personal dieting idea.. good or bad?

Starve is the wrong word. If you are getting the calories you need to burn, then you are eating enough. If you intake more calories than you need, I do not care whether they are fat, protein or carbs, you can gain weight. If you restrict your caloric intake to what you actually burn, you cannot gain weight. That is not starving yourself, it is not eating more than you need to be healthy.

Mainstream doctors recommend adequate exercise, balanced diet and limit calories to what you burn. Fad diets like low carb, high protein are not recommended by mainstream doctors who, in fact, say they are harmful.

Carbohydrates are the primary fuel that make your muscles and brain work and cutting back severely is not good.

I am not going to insist as this is akin to a religious issue for some people. I just prefer to go with mainstream medical thinking than with the fringe. Nobody has died from a balanced diet AFAIK and some people have died from high protein diets.

MSK, It sounds like a healthy diet would be a good start. You can eat healthy when you eat out, but I know it’s hard.

A few more ideas:

  1. Stop drinking. It sounds like you have a beer gut.
  2. Start cycling again.
  3. Join a gym. Having spent the money, you’ll be more inclined to go. If you make friends there, or get a lifting partner or several partners, it will be a partly social event when you go and you’ll find yourself going for that reason as well. I’ve personally never been able to lift at home with any discipline. Besides, the equipment will be better at a commercial gym (well, usually).
  4. Start doing sit ups. Although it is a myth that exercising a muscle will make the fat overlaying that muscle burn preferentially, nevertheless from personal experience I can tell you that more toned stomach muscles allow your gut to swell out less than it will if your ab muscles are weak. A stronger stomach may also help with your back pain, with or without the fat.

Some links on this topic:
http://www.healthcentral.com/mhc/top/002457.cfm?
http://www.healthcentral.com/centers/onecenter.cfm?Center=Weight
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/deanfulltexttopics.cfm?id=39226

from: http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/deanfulltexttopics.cfm?id=36337
"But when it comes to weight loss there is no getting around the basic scientific fact that weight loss happens when you use more calories than you eat. "

***phouka:**MSK, you do have to have some fat and carbs in your diet, or your body will shut down and grind to a half. *

Ewwww, yuck!

Which half gets ground away? Left, right, top, bottom, front, or back?

Also: before you embark on a weight loss plan: see your doctor!

This is why this thread belongs in Great Debates.

Sailor, you HAVE to give a cite for this remark–I want to see the reports of people who have suffered kidney damaged or died. You have no idea how many times I have read this sort of remark, but when questioned, NO ONE can back it up with evidence. Real evidence. Not doctors “worrying that it may cause kidney damage.” If you could get me a cite, you would be doing science a great service, because this debate has been raging on alt.support.diet.low-carb forever–and not one report of kidney damage has ever been offered.

Let me know if you want me to post articles showing that low-carb dieting does NOT cause kidney damage (I don’t have the links, so I can’t link to them, and I don’t want to clog up the board if no one is interested).

True. But the problem is that, for many people, such a diet is not maintainable. They are permanently hungry. The advantage of LC in this regard is that the higher fat intake promotes satiety and the lack of a cycle of blood sugar spike/insulin spike/blood sugar crash does not induce further hunger. So people CAN maintain the proper caloric intake for their activity level, without feeling like crap all the time.

Scientifically, if you don’t eat ONE of the four food groups, youll lose weight.

Exercise is important.

Maybe invest a few bucks and pick up a copy of the “Nell Carter Workout Video.”

I disagree. Starches are necessary to a healthy
diet; meat is not. All whole grain starches have
protein in them and very little fat. Meat
has NO starch and does have fat (which is over
twice as caloric as starch). Animals raised
for food are injected with hormones to make
them fat. What do those hormones do to people?

I’ve always told people who want to eat less
sweets to cut out meat. I’ve yet to meet a
person who did not report that, when they
ate little or no meat, their cravings for
sweets went way down.

OK, look, I have no interest in debating this. You keep your opinions and I’ll keep mine. But it is a fact that mainstream medicine is against high protein, low carb, diets. That is a fact.

I have already provided some links that support this. here’s another: http://msnbc.com/news/316319.asp

There was news some months ago about some army officer who pressured his subordinates into this kind of diet and was being investigated when one of them died of renal failure. I cannot find it now and I really do not remember any details. In any case, a high protein diet is hard on the kidneys.

The same people who disregarded all the warnings about PhenFen were later quick to sue. The same people who disregard all warnings on high protein diets would be quick to put the blame on someone else if it harms them.

I know of no athletes or people in really good physical shape who use such diets.

Americans want to believe they can eat all they want, not exercise and be healthy and slim. In the meanwhile the statiscs tell the truth: Americans are fatter than ever and much fatter than people from other countries.

To finish my post I will repeat: It is a fact that mainstream science is against low carb, hi protein diets and in favor of a balanced diet limited in calories. In spite of this many people believe in them just like many people choose to believe in creationism. I am not going to try to change their minds.

You know what I love? I love it when someone whines about suffering health problems they were warned they could bring upon themselves. I love saying those words that give me so much pleasure: I told you so.

Gee, Sailor, thanks for your concern. I sure am glad I asked for advice.

True, but on a “healthy, balanced diet,” i.e. a high carb low fat diet, I was

  • hungry all the time, making it a little hard to stay on the “healthy, balanced diet”
  • as a consequence, I was even bitchier than I am now
  • had blood sugar crash migraines frequently
  • as a consequence, I was even bitchier than I am now
  • had erratic blood sugar levels
  • as a consequence, I was even bitchier than I am now
  • wanted to take a nap every afternoon around 3 due to the blood sugar crash
  • Did I mention I was bitchier?

**

Thanks, I’ll be sure to tell my doctors that I’m not healthy. That blood work must all be wrong.

BTW, how about a cite for that claim about people dying from following a low-carb program. Something from Medline or JAMA would be good.

XXOOXXOO

No argument here.

Your unspoken assumption here is that low-carb diets are some new fad. Dr. Atkins (of the eponymous diet) and thousands of his patients have been eating low-carb for about 40 years. And, of course, he basically just dusted off and repackaged an old ketogenic diet that was developed to treat epileptic seizures at the turn of the century (and is still used today).

And don’t forget–many people in the world get by just fine w/ just fat, protein, and not a lot of carbohydrates. Can you say Inuit?

Your compassion is inspiring.

I don’t drink often. I probably have an average of six beers, at most, per month, if that. I never have been much of a drinker, even if you are just kidding.

Awright, kids. Stop arguing about the low-carb/hi-carb thing.

First of all, you all must distinguish between “no-carb” and “low-carb” diets. Many of the “low-carb” plans DO include a significant amount of carbohydrates.

Second, There has been no conclusive evidence on either side. Most of the arguments from one side can be refuted by valid claims by the other. The problem is that it is usually the extremists who make wild claims on both sides who get the attention. (Ever hear an Atkins/Ornish debate? Whatta couple of wackos!)

Third, Many people do well on a low-fat, high-carb diet. Others do well on a high-protein, low-carb plan. People have different body chemistries. It is true that weight loss boils down to a simple “calories in vs. calories out” equation, but some people find it possible to take in few enough calories ONLY on one particular type of plan. If “willpower” worked, then there would be many fewer pudgy people people out there.

Fourth, There are a few things that the diet docs on both sides (except for the extremists) agree on:
–Refined sugars and starches should be limited
–Saturated fats should be limited
–Alcohol intake should be limited
–It is important to get enough fiber
–It is important to get enough exercise

So quit your arguing.

To those of you who have found success on low-fat, hi-carb diets: Congratulations.
To those of you who have found success on high-protein, low-carb diets: Congratulations.
And be happy for each other, too.

I just remembered this http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=30302#post567127

Green Bean: well said.

Well, I just lost 30 pounds in 5 months, and this is all I did:

  1. I ate normally, but cut out almost all between meal snacks. I still eat dessert, big meals, sometimes greasy meals, sometimes more healthy. But no inbetween meal snacks.

  2. Cut out all regular soda. Drink either diet, or better yet, replace it with water. Still drink other beverages; but I used to drink 3-4 cans of coke a day. That’s about 1000 calories a day. Now, I drink pepsi one usually (only diet I can stand), or just water when I want a Coke.

  3. Exercise. Vigorous exercise 3-4 days a week. I did a combination of distance running (3 miles a day or so) and pushups, situps, and other strength exercises.

Went from 234 to 205 in 5 months, and I still got to eat quite well. I’ve put on about 5 of that again (been slacking off on the diet), but I’m back to the formula now, and hope to be down to around 195 by December. That would put me at a very good weight. (I’m 6 feet tall and fairly muscular). Anyway, that worked very well for me.

Jman

To nitpick–actually only about 600 calories, max. Each can has 120-150 cals, I believe.

But, still nasty. Kudos on kicking sugar soda. It was blimpifying me, too.

from http://www.thecoca-colacompany.com/faq/index.html

Sugar and Caloric Content of Selected Foods
Products, 8 oz.

Coca-Cola classic = 97 Calories

So a 12 oz. can would be 145ish.

The rest of the link is pretty funny. Like their answer to “Can soft drinks be part of a healthy diet?”