 45.5% water.
Of course, muscle contains a lot of water. As does everything else.
So, I dunno how useful the water number is if it's not just
free water like those tied to liver glycogen. I know people suggest
that LC is all water weight, but I think even they would be hard
pressed
to suggest that you have 122 lbs of loose water hanging around. As
to total composition, I think it's probably a good thing to have some
water in. I cannot imagine a circulatory system working without it.

Quoted message said:

FOB pointed out earlier in this thread that no scale exists that can
provide consistent fat percentage readings. Yet another bit of proof
for that.

You might look into a tape measure and some math. Not necessarily
better, but I think this is the opposite of the man with two clocks
not
knowing what time it is.

Quoted message said:

The worst of the process of entering ketosis is over, it seems. I've
also switched my feeding times, so-called because I wouldn't strip the
word "eat" of its inherent dignity and vitality. Even the expression
"eat me" involves less contempt than what I'm doing now.

Without any depth of comment here, the more I read, the more this
sounds like an eating disorder. I think Jim pointed you towards
emotional eating. It might be a start.

Quoted message said:

This is how the schedule goes:

<snip>

Nearly everything you ever read about weightloss stresses the
importance of breakfast. Or at least the correlation between
breakfast eating and success. Lots of explanations (metabolism
quickening, insulin response, daily satieity, etc etc etc), but
from the Eades (low carb) to Dean Ornish (no fat) to the NWCR
(generally low fat) to even Kimkins (low everything), breakfast and
water consumption seem to be major points of concurrance.

If I were you (obviously, I'm not), I'd move two of the eggs to the
morning, with the coffee.

A bigger question though: If you don't like eggs, why are you
eating them? You're getting what, 28g of protein from them?
You could replace with something you like more at 28g of
protein. Of course, eggs are brilliant for you in near about
every way (you might look into alternative prep methods), but
so is broccoli, and I'm not eating that any time soon.

Quoted message said:

Whenever I've done food-intake calory restriction in the past, the
pattern has always been exactly the same as regards sticking to
mealtimes. I cannot afford to cheat even one minute on them. If I do,
my diet is as good as over the second time I do it. I've kept records.

Not to harp, but this sounds like both an indictment of food intake
calorie restriction and an invitation to a food-based psych disorder.

Quoted message said:

Even now, after I get done feeding on my cheese or my eggs, my mind
will spend a good ten minutes throwing up fantasies of eating as much
as I want. Everything else just goes away as the lower mind torments
the higher mind to ease that trembling, crawling NEED.

A lot of folks believe that intense cravings and food fantasies point
to
some nutrient lack in the diet. I will say no more on that.

Quoted message said:

That's why I threw out that bit about backsliding, Mike. In the end,
justifying my seemingly mad scheme to all of you is just an end to a
means, a weapon in this struggle against what I really do believe is a
demon that possesses me as real as any in history or speculation.

You do what you gotta do.

Hollywood said:

Eric said:

We had some movement on the scale today:
268.6/Fat:38.0%/Water Mass 45.5%

Congrats, although at last read you were 38% fat and 45.5% water.
Of course, muscle contains a lot of water. As does everything else.

On the scale discussion elsewhere in the thread - The scales
that use electricity to estimate body fat percentage are
notorious for their lack of accuracy. But does that matter for
one person using one scale? As long as you average the data
across at least a week and ignore single day swings, I don't
think so. As long as it shows the trend in the weekly average,
it tells you what you need to know - the direction of the trend
and any week-long reversal in the trend.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The worst of the process of entering ketosis is over, it seems.

I've read claims by Dr Atkins that the harder you find Induction the
more you're likely to benefit from his plan. This should apply
equally to people no non-Atkins low carb plans like Eric. A hard
first couple of weeks should point to more health benefits and
better loss later on. Everything comes with a price, though.
More health benefits and better loss while on-plan also means
worst health loss and faster regain while off-plan. Though many
find low carbing easy to stay on, that never equals hard to fall
off. It's always trivial to fall off plan no matter what type of
plan;
the best any offer anyone is easy to stay on.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I've
also switched my feeding times, so-called because I wouldn't strip the
word "eat" of its inherent dignity and vitality. Even the expression
"eat me" involves less contempt than what I'm doing now.

Without any depth of comment here, the more I read, the more this
sounds like an eating disorder. I think Jim pointed you towards
emotional eating. It might be a start.

