Re: Newbie question about weight loss

[Guest guest]

hi, michael:

first, congratulations on your healthy children!!

second, you so totally don't need all that processed crap to lose weight.

you'll get various responses from the list, so here's mine

i just low-carb, and eat 100% according to nourishing traditions. if i want

a smoothie, i mix kefir and coconut cream, maybe a little vanilla. until i

lose the rest of my baby fat (just 8 pounds to go! i've lost 30 since i

started low-carbing about 3-4 months ago), i just don't eat any starch. my

family is gluten-free, so bread/pasta doesn't even enter our picture, but i

also avoid potatoes and starchy foods, and i limit fruit (which i love!) to

one small piece a day. i do eat all the coconut i want, even though that

has some carbs, and i drink raw milk by the gallon - i think if i cut that

out i might lose the weight a little faster, but i love it, and i'm losing

weight fine enough as it is. my typical day includes all variants of dairy

products (milk, cream, butter, kefir, cheese, occasionally yogurt), meat,

eggs, and some of the following veggies: avocados, kale, broccoli, cabbage,

spinach, tomatoes, onions, cucumbers, cauliflower, seaweeds... also,

coconut oil, coconut cream, sardines, and lots of delicious herby goodness.

i should note, the low-fat part of your diet is not so good for you - you

need those good fats! so my recommendation is to just low carb, since

that's what you're familiar with right now, and forget all that processed

crap! remember, nourishing traditions is a method, not a diet. you choose

your own diet, and you can turn to NT for guidance on that. then, once you

know what you're going to eat, consult NT for the proper things to buy and

the right way to prepare it...

welcome aboard,

katja

>So, a long-winded explanation to my question, can a

>person loose weight on this diet (cutting out the

>refined carbs altogether and limiting sprouted carbs)?

>I haven't limited too much the butter/olive

>oil/avocado intake. Do I need to? Has anyone

>experienced lost weight on NOURISHING TRADITIONS?

>

>Thanks for reading my post and especially to anyone

>who answers it.

>

> M

[Guest guest]

-

>Has anyone

>experienced lost weight on NOURISHING TRADITIONS?

Sure. Nourishing Traditions doesn't really prescribe a diet per se, except

inasmuch as it advocates nutrient-dense foods and a return to higher-fat

eating. Within that broad stricture, you can eat low-carb or high-carb, or

I suppose you could even eat low-fat. If your physiology requires

low-carbing in order to lose weight (as mine does) there's absolutely no

reason you can't construct an NT-friendly low-carb diet. It'll be far

healthier than a fake-foods low-carb diet. That's how I eat.

-

[Guest guest]

I am doing the Body For Life program loosely. I stuck to it religiously at

first (but using NT type foods and no myoplex protein shakes! Those things

have awful ingredients) but i found eating 6 meals a day to exhausting and

that there were too many carbs for my liking. I have never done low-fat.

I am losing weight, albeit very slowly (about 10 pounds my first three

months, which aren't quite up yet). But i'm really enjoying the exercise. I

added more cardio -- up to 5Xweek and longer duration. I think that is

necessary for fat loss. I pretty much only do his weight training program,

the intensity level formula, and i'm a believer in journaling, although not

so good about sticking to it. But i will always credit BFL for getting me

started with its very doable program.

I found the free day really worked at first to get me off the sugar habit,

but i've since done away with it. I eat less sweets if i have them every now

and then instead of all day Sunday, LOL.

Lots of people seem to be losing weight with NT foods -- just a matter of

how you eat them. Low carb works best for me. Others are doing the Warrior

Diet. I have found when you eat saturated fats and all this other good

stuff, you generally need to eat less.

Elaine

>> Has anyone

>> experienced lost weight on NOURISHING TRADITIONS?

[Guest guest]

>So, a long-winded explanation to my question, can a

>person loose weight on this diet (cutting out the

>refined carbs altogether and limiting sprouted carbs)?

>I haven't limited too much the butter/olive

>oil/avocado intake. Do I need to? Has anyone

>experienced lost weight on NOURISHING TRADITIONS?

>

>Thanks for reading my post and especially to anyone

>who answers it.

>

> M

I use a combination of NT, the Warrior Diet, and the

stuff I learned on Body for Life and Cliff Sheats. I've

lost 20+ lbs so far. NT isn't really " diet " specific ...

I just choose foods that are more " whole " . Some things that help:

1. Using the Warrior Diet (only one meal a day, basically, in the evening).

2. Using coconut oil (or MCT, on salads) instead of other fats (gets

your metabolism going).

3. Tracking calories (I had to cut down on amounts of nuts!).

4. Lower amounts of carbs (on the WD, you eat salad, then protein and

vegies, and starch LAST if at all, so there is less starch and only once a day).

5. Doing muscle-building exercise.

6. Eating soups first for dinner a lot.

7. Avoiding any and all foods I react to (allergic foods).

Also TOTALLY avoiding wheat/barley/rye seems to really work

for some folks... my DH and daughter both lost weight by ONLY

avoiding those 3 (they still eat ice cream and plenty of other starches).

-- Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

>> So, a long-winded explanation to my question, can a

person loose weight on this diet (cutting out the

refined carbs altogether and limiting sprouted carbs)?

I haven't limited too much the butter/olive

oil/avocado intake. Do I need to? Has anyone

experienced lost weight on NOURISHING TRADITIONS? <<

, I did not lose weight just by eating according to NT, but when I went

on Atkins last May, I lost huge amounts of weight, reduced all my hypoglycemia,

lost my cravings, got a gigantic burst of energy, and turned into a morning

person. I still eat according to NT, just also according to Atkins. I have now

lost 86.8 pounds since May 19. I feel incredible.

The Body for Life diet you describe, low carb AND low fat, is a recipe for blood

sugar disaster IMO. Low carb and low fat don't go together, IMO low carb only

works if you also eat high fat. And NT of course is also high fat, although not

as high as the weight loss phase of Atkins. NT is more like Atkins maintenance

phase AKA " Atkins for Life. " My brother who is not overweight at all does

" Atkins for Life " and NT in combo and is in great health and is very happy with

it. He was a vegetarian but he and his wife have switched to NT at my suggestion

because they were not able to conceive a child.

There are also people on this list who will highly recommend the " Warrior Diet, "

which is not a high carb plan, but more a controlled undereating/feasting cycle

throughout the day. I personally am not interested in that approach for me, as I

like to eat a big breakfast and do best with a very small evening meal, the

exact opposite of WD. But depending on each person's own individual preferences

and how their body does best, that is an alternative that, combined with NT

principles, might work well for you.

Christie

[Guest guest]

Hi ...I'm a Body For Lifer too! I still use the workout scheme pretty

much to a T...and I'm new to NN as well.

I will disagree with you on the low carb part though. BFL is equal portions of

carbs and protein, though it was low fat...and the choice was personal whether

or not to rely on shakes and bars..I personally did it with 100% food because

there isn't a shake out there that doesn' tmake me green.

Anyway...I'm heading in the same direction that you are...raw milk etc.

I don't have an answer for you though I can say that I'm not eating any grains

now EXCEPT for an occasional bowl of cream of rice cereal....and my first goal

is a 50 lb weight loss.

I guess I dont' have an ANSWER, but wanted to wave at you, and let you know I'm

just about where you are at this point....

Marie

Newbie question about weight loss

Hello. I'm new to the list and new to Native Nutrition

in general so please forgive my question. From the

volume of postings I receive on a daily basis from

this group, I'm sure this topic has been covered

before.

I was about 50 pounds overweight and wanted to loose

some so went on an 12-week exercise/diet program in

December using the BODY FOR LIFE routine. The diet was

a low carb, high protein, low fat, high green

vegetables plan and relied heavily on protein shakes,

bars, etc. I lost 20 pounds so I can say it was

successful but didn't care for all of the processed

foods.

[Guest guest]

by the way, i wouldn't say Body For Life is low-carb at all. Pretty high

carb actually. People have said they've gained flab on it!

I do not really diet with Body For Life. I eat starches, although i try to

keep them low, and i enjoy desserts. I just shoot for not overeating and for

eating a well-balanced diet with good fats and proteins. And i'm still

losing weight, but, like i said very slowly. I am a lifelong yo-yo dieter

and i can't stomach anymore dieting, so this is working best for me, even

though i have a ways to go (40 pounds). My experience is still one of

deprivation equals bingeing. If/when i get over that i will probably do

better with a stricter diet. My goal in life is to eat like a normal person,

although i figure NT hardly qualifies as normal in most people's eyes.

Elaine

[Guest guest]

Hi!

At our house my husband has lost 35 lbs and I've lost 20 over about six

months from limiting our carbs, especially grain consumption. We'd

rather spend our carbs on sugar in our coffee (for the hubby) and in

ice cream (for me) than on grain products. We do eat grain, just

NOWHERE near what we used to eat. I personally have found that the more

good fat I eat the less I want carbs/sweets. I've got at least 50 more

lbs to lose (if you look at the charts, more like 100, but I'll be

satisfied anywhere below a total weight of 200 lbs) and if it takes me

a couple of years to lose it that's okay with me.

Lynn S.

------

Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

Editor/Publisher, The New Homemaker

http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

Celebrating 5 Years of Homemaker and Caregiver Support: 1999-2004

[Guest guest]

>A quick question and the Atkins people can probably

>speak to it: What about the equation of CALORIES IN

>MUST BE LESS THAN CALORIES OUT for weight loss to

>occur? Is that out the window these days?

>

>Thanks again for the information and for getting me to

>think!

>

> M

I personally think that equation is more or less true, but

it's also not quite so simple. I've tracked my food record

calorie for calorie, and really, lower cals means weight loss.

I've lost weight on high protein/high fat and also on high carb/low fat.

But, there are caveats:

1. Some foods, like coconut oil, really do rev up your metabolism

so you burn more calories.

2. Some foods, like MCT and protein, don't easily get stored as

fat.

3. Some foods, esp. high glycemic carbs and foods you are

allergic too, trigger an INTENSE hunger response and make you

eat too much. I think gluten is bad in this regard for a lot

of people.

4. Eating too few calories will put your metabolism in " starvation

mode " and it becomes harder to lose weight. Also you will tend

to burn muscle.

5. Some eating patterns are more conducive to fat loss, as

far as timing. IMO the Warrior Diet pattern, with few calories

for some period of time, forces the body into using stored

fat for energy (instead of relying on currently-digesting food).

6. Being in " ketosis " probably makes one " waste " calories

by using an inefficient way of burning fat.

7. " Food in " doesn't mean that food gets DIGESTED. Fats

in particular often just " pass through " without gettng digested

(depending on how many you eat and how good your fat

metabolism is) so they might be a " freebie " for some people.

Many people have malabsorption problems of one sort or

another, which is one reason you have these super skinny

people that eat humongous amounts of food.

There are probably more. Bottom line, for me ... keep a food

diary, experiment and see what WORKS. For me a diet has to

include all the stuff I REALLY like (such as hash browns) ... I can

force myself to do anything for a short period of time but that

doesn't lead to long-term weight loss. My current diet is making

me skinnier, slowly, