losing weight too fast...

cguttman said:

Hi guys,

I seem to have lost 1.5 - 2 kg over the last 7 days. I am using a
Swedish nutrition/exercise program called "halsovakten" to track my
food intake and exercise. My weight is 88kg and body fat is around
15% (using body calipers), I want to lose 3-4 kilos fat.

According to the program, I need 2100 calories a day, and if I type in
the exercise that I did for the day, the program increases this value
- typically to 2600 calories a day. I tried to stay at 20% under this
value, i.e. 1600-2100 a day, in order to lose fat. Eating 500cals
less a day means I should lose 500gram of weight a week, but I lose
more than 500grams a week. According to what I have learnt in this
newsgroup to this point, this means that I will lose muscles as well
as fat - in fact, I seem to lose too much muscle mass.

Could it be that my basic calorie requirements of 2100 cal/day are
estimated too low, particularly when I seem to have more muscles than
the average person assumed by the program? Since muscles use more
energy, this means that I probably need more calories?

Chris

Don't forget that when you restrict calories (diet) you will also lose water
weight especially if you're just starting. It's not uncommon to lose at
least 2 kg when just starting out. In fact most of the weight you lose the
first week is most likely due to water.

cguttman said:

Hi guys,

I seem to have lost 1.5 - 2 kg over the last 7 days. >
Eating 500cals less a day means I should lose 500gram
of weight a week, but I lose more than 500grams a week.

Eating 500 calories less a day equals a 3500 calorie deficit for the
week which is said to be equal to a pound of scale weight, so you are
abit above target having lost about 1.5 -2lbs over 7days. Not an
overly big loss (someone mentioned water weight change at first on any
diet) and that can even fluctuate from week to to week or even day to
day. Give it time and dont stress over it. Let us know how it goes in
say 12 weeks from now if you have reached your main goal.

joanne

Ah - yes, that makes sense.

Why do you lose water in the first week? Because protein, fat, carb
molecules are bound to water molecules?

Chris

joanne said:

cguttman said:

Hi guys,

I seem to have lost 1.5 - 2 kg over the last 7 days. >
Eating 500cals less a day means I should lose 500gram
of weight a week, but I lose more than 500grams a week.

Eating 500 calories less a day equals a 3500 calorie deficit for the
week which is said to be equal to a pound of scale weight, so you are
abit above target having lost about 1.5 -2lbs over 7days. Not an
overly big loss (someone mentioned water weight change at first on any
diet) and that can even fluctuate from week to to week or even day to
day. Give it time and dont stress over it. Let us know how it goes in
say 12 weeks from now if you have reached your main goal.

joanne

In article <[email hidden]>,

joanne said:

cguttman said:

Hi guys,

I seem to have lost 1.5 - 2 kg over the last 7 days. >
Eating 500cals less a day means I should lose 500gram
of weight a week, but I lose more than 500grams a week.

Eating 500 calories less a day equals a 3500 calorie deficit for the
week which is said to be equal to a pound of scale weight, so you are
abit above target having lost about 1.5 -2lbs over 7days. Not an
overly big loss (someone mentioned water weight change at first on any
diet) and that can even fluctuate from week to to week or even day to
day. Give it time and dont stress over it. Let us know how it goes in
say 12 weeks from now if you have reached your main goal.

My experience has been that the body fights back against rapid weight
loss. Each time I have to have a colonosciopy I have to do a liquid
fast several days in advance and usually lose four pounds which
gradually returns in the weeks following.

Diva

Diva

cguttman said:

Hi guys,

I seem to have lost 1.5 - 2 kg over the last 7 days. I am using a
Swedish nutrition/exercise program called "halsovakten" to track my food
intake and exercise. My weight is 88kg and body fat is around 15% (using
body calipers), I want to lose 3-4 kilos fat.

According to the program, I need 2100 calories a day, and if I type in
the exercise that I did for the day, the program increases this value -
typically to 2600 calories a day. I tried to stay at 20% under this
value, i.e. 1600-2100 a day, in order to lose fat. Eating 500cals less a
day means I should lose 500gram of weight a week, but I lose more than
500grams a week. According to what I have learnt in this newsgroup to
this point, this means that I will lose muscles as well as fat - in
fact, I seem to lose too much muscle mass.

Could it be that my basic calorie requirements of 2100 cal/day are
estimated too low, particularly when I seem to have more muscles than
the average person assumed by the program? Since muscles use more
energy, this means that I probably need more calories?

You lose all kinds of tissue: water, fat, muscles, etc.

If you initially lose a few extra pounds, that is not at all abnormal.

When you lose, you need to have a deficit that is somewhat lower than
3,500 calories to lose a pound of weight. The reverse of this is that
when people gain, they need to have less than 3,500 calorie
(equivalent to 1 lb of fat) calorie surplus to gain weight.

i

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:11:09 +1100 in sci.med.nutrition, cguttman
<[email hidden]> wrote,

Quoted message said:

Why do you lose water in the first week? Because protein, fat, carb
molecules are bound to water molecules?

Because glycogen, the fast-access, first depleted energy store, is
bound to water.

David Harmon said:

cguttman said:

Why do you lose water in the first week? Because protein, fat, carb
molecules are bound to water molecules?

Because glycogen, the fast-access, first depleted energy store, is
bound to water.

And because no matter what plan you use one way or another
it's going to reduce the amount of energy your body keeps in
short term storage. The short term storage system is glycogen
and the water it takes to dissolve that glycogen.

It's quite easy to see why a low carb plan would do that. Burn off
all the stored carbs then switch to burning fat. It's less easy to
see why a low-fat/high-carb system would result in storing less
carbs short term but that does happen.

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Because glycogen, the fast-access, first depleted energy store, is
bound to water.

And because no matter what plan you use one way or another
it's going to reduce the amount of energy your body keeps in
short term storage. The short term storage system is glycogen
and the water it takes to dissolve that glycogen.

The short term? What do you think is used for long term?

Quoted message said:

It's quite easy to see why a low carb plan would do that. Burn off
all the stored carbs then switch to burning fat.

If your referring to burning off all your glycogen you are now in bonk
land. You're not trying to suggest that we burn of all the glycogen and
then silently start to burn fat? It does not work that way. Once you
glycogen stores are gone it's like trying to run you gas car on diesel
oil, you spit and sputter. Fat burns in the carbo flame - no flame no
burn.

Quoted message said:

It's less easy to
see why a low-fat/high-carb system would result in storing less
carbs short term but that does happen.

If you don't get sufficient carbs to replenish your glycogen stores in
your liver and muscles it will be painful to exercise. If your LCing and
walking around the block then maybe. Turn up the duration or intensity
the tank goes dry rapidly.

-DF

Doug Freese said:

Doug Freyburger said:

Quoted message said:

Because glycogen, the fast-access, first depleted energy store, is
bound to water.

Quoted message said:

And because no matter what plan you use one way or another
it's going to reduce the amount of energy your body keeps in
short term storage. The short term storage system is glycogen
and the water it takes to dissolve that glycogen.

The short term? What do you think is used for long term?

Lean and fat. This isn't difficult stuff.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's quite easy to see why a low carb plan would do that. Burn off
all the stored carbs then switch to burning fat.

If your referring to burning off all your glycogen you are now in bonk
land.

Except for what actually happens. "Bonk land" is for people doing
levels of exercise in excess of their current fitness and/or who are
doing it too soon after switching to low carb.

Quoted message said:

You're not trying to suggest that we burn of all the glycogen and
then silently start to burn fat? It does not work that way.

Yes it does. There's a smell involved in going into ketosis but the
body doesn't make a clicking noise or any other type of noise.
And for many there's a burst of energy just like for many there's a
lack of energy.

Quoted message said:

Once you
glycogen stores are gone it's like trying to run you gas car on diesel
oil, you spit and sputter.

Except for what actually happens in real practice. But do keep
on with your cool sounding theories.

Quoted message said:

Fat burns in the carbo flame - no flame no burn.

Since fat is cut into fatty acids plus glycerol and the glyercol goes
to glucose, roughly 10% of the energy from burnging fat comes from
glucose. It's enough that dietary fat is not essential to life.

On the other hand because fat burns in a flame of carbs, the 10%
level is generally not ideal for the best burning. This is why there
is not a single low carb plan out there that teaches that less is
better so go towards zero. Each and every plan out there teaches
to find a reasonable-but-low carb intake level. Sure enough, the
plans are teaching what in automotive terms would be a richer
mixture of fuels.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

It's less easy to
see why a low-fat/high-carb system would result in storing less
carbs short term but that does happen.

If you don't get sufficient carbs to replenish your glycogen stores in
your liver and muscles it will be painful to exercise.

Except for what happens in the real world of people paying attention
to the directions. Take it easy for the first couple of weeks then
as you build up your carb intake also build up the insensity of your
exercise plan.

Quoted message said:

If your LCing and
walking around the block then maybe. Turn up the duration or intensity
the tank goes dry rapidly.

It's like you think the only levels of exercise in existance are
walking
around the block and running a marathon. No wonder you don't make
any sense.

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

Quoted message said:

Except for what actually happens. "Bonk land" is for people doing
levels of exercise in excess of their current fitness and/or who are
doing it too soon after switching to low carb.

Then you better sets your goals for glorifies walks in the park. LC puts
a giant limiting factor on what you can do.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

You're not trying to suggest that we burn of all the glycogen and
then silently start to burn fat? It does not work that way.

Yes it does.

No it doesn't but keep telling yourself that or keep your exercise slow
and within the palty glocgen you manage to store.

Quoted message said:

There's a smell involved in going into ketosis but the

It's your body telling you it's in desparate need of some missing
nutrients. The smell is mother nature telling you it's not happy. I
guess you can tell yourself it the purging of some evil goop.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Once you
glycogen stores are gone it's like trying to run you gas car on
diesel
oil, you spit and sputter.

Except for what actually happens in real practice. But do keep
on with your cool sounding theories.

Not my theory but voulumes exercise physiology. Your welcome to believe
the world is flat.

Quoted message said:

It's like you think the only levels of exercise in existance are
walking
around the block and running a marathon. No wonder you don't make
any sense.

I use walking beause it is common for discussion. I use the marathon
because it also common to enduance. Regardless of the flavor of exercise
it's bounded by glycogen. Did you find some exercise that burns K-Mart
Co2 canisters rather than carbs? Talk about senseless.

-DF

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Except for what actually happens. "Bonk land" is for people doing
levels of exercise in excess of their current fitness and/or who are
doing it too soon after switching to low carb.

Then you better sets your goals for glorifies walks in the park. LC puts
a giant limiting factor on what you can do.

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one of my
friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles but
after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile ride.
Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his bike
up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12 miles
into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to slow
it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He said he
had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the future.

Beverly said:

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Except for what actually happens. "Bonk land" is for people doing
levels of exercise in excess of their current fitness and/or who are
doing it too soon after switching to low carb.

Huh??? That's not it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Then you better sets your goals for glorifies walks in the park. LC puts
a giant limiting factor on what you can do.

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one of my
friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles but
after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile ride.
Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his bike
up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12 miles
into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to slow
it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He said he
had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the future.

Low carb us wrong for athletes. Athletes NEED carbs. From Chris
Carmichael's book: Food for Fitness:

Not only to power, endurance, stamina and strength decrease as a result
of carbohydrate depletion; athletes sometimes feel nauseated, dizzy
and/or lightheaded too. While most endurance athletes have experienced
these symptoms associated with "bonking" at some point, bonking usually
occurs hours into a long workout as the result of low blood sugar. The
symptoms of bonking catch athletes off-guard when they appear within
the first 30 minutes of exercise, so your body is reacting to the same
scenario. Glucose is the primary fuel your brain and central nervous
system can directly use for energy, so your body acts defensively to
preserve whatever glucose it has left. Bonking is your body's way of
forcing you to stop exercising while there is still enough glocuse in
your blood to maintain normal bodily functions. Althetes eating
low-carbohydrate diets bonk much earlier than normal because they start
workouts glycogen-depleted. As a result, they have far less fuel than
they need to supply energy for muscles and the central nervous system.

He goes on, but you get the picture. It's a great book that I highly
recommend.

Thank god that trend's going away.....Common sense is the only thing
that works. That and working your ass off. : )

Martha

Beverly said:

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one of my
friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles but
after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile ride.
Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his bike
up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12 miles
into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to slow
it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He said he
had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the future.

Crazy timing to do the exact wrong thing. The initial effects of low
carbing last around two weeks and then the body adjusts. So the
third or forth week more carbs won't be needed with no other changes
but the calendar advancing more days and the body doing the
natural sequence of adjustments.

For an avid cyclist in good shape it's no surprise he bonked in the
first two weeks. Expected part of the plan and all that. For an avid
cyclist to completely ignore the known sequence of events and
trash the two week ajustment period by recarbing, dumb. Go
through all that work to trash it because you haven't bothered to
read up on the expected and known sequence of events ...

Forty miles is a good example size. Well over a casual ride so it
shows the rider is in good physical condition and thus shows the
rider isn't a couch potato. Well under a competitive endurance run
and thus shows the rider isn't a competitive athlete who blows
normal dietary needs out of the water.

Lessons learned - First two weeks you're supposed to take it
easy, so duh, do that. And later weeks you'll be able to build
rapidly back up to previous levels, so duh, follow the directions
don't carb load just as it stops being needed.

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

Quoted message said:

Beverly said:

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one

of my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile

ride.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his

bike

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12

miles

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to

slow

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He said

he

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the

future.

Quoted message said:

Crazy timing to do the exact wrong thing. The initial effects of low
carbing last around two weeks and then the body adjusts. So the
third or forth week more carbs won't be needed with no other changes
but the calendar advancing more days and the body doing the
natural sequence of adjustments.

For an avid cyclist in good shape it's no surprise he bonked in the
first two weeks. Expected part of the plan and all that. For an avid
cyclist to completely ignore the known sequence of events and
trash the two week ajustment period by recarbing, dumb. Go
through all that work to trash it because you haven't bothered to
read up on the expected and known sequence of events ...

Forty miles is a good example size. Well over a casual ride so it
shows the rider is in good physical condition and thus shows the
rider isn't a couch potato. Well under a competitive endurance run
and thus shows the rider isn't a competitive athlete who blows
normal dietary needs out of the water.

Lessons learned - First two weeks you're supposed to take it
easy, so duh, do that. And later weeks you'll be able to build
rapidly back up to previous levels, so duh, follow the directions
don't carb load just as it stops being needed.

He switched to a low calorie diet that included the nutrients he needed to
fuel bike rides. Since switching he's had no problems and has lost the
15lbs he wanted to shed.

I think everyone has to follow the diet that allows them to live their
lifestyle and still lose weight. For me that simply means counting calories
and choosing healthy fat, carbs and protein.

Beverly said:

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

Quoted message said:

Beverly said:

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one

of my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile

ride.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his

bike

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12

miles

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to

slow

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He said

he

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the

future.

Quoted message said:

Crazy timing to do the exact wrong thing. The initial effects of low
carbing last around two weeks and then the body adjusts. So the
third or forth week more carbs won't be needed with no other changes
but the calendar advancing more days and the body doing the
natural sequence of adjustments.

For an avid cyclist in good shape it's no surprise he bonked in the
first two weeks. Expected part of the plan and all that. For an avid
cyclist to completely ignore the known sequence of events and
trash the two week ajustment period by recarbing, dumb. Go
through all that work to trash it because you haven't bothered to
read up on the expected and known sequence of events ...

Forty miles is a good example size. Well over a casual ride so it
shows the rider is in good physical condition and thus shows the
rider isn't a couch potato. Well under a competitive endurance run
and thus shows the rider isn't a competitive athlete who blows
normal dietary needs out of the water.

Lessons learned - First two weeks you're supposed to take it
easy, so duh, do that. And later weeks you'll be able to build
rapidly back up to previous levels, so duh, follow the directions
don't carb load just as it stops being needed.

He switched to a low calorie diet that included the nutrients he needed to
fuel bike rides. Since switching he's had no problems and has lost the
15lbs he wanted to shed.

I think everyone has to follow the diet that allows them to live their
lifestyle and still lose weight. For me that simply means counting calories
and choosing healthy fat, carbs and protein.

Yes, IOW, to live a healthy life. To be phobic about anything, be it
fat or carbs doesn't make any sense.

Martha

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Beverly said:

I saw the effects of a low-carb diet this summer while biking with one

of my

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

friends. He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+
miles

but

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

after two weeks on a low-card diet he wasn't able to finish a 20 mile

ride.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thankfully his wife was meeting us for lunch and she loaded him and his

bike

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

up and took them home as he wasn't able to ride any longer. About 12

miles

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

into the ride he just couldn't keep up the 15-18 mph pace and I had to

slow

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

it down to 10-12 for him. Even at this pace he was struggling. He
said

he

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

had learned his lesson and will be sure to be properly fueled in the

future.

Quoted message said:

Crazy timing to do the exact wrong thing. The initial effects of low
carbing last around two weeks and then the body adjusts. So the
third or forth week more carbs won't be needed with no other changes
but the calendar advancing more days and the body doing the
natural sequence of adjustments.

For an avid cyclist in good shape it's no surprise he bonked in the
first two weeks. Expected part of the plan and all that. For an avid
cyclist to completely ignore the known sequence of events and
trash the two week ajustment period by recarbing, dumb. Go
through all that work to trash it because you haven't bothered to
read up on the expected and known sequence of events ...

Forty miles is a good example size. Well over a casual ride so it
shows the rider is in good physical condition and thus shows the
rider isn't a couch potato. Well under a competitive endurance run
and thus shows the rider isn't a competitive athlete who blows
normal dietary needs out of the water.

Lessons learned - First two weeks you're supposed to take it
easy, so duh, do that. And later weeks you'll be able to build
rapidly back up to previous levels, so duh, follow the directions
don't carb load just as it stops being needed.

He switched to a low calorie diet that included the nutrients he needed to
fuel bike rides. Since switching he's had no problems and has lost the
15lbs he wanted to shed.

I think everyone has to follow the diet that allows them to live their
lifestyle and still lose weight. For me that simply means counting
calories
and choosing healthy fat, carbs and protein.

On an earlier attempt I had simliar results. I had a superficial knowledge
of the diet and simply ate about 20g of carbs until I was left completely
exhausted (after two and a half weeks). Of course, I wasn't following any
real diet, just what I thought was a real diet. Most of the LC diets don't
have you stay in "induction" for more than two weeks.

Beverly said:

Doug Freyburger said:

Beverly wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

He's an avid cyclist who thinks nothing about riding 40+ miles ...

Quoted message said:

Crazy timing to do the exact wrong thing. The initial effects of low
carbing last around two weeks and then the body adjusts ...

He switched to a low calorie diet that included the nutrients he needed to
fuel bike rides. Since switching he's had no problems and has lost the
15lbs he wanted to shed.

Which says zero about the known feature of low carb diets that
there is a two week adjustment period. It does he he never
learned about it and quit just as he completed that. So while
what he's doing now works, that does NOT imply that what he
did earlier didn't work. All it implies is he bailed out at the wrong
time for the wrong reason and ended up falling into rose petals.

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Which says zero about the known feature of low carb diets that

there is a two week adjustment period. It does he he never
learned about it and quit just as he completed that. So while
what he's doing now works, that does NOT imply that what he
did earlier didn't work. All it implies is he bailed out at the wrong
time for the wrong reason and ended up falling into rose petals.

And any diet that demands your body to go through an implosion even two
weeks and call it an adjustment period is a crock. Beverly, trust your
body and your instincts and eat balanced and may a bit less by
restricting of obvious junk food. High fat and high protein is for
people with no personal self control and want to look thin. Choose an
eating style that cares for you from stationary to oodles of endurance.
Any diet that only plays in the beginning is simply to lose weight.
Adopt an eating style that covers every physical situation and lets you
loose weight.

Of course this is cross posted so they need to justify their fad.

-DF

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

Quoted message said:

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Which says zero about the known feature of low carb diets that

there is a two week adjustment period. It does he he never
learned about it and quit just as he completed that. So while
what he's doing now works, that does NOT imply that what he
did earlier didn't work. All it implies is he bailed out at the wrong
time for the wrong reason and ended up falling into rose petals.

And any diet that demands your body to go through an implosion even two
weeks and call it an adjustment period is a crock. Beverly, trust your
body and your instincts and eat balanced and may a bit less by restricting
of obvious junk food. High fat and high protein is for people with no
personal self control and want to look thin. Choose an eating style that
cares for you from stationary to oodles of endurance. Any diet that only
plays in the beginning is simply to lose weight. Adopt an eating style
that covers every physical situation and lets you loose weight.

Of course this is cross posted so they need to justify their fad.

-DF

Errr... my diet covers every physical position.