There's a chance the root cause is on the physical side, and
low carbing handles the insulin resistance and blood sugar
swings on the physical side. For those who follow the actual
directions of Atkins including the eliminate and challenge aspect,
they also discover food intolerances that trigger addictive
behavior patterns. So at very least, physical causes can be
removed from the table and that at least makes "fix your head"
less difficult.

But what do folks with eating disorders do? Extremist stuff.
Doing extremist stuff isn't sufficient to accuse someone of having
an eating disorder but it is one item on the list to be suspicious
of. I don't think Eric has an eating disorder. Nonetheless,
treating yourself as if you have one might not be all that bad -
One item in the list of actions is to resist extremist approaches.
As long as Eric does progress to less restrictive food over time
as he's mentioned then he'll be clearly following that and thus
not having an eating disorder.

Quoted message said:

Nearly everything you ever read about weightloss stresses the
importance of breakfast. Or at least the correlation between
breakfast eating and success.

And nearly all of that material has been about keeping it off
the way I read the reports.

Quoted message said:

Lots of explanations (metabolism
quickening, insulin response, daily satieity, etc etc etc), but
from the Eades (low carb) to Dean Ornish (no fat) to the NWCR
(generally low fat) to even Kimkins (low everything), breakfast and
water consumption seem to be major points of concurrance.

I think breakfast is a hunger prevention plan. Eat breakfast
and with the sdame total calories for the day you end up less
hungry during the day. Less hungry means less physical
drive to move off-plan. An ounce of prevention is worth a
pound of cure, and in some way this maps to an ounce of
breakfast makes a pound of binge less likely.

Quoted message said:

If I were you (obviously, I'm not), I'd move two of the eggs to the
morning, with the coffee.

Think of it as a step towards building a maintenance plan.
No time like the present to start building for maintenance.

Quoted message said:

A bigger question though: If you don't like eggs, why are you
eating them? You're getting what, 28g of protein from them?

Eggs get boring, but for an afternoon person boring in the
morning just doesn't matter. I eat about the same breakfast
every day and as an afternoon person I long ago decided I
didn't care if it ended up boring in the morning. For a
morning person, variety or personal tastes matter a lot more
in the morning.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Whenever I've done food-intake calory restriction in the past, the
pattern has always been exactly the same as regards sticking to
mealtimes. I cannot afford to cheat even one minute on them. If I do,
my diet is as good as over the second time I do it. I've kept records.

Not to harp, but this sounds like both an indictment of food intake
calorie restriction and an invitation to a food-based psych disorder.

Consider that moving steadily to a less restrictive diet on a
schedule of week to week is not cheating. It's the heart of the
process. And if you add in food X some week and it triggers a
binge, as long as you retreat to very low carb and avoid that
food type from then on as alesson learned, that's a victory not
a defeat. One less thing that can kick you off maintenance
several years down the line matters a lot more than a one week
setback during the loss phases. Very hard to wrap the emotions
around that view of it!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Even now, after I get done feeding on my cheese or my eggs, my mind
will spend a good ten minutes throwing up fantasies of eating as much
as I want. Everything else just goes away as the lower mind torments
the higher mind to ease that trembling, crawling NEED.

A lot of folks believe that intense cravings and food fantasies point
to some nutrient lack in the diet. I will say no more on that.

Or of psych issues. Extremely hard to tell which. But Eric isn't
eating food that puts him short on essential fatty acids or essential
amino acids. And once in ketosis carb cravings should go away
(not for everyone as Eric already pointed out, just for most). And
vitamin and mineral lacks shouldn't appear this early.

So it's more likely to be old habits struggling for their lives than
a nutrient lack at this point. The way out of that battle is the way
through not to appease the old habits to keep them alive longer.

Still, a good supplement program is a good idea. More than just a
good quality multi. It's possible that there's a pre-existing
vitamin or mineral deficiency if Eric hasn't been taking at least a
good multi before starting.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's why I threw out that bit about backsliding, Mike. In the end,
justifying my seemingly mad scheme to all of you is just an end to a
means, a weapon in this struggle against what I really do believe is a
demon that possesses me as real as any in history or speculation.

You do what you gotta do.

If it works under the category of "fix your head" then it works.

Mark Filice said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Eric says...

Quoted message said:

Where do you people get your staunch certainties that I will never be
able to sustain this austere diet for long? That no one can, and that
it lies outside the realm of human endeavor, is the general sense of
what I've been reading.

Quoted message said:

Sometimes, when I'm not feeling too strong, I'm halfway to agreeing
with you, but in the past, occasionally on even more austere diets
than this one, I've lost plenty of weight. So every time one of you
tells me that no one can lose a pound a day for months at a time, no
way, no how, it's a compliment, even if I don't make it this time.

Because a lot of us have "been there, done that" on virtually every diet out
there.

In the mid 90s, I went to the gym every weekday morning for about 10 months. My
workouts were 30-40 mins of cardio, and then weights. I drank a protein shake
for breakfast, another for lunch, and ate a "sensible" dinner.

In those 10 months, I lost approximately 30 lbs. of fat and my BMI was about 19.
However, I injured my leg at the gym. I lost the motivation to start back after
it healed. I started eating [censored] again and gained back way more weight than the
amount I lost.

I've got 3 other examples where I lost significant (40+ lbs) amounts of weight
in my life on different diets. But I always gained it back.

It appears that you too have crash dieted in the past and then reverted back to
your previous lifestyle and gained it back. Now you are trying to do the same
crash diet thing again.

It doesn't work for the long haul. A diet is only successful if you can stay on
it and not regain the weight that was lost. Or in my case, to reverse a medical
condition that could shorten my life.

Quoted message said:

My motivation this time is totally different. My glucose level had been rising
over the years and in August the doctor started talking about Type 2 diabetes
and putting me on medication.

I knew I simply had to say something about this a little more
important than a discussion on crash dieting.

Mark, I have understood for quite some time that I am going to end up
half-blind, crippled, raving in my bed at times, and dying many years
before my time if I do not make serious changes in my life. That's
exactly what happened to my father.

Quoted message said:

I did some reading and study and started LCing. I didn't do the Atkins induction
phase, I eat vegetables and salads and lots of meat and cheese. I've lost over
35 lbs in a little over 3 months. My glucose level has dropped to normal levels
and my doctor is no longer talking about diabetes for me.

Unlike you, I can't allow myself to say "if I don't make it this time." This is
something I have to do to give myself the best shot at living a full life.

Yes, you do. And the motivation you have is of a different stripe than
that for others. In twenty-five years under the creeping malignancy of
diabetes, my father could never get it all off. In many ways I still
blame him for it. My dad is the prime example I have of the power of
the mind to change a person. When I was younger, he was cruel, deeply
ungenerous, and the most pompous PhD you've ever met. The disease
ravaged his body, but his spirit soared. Near the end, he had become
the kindest, most gracious man in everyday thought and action you
could imagine.

Yet all through his personal transformation, as I watched him step
above the things that I cannot forget as a child, patiently prising
off self-destructive shackles of conventional thought and the immense
bigotry of a European who took decades to accept and then embrace the
radical American conception of egality, one thing continued to shame
him. Food. The pattern never wavered and the binges never changed. All
dignity aside, you could still find him at sixty sneaking something
out of the fridge, enduring the scolding of my mother in shameful
silence as she discovered half the next day's meal was already gone
and making excuses for his inability to hold himself back.

The food demon killed him. It gutted him and threw him aside, gloated
over his deathbed and danced as we lowered him in the family tomb. It
made a mockery of his achievements and a fool of his memory.

Mike, I'm well aware that this diet is not the end, but the beginning
of the long haul. I have to change everything, because if I don't, I
will end up with the grim motivation you do. This is my first step,
and the end of the trip is when I go, hopefully later rather than
sooner.

About my maintenance diet: although I don't want to think about it too
much right now, I will never eat highly-refined carbohydrates on a
sustained basis again, I will always control my general carbohydrate
intake, and my eating habits are never going to be the same after this
experience, one way or the other.

Quoted message said:

With this LC diet I've lost weight. But more importantly, my glucose,
trygliceride level, my blood pressure have all dropped into the normal ranges.

I simply can't change the way I'm eating now. My life depends on it.

Quoted message said:

I wish you the best.

Mark

And I wish you the best too. Good Lord, I wish you the best.

Dear regulars,

It's going to take me some time to respond to all of your comments,
and I will most definitely fall behind, since I'm just one guy sitting
here typing away. Doug, you're next on my list. The discussion may go
on in new directions and open up new vistas of precisely why there's
no way on God's green earth that what I'm doing could in any way be
linked to what anyone else should be doing, and I can understand that.
In no way do I believe that I am leading the way in diet research and
practice. So I'd plod behind you in my responses.

November 17,2007

Today the scale held steady.

267.4 / 37.5% Fat / 46.0% Water

"Eric" <[email hidden]>

Hi Eric,

Seems to me you're doing pretty well with on your plan in terms of meeting
your goals.

OT, but...

Quoted message said:

One final point:
I've been waking up at 12:00 these past few days because I'm rewriting
my posts all night.

What do you do for a living? One of those crazy stay up all night
programmers?

Mike

Eric said:

I've exceeded the average Benoit study weight-loss results in 6 days,
not ten, but I'm 6'2" and quite a bit fatter than any active
serviceman.

Good. Both in the results and the understanding

Quoted message said:

Hollywood, this post is LONG. Start reading it when you have time. For
others...it ain't worth much. Maybe not for Hollywood, either, but he
made some good points and he deserved a thoughtful response.

It's good that my wife sleeps late. Otherwise, I might never have
time.

Quoted message said:

--------------------------------------------------------------

<military story snipped>

Quoted message said:

------------------------------------------------

On the subject of why I feel my prescription drug use in the past may

So, you may be metabolically resistant. The point of doing induction,
challenge, expansion or fat fast correction is to know, rather than
assume. Either way.

Quoted message said:

------------------------------------------

So once again, you're right. I agree. I AM MOST DEFINITELY NOT USING
THE FAT FAST AS THE ATKINS PROGRAM DICTATES. And while my diet is only
minimally modified from what Atkins details as one of "his" diets,

Semantic disagreement here. Atkins describes the whole process
(induction, owl,
maintenance, and even the fat fast) as his diet. Your diet is a
modified form of
one phase of the Atkins diet, designed for the most resistant dieters
who have
already ruled everything else out. None of that is to say what you're
up to is
wrong, but rather to suggest that your representation of what you're
doing
(A LC Crash diet, your phrase, not mine) as something endorsed by
Robert
Atkins is stretching the truth.

Frankly, I don't hold Dr. A in such reverence that it matters to me,
but
it might be a disservice to others.

Quoted message said:

I AM NOT FOLLOWING THE ATKINS PROGRAM. I AM FOLLOWING A LOW-CARB DIET
UNDER MY OWN TERMS.

I guess everybody's clear now.

Quoted message said:

You are absolutely right, again, but you're simplifying the "core
issue." Part of the reason I want to lose weight quickly is because I
have never managed to lose weight in any other way, but I've proved to
myself in the past that I am one of that group that can effectively
lose weight quickly on a TEMPORARY basis. The will power necessary to
maintain a 3 month, 1000 calory diet is for me in many ways identical
to the will power necessary to maintain a 3 month, 2000 calory diet.

I dunno what to tell you. The temporary basis doesn't matter much if
you don't have a way to make it permanent. The up and down is probably
worse than just staying up.

But, it's your science experiment.

Quoted message said:

A tangible, measurable payoff day-by-day and week-by-week enables me
to fight the binge cravings, because on austerity dieting they comes
at you hard and fast, not sneaky-like when you're not looking (another
point for maintenance dieting). If you binge once on a low-carb diet
at about 2500 calories, you've set your diet back at least two weeks,
on a high-carb diet, about a week. I've tried it more times than I can
count, and it doesn't work for me. The binge tendency is a problem
because perversely, the diet is too easy to do to face the binge
tendency down.

Hrm. I don't buy the math as it doesn't match my experience, but
nothing says my experience is any more valid than yours, or more
importantly, and more relevant to your situation. It will be
interesting
to see how it all plays out. I hope you are part of the 5% who manage
to lose big weight and the 1 in 20 who manage to keep it off.

Quoted message said:

It takes will power, you might respond, and both my inability to lose
weight and keep it off, and all these other people's really represents
a lack of personal character, now that we've been shown THE WAY. Well
my lack of dieting success on a go-slow diet, and my inability to
stick at 180 or so, as I've gotten older and done things I'm proud of,
has lost its claim on my ego. Instead, there's been a growing
suspicion that while I'm at the far end of the bell curve, a whole lot
of people have been and are being hoodwinked by the Right Reverend
Atkins.

I don't buy the moral failure argument. Others do. You might, given
some
time, review "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes to get a
better picture of the research (and more up to date) than the 1992
edition of DANDR. Taubes doesn't have a diet to sell as it's more a
book
about the state of knowledge around healthy dieting and weight loss.
And the research suggests to him that Atkins was right on this.

Last thing. Was reading Dr. Mike Eades (of Protein Power) blog the
other day. He's apparently been getting crucified by Anthony Colpo
over the question of metabolic advantage and calorie counting, which
I feel is probably related to this question of banqueting. Eades
suggested
in this post that, in terms of maintenance (not loss), unlimited fat
and
protein calories with low carb intake should not add any fat mass.

Quoted message said:

Say my math is screwy, say that it doesn't take into account the many
millions that tried Atkins and are now slim, say whatever...twenty
million dieters don't even make a one percent different in the strike-
out rate?

So, let's suggest this. Under the supervision of, well, the real
creator
of the diet plan, success rates will be higher than people doing it ad
lib.
Lots of reasons why this would be so (public commitment, correction,
more ideal instructions, etc), but to suggest that reading the book
and
being a patient of the man should produce the same results is, well,
being obtuse. Suggesting that people will get the same results from
just reading the book and doing the diet as they would from receiving
direct care is dishonest or naive. Knowing what I know about Dr. A,
I can make an estimation as to which.

Quoted message said:

Everyone gains it back, low-carb and high-carb, fast-losers and slow-
losers except for that 3-5%. And that 3-5% universally state it's
because they changed their eating and their exercise habits
permanently. They modified their behavior. If you can show me any no-
quibble data proving me wrong, you'll make me a very happy man because
I can stop choking down the dogshit I'm eating.

The "Dogshit" you're eating. I'm not gonna say anymore.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You can start and stop there, frozen in perpetuity. Or, you can start
and continue. Your version of DANDR is 15+ years old. A lot of the
science is a lot better understood now. Some isn't. Protein Power
is only 12 years old. Protein Power Life Plan, only 7. Men's Health
Targeted Nutrition Tactics, a mere 2 months old. You can start
somewhere or you can start somewhere.

Hollywood, when you write something like this, I see it as an attempt
to appeal to my belief that new science supersedes old science in the
Hegelian progression of thesis-antithesis-synthesis, in the eternal
lockstep of progress that leads to the continuing realization of Being
as Spirit. Since I do not accept the Hegelian view of history, it's a
hard sell for me.

It's about incremental improvements. But forget that. In the 1997
version
of DANDR, Atkins talks about early experiments starting at Duke,
testing
his diet. In 2007, there is Dr. Jeff Volek at the University of
Connecticut,
recipient of near a half million dollars from the Atkins foundation to
study
low carb diets and exercise. I'm not suggesting that everything has
changed or that a Marxian theory of history is correct, but the
history of
science has been one of revision and expansion, not one of stone
carved
truths. We fly very far afield.

I'm also going to suggest that it is possible for one perspective to
get it
mostly right, and multiple perspectives to get it closer to an
objective
truth if there is such a thing. A cherry picked data set from a 17
year old
book when there are many updated perspectives and reviews, well,
that's
all I need to say.

Gonna again recommend "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Taubes. Very
up to date, very thorough. Not comprehensive, but very very very good.

Quoted message said:

Clearly, low-carb
dieting hasn't worked for the world at large, or else there would be a
flood of commissioned studies supporting the long-term benefits of low-
carb dieting far more clearly than what we have now. WHERE IS THAT
RESEARCH, the new science? It would have taken the world by storm by
now, 15 years after _New Diet Revolution_.

1- There is a lot of new science going on. Check out Dr. Jeff Volek at
UConn,
and his group. Lots of stuff.

2- You really need "Good Calories, Bad Calories." You'd understand
that
there is research going on and why it's hard to see it, given the
information
cascade of the last 40 years towards low fat. You and I both know low
fat
doesn't work, so no point yaking about that cascade.

You can't use the masses to prove anything. 500 years ago, no person
believed anything but divine creation. 600 and you're talking about an
earth
centric universe. Hell, 300 years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find
an
Englishman who didn't believe in witches, werewolves, and sorcerers.
What
the masses believe and what's real don't really bear any relation, do
they?

Quoted message said:

I have several unanswered concerns regarding the personal priorities
of those males of our species who devote a significant share of their
time and energy to the pursuit of developing their physique for the
purposes of self-worship and/or attracting members of the other
gender.

Typical. I have a wife. I lift for health. I like to lift. I like it
more than
dreadmill. I don't hate the dreadmill. But lifting is fun. Maybe
because
I'm stealthy Type A and it feeds that. I dunno. But your view here is
very limited and therefore, very limiting. You're not gonna find many
things better for your attempts at improving your health than
resistance
exercises. Regardless of what the mooks at the gym have as personal
priorities.