Re: Re: The French Riviera Diet

[Guest guest]

-

Well, so do I (sourdough anyone?) but I only have to fight cravings if I've

eaten to many carbs or not enough fat. Otherwise they're just not

particularly tempting.

>Although I realize we are talking cravings here, I frankly LIKE some

>grains, even if I don't crave them.

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

>Probably everyone is different. I'm wondering though -- have you ever

>*tried* alternate

>feasting/famine?

In the sense that after missing a meal I'll gorge on the next one, sure,

but never systematically. Well, not exactly, anyway. When I go really

low-carb and eat a lot of fat, I can actually go a long, long time between

meals, at least if I'm not particularly physically active. When I've eaten

enough fat and stayed away from carbs enough for long enough, I naturally

tend to settle on two big meals a day, generally with no snacks

either. But it depends pretty much entirely on my macro-nutrient ratios.

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

>My logic is, that I want my body to use MY fat for energy during the daytime.

>I have plenty of it, don't need supplements!

But the body doesn't necessarily make that much of a distinction between

your fat and dietary fat. Low-carbing works because once the body gets

used to consuming fat, it'll consume any fat, including depot fat. If it's

getting carbs for fuel, it just doesn't seem to think to dip into depot fat

in the same way. Insulin and cortisol aren't the only reasons for Atkins;

it's also a matter of training the body to burn fat for fuel by giving it

lots of fat and relatively little in the way of alternatives.

-

[Guest guest]

Chris-

And Gottschall's work is pretty clear on the subject too.

>Yet I know

>plenty of people, including myself, who have problems with raw plant

>products,

>and it seems that trouble digesting salad is very, very common.

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

Well, it can get tempting, but I've found that social circumstances and

exposure to temptation are really only factors when I haven't eaten enough

fat. If I've gotten enough food with enough fat and avoided carbs enough,

it doesn't matter what people are eating, even if it's my favorite food in

the whole world. That's why I'm so desperate to make a workable

pemmican. My willpower is entirely dependent on my diet.

>Some folks are probably natural born carnivores and don't care, or maybe

>it is a " girl thing "

-

[Guest guest]

>When I go really

>low-carb and eat a lot of fat, I can actually go a long, long time between

>meals, at least if I'm not particularly physically active.

And that is something I've never been able to do! (before).

But the question still is -- if your body HAS some fat, why

doesn't it access it when you are active instead of forcing

you to eat? Theoretically, even if you didn't eat enough

fat, most people have enough stored that the body should

just use what it has and wait for the next meal.

Ditto with glycogen ... it really shocked me that my body

was quite able to " find " enough blood sugar to get me

out of a blood sugar slump so quickly, albeit with leftover

nasty cortisol feelings. Most people have enough glycogen

for quick use to last a day or so ... so why should we need

to snack all day long?

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

>But the body doesn't necessarily make that much of a distinction between

>your fat and dietary fat. Low-carbing works because once the body gets

>used to consuming fat, it'll consume any fat, including depot fat. If it's

>getting carbs for fuel, it just doesn't seem to think to dip into depot fat

>in the same way. Insulin and cortisol aren't the only reasons for Atkins;

>it's also a matter of training the body to burn fat for fuel by giving it

>lots of fat and relatively little in the way of alternatives.

>

>-

EXACTLY! Fasting *should* do the same thing. The reason we store fat is to *use*

it, but for some reason we have learned not to -- carbs for fuel, plus maybe

frequent

meals and other hormonal issues. If you don't eat for a period of time, then

the body starts burning your own fat. If you don't eat for *too* long then you

go

into starvation mode, which you don't want.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

>Heidi-

>

>Well, it can get tempting, but I've found that social circumstances and

>exposure to temptation are really only factors when I haven't eaten enough

>fat. If I've gotten enough food with enough fat and avoided carbs enough,

>it doesn't matter what people are eating, even if it's my favorite food in

>the whole world. That's why I'm so desperate to make a workable

>pemmican. My willpower is entirely dependent on my diet.

>

>-

Hmmm ... how many people do you cook for? Is anyone making popcorn in the house

on a regular basis? Leaving bags of chips on the counter? Bowls of fresh fruit?

Your kid learned to make her first fruit cobbler and wants you to take a bite?

Wants you to teach her to make cookies?

It REALLY is different for a Mom! I have not met a successful low-carb Mom

yet. I suppose one could " de-carb " the kids, but really, just keeping them

off (most) commercial food and wheat is a big challenge, and you can forget

about changing my DH. Now if we all lived in an igloo and I could just

thaw out a raw fish for breakfast and pass it around ...

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

No doubt because my metabolism will never truly become " normal " or

" healthy " . It still has difficulty mobilizing depot fat, and it's still

petrified of starvation.

>But the question still is -- if your body HAS some fat, why

>doesn't it access it when you are active instead of forcing

>you to eat?

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

But in many cases, the body mobilizes protein before stored fat, the

rationale presumably being that muscle (and other protein tissues) consumes

more calories itself and therefore should be the first to go in times of

hunger. Eating a lot of fat (and not fasting) short-circuits that problem.

>If you don't eat for a period of time, then

>the body starts burning your own fat. If you don't eat for *too* long then

>you go

>into starvation mode, which you don't want.

-

[Guest guest]

Heidi-

>Hmmm ... how many people do you cook for? Is anyone making popcorn in the

>house

>on a regular basis? Leaving bags of chips on the counter? Bowls of fresh

>fruit?

>Your kid learned to make her first fruit cobbler and wants you to take a bite?

>Wants you to teach her to make cookies?

I mostly just cook for myself, as my girlfriend is petrified of fat, but

yes, she makes popcorn all the time, as well as macaroni and cheese and

pasta and all kinds of things I love. She leaves bags of chips around,

eats cookies and candy bars and chocolate and hot chocolate and fruit and

so on and so forth, and as long as I eat enough fat, it's just not a

problem for me.

I'm not sure what I'd do if I had a kid, but hopefully I wouldn't raise him

or her to want cookies. A difficult proposition, I know. <g>

-

[Guest guest]

>Heidi-

>

>No doubt because my metabolism will never truly become " normal " or

> " healthy " . It still has difficulty mobilizing depot fat, and it's still

>petrified of starvation.

>

>-

That is the theory I'm trying to test. If the body " knows " it is getting a big

dinner, then quite probably it will not think it is in " starvation " mode.

I can't say for your metabolism ... I can only experiment on mine! It will

either work, or it will not.

If it learns to mobilize depot fat, I will be very happy!

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

>Heidi-

>

>But in many cases, the body mobilizes protein before stored fat, the

>rationale presumably being that muscle (and other protein tissues) consumes

>more calories itself and therefore should be the first to go in times of

>hunger. Eating a lot of fat (and not fasting) short-circuits that problem.

>

>-

Again, that is the theory. I'm betting the big meals offset that -- there is

just

too much human history of " big meals in the evening. " It takes about 20-40 hours

to fully digest a meal (depending on the person) so if you ate a big meal

last night, it is still digesting and presumably your body would be " smart "

enough to know that.

If you HAVE to eat fat *often* doesn't that say that your internal stores

aren't being accessed efficiently? There is a difference between fat getting

out of fat cells and that coming from the intestines ... cortisol (I think?)

shuts down the ability of the fat cells to release fat, but digested fat

can still reach the bloodstream as lipids.

I had a snake once, and it ate once a month, a whole mouse. After it ate the

mouse it sat for a few days until the mouse digested ... which of course you

could watch, as the bulge slowly moved down. Then it " fasted " for the

rest of the month. Was the snake eating muscle during that month? I doubt

it -- snakes are designed to eat rarely, as are most carnivores. We're

omnivores,

but I think we *should* be able to eat less frequently than we do without losing

muscle and without our metabolism crashing. Can a damaged metabolism

be retrained? That is another unanswered question.

I don't think it is a theory that has been tested really (except on

kibble-mice),

so I'm testing it. We can theorize about it forever and not get anywhere.

So far we have maybe 4 people that have tested it and seem to be getting

good results (judging from their emails). I have a Tanita scale so I'll

keep track of muscle gain/loss too.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 12 Aug 2003 15:57:09 -0700

Heidi Schuppenhauer <heidis@...> wrote:

>

> >----I understand the above that the need is to burn fats but to keep

> >your body burning fats instead of carbs; you eat only fruits and

> >veggies and no fats during the day and you get all your fats at night

> >when you over eat??

>

> I'm not sure fats matter -- this is something to experiment with.

> In the Warrior Diet, the diet is supposed to be pretty low fat,

> it sounds like (?), at least the meats are low fat. I'm

> not following that rule, because by NT standards, fats are good.

> Fats don't influence your insulin one way or the other.

From what I can glean, without the book, is that he wants to limit fats

during the day, probably because he thinks this will disrupt the detox

that occurs while undereating.

I haven't gotten the impression that this is true of the big meal

however, but maybe it is. If so I have been ignoring it. Fats are good,

especially raw fats. And I eat plenty of them. The only real " rule " I

see for the big meal is to eat carbs last.

On a funny note, I just read a review of the Warrior Diet where the reviewer

described the author as believing in three square meals a day, just all

at one time.

http://www.cbass.com/warrior_diet.htm

[Guest guest]

>On a funny note, I just read a review of the Warrior Diet where the reviewer

>described the author as believing in three square meals a day, just all

>at one time.

>

><http://www.cbass.com/warrior_diet.htm>http://www.cbass.com/warrior_diet.htm

:

Cute. The article stresses the " warrior " part though -- I think

I like the FRD spin, I'm not Bruce Lee either (though he is cute).

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Dear Heidi,

Another reason our bodies make fat is to contain the toxins, and fatness saves

people from the toxic effects. The less toxins the less fat the body needs to

make.

Sorry about another clinker in here.

Your Friendly Bee

Re: Re: The French Riviera Diet

>But the body doesn't necessarily make that much of a distinction between

>your fat and dietary fat. Low-carbing works because once the body gets

>used to consuming fat, it'll consume any fat, including depot fat. If it's

>getting carbs for fuel, it just doesn't seem to think to dip into depot fat

>in the same way. Insulin and cortisol aren't the only reasons for Atkins;

>it's also a matter of training the body to burn fat for fuel by giving it

>lots of fat and relatively little in the way of alternatives.

>

>-

EXACTLY! Fasting *should* do the same thing. The reason we store fat is to

*use*

it, but for some reason we have learned not to -- carbs for fuel, plus maybe

frequent

meals and other hormonal issues. If you don't eat for a period of time, then

the body starts burning your own fat. If you don't eat for *too* long then you

go

into starvation mode, which you don't want.

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

Something else to think about is that it can take up to four years to get rid of

trans-fats in the body.

Bee

Re: Re: The French Riviera Diet

>When I go really

>low-carb and eat a lot of fat, I can actually go a long, long time between

>meals, at least if I'm not particularly physically active.

And that is something I've never been able to do! (before).

But the question still is -- if your body HAS some fat, why

doesn't it access it when you are active instead of forcing

you to eat? Theoretically, even if you didn't eat enough

fat, most people have enough stored that the body should

just use what it has and wait for the next meal.

Ditto with glycogen ... it really shocked me that my body

was quite able to " find " enough blood sugar to get me

out of a blood sugar slump so quickly, albeit with leftover

nasty cortisol feelings. Most people have enough glycogen

for quick use to last a day or so ... so why should we need

to snack all day long?

-- Heidi

[Guest guest]

- Au contrare - the body mobilizes protein from the muscles if it isn't

getting enough from the food eaten. I'd be interested in the source of your

information since it doesn't make sense to me. Are you saying the body will

mobilize the heart muscle before it mobilizes fat? Pretty far fetched I'd say.

Bee

Re: Re: The French Riviera Diet

Heidi-

But in many cases, the body mobilizes protein before stored fat, the

rationale presumably being that muscle (and other protein tissues) consumes

more calories itself and therefore should be the first to go in times of

hunger. Eating a lot of fat (and not fasting) short-circuits that problem.

>If you don't eat for a period of time, then

>the body starts burning your own fat. If you don't eat for *too* long then

>you go

>into starvation mode, which you don't want.

-

[Guest guest]

>Dear Heidi,

>Another reason our bodies make fat is to contain the toxins, and fatness saves

people from the toxic effects. The less toxins the less fat the body needs to

make.

>

>Sorry about another clinker in here.

>

>Your Friendly Bee

This is true, and is a good reason not to lose fat quickly! I don't think it is

a clinker -- my experiment is merely to shift the caloric content of my day from

the AM to the PM. This will either work or it won't. So far according to Tanita

I'm losing about .2 lbs fat a day, which may or may not be accurate (the first

week of a diet change isn't very accurate) but in any case isn't excessive. I

kind of think that when you eat once a day the body has an easier time handling

the toxins -- any food is toxic if not digested correctly, but during the

daytime hours the body has SOOO many demands on it maybe food digestion loses

out.

-- Heidi

>

[Guest guest]

This is fascinating. And I'm doing so well on my low carb diet, which

admittedly isn't the 5 small meals a day I had planned but works out to

snacking all day, a small to medium meal in the late afternoon and a

large one at dinner. So, in theory I could modify it more, take some of

the stress off worrying about what to eat for breakfast/lunch and feast at

night... which I do admit is fun! =) Having a big meal with my fiance after

his long day at work, well... it's a good time to spend together.

I'm just a bit worried about screwing up an already good thing. =) But

then, if I am mostly doing this anway and have always hated eating

breakfast and hasseling over lunch... why not go for it?

Dawn

[Guest guest]

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 08:32:08 EDT

ChrisMasterjohn@... wrote:

> This is pretty normal. A lot of veggies and fruits bother me raw. By the

> way, if you have diarrhea you should not be eating *any* raw veggies or even

> fruits I think, according to several sources (Gottschal says this and also

Jordan

> Rubin).

>

> In the 1830s vegetables were never eaten raw as they were considered hard to

> digest.

>

> In general, plants need to be cooked and animal products are best raw. Funny

> how that works out!

>

> Chris

>

So refreshing to hear this. The only thing I would add is that veggies

can either be cooked *or* fermented. Never ever saw a cooked vegetable

that I liked <beg> (unless they were yams or french fries - yummmmmmmmy!)

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 00:07:47 -0700

" Berg " <bberg@...> wrote:

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: <slethnobotanist@...>

>

> > Although I realize we are talking cravings here, I frankly LIKE some

> > grains, even if I don't crave them. Dr. Atkins, like Aajonus

> > Vonderplanitz (whose diet Dr. Atkins thought highly of while he was

> > still living)...

>

> That's the first I've heard of this. When did Dr. Atkins comment on the

> Primal Diet, and what did he say about it?

IIRC, Aajonus was on Dr. Atkins radio show. The interview, or portions

of it, was online at one time. Karl Loren's website might have some

mention of it.

In general he praised Aajonus, and said he was going to go home that

night and have some steak tartar.

[Guest guest]

Quoting slethnobotanist@...:

> IIRC, Aajonus was on Dr. Atkins radio show. The interview, or portions

> of it, was online at one time. Karl Loren's website might have some

> mention of it.

Ah...so it does!

R.B. (Rae Bradbury): On October 27, 1997, I heard Dr. Atkins interview you

on his famous talk show in New York " Your Healthy Choices. " He advocated

your diet as being the greatest dietary approach to reversing disease and

creating health of all times, and that he was going to go home that night

and have steak tar tar.

A.V.: Yes, I was as astounded as you that a medical doctor could discard

the bacterial and parasitic phobias that are sweeping terror among the

masses.

http://www.karlloren.com/Diabetes/p75.htm

> In general he praised Aajonus, and said he was going to go home that

> night and have some steak tartar.

Are you aware of Atkins' opinion of the Primal Diet being reflected at all

in any of his work? There was a new edition of " The Diet Revolution "

published a couple of years ago. I gave it a quick look-through several

months ago and didn't see anything about raw foods, animal or otherwise, or

even the preferability of rare steak over well-done, nor have any of the

Atkins dieters I've ever met mentioned anything of the sort.

--

Berg

bberg@...

[Guest guest]

-

I doubt he would've praised something like the Primal Diet in a mass medium

like one of his books. He always had to walk a very fine line between

pushing the truth and avoiding utter destruction. I doubt he thought the

PD was the be-all and end-all of eating plans anyway, but obviously there's

a lot of merit to the idea of eating at least some raw animal foods.

>Are you aware of Atkins' opinion of the Primal Diet being reflected at all

>in any of his work?

-

[Guest guest]

see comment below

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 10:07:10 -0700

Heidi Schuppenhauer <heidis@...> wrote:

>

> >But the body doesn't necessarily make that much of a distinction between

> >your fat and dietary fat. Low-carbing works because once the body gets

> >used to consuming fat, it'll consume any fat, including depot fat. If it's

> >getting carbs for fuel, it just doesn't seem to think to dip into depot fat

> >in the same way. Insulin and cortisol aren't the only reasons for Atkins;

> >it's also a matter of training the body to burn fat for fuel by giving it

> >lots of fat and relatively little in the way of alternatives.

> >

> >-

>

> EXACTLY! Fasting *should* do the same thing. The reason we store fat is to

*use*

> it, but for some reason we have learned not to -- carbs for fuel, plus maybe

frequent

> meals and other hormonal issues. If you don't eat for a period of time, then

> the body starts burning your own fat. If you don't eat for *too* long then you

go

> into starvation mode, which you don't want.

>

> -- Heidi

>

EXACTLY! hehe... Fasting *does* do the same thing, especially when

accompanied by physical activity. From my own personal experience, the

worst thing you can do while fasting is to be physically inactive. And

in a longer fast, when hunger returns and won't go away (and just like a

ketogenic diet - hunger will be supressed after a few days on a fast),

it is your body signalling that it is going into starvation mode, and

thus it is time to eat.

Remember, in this country, ketogenic diets were developed to mimic the

effects of fasting, without actually fasting, as a way to deal with

seizures, since fasting has been shown to be very effective in dealing

with seizures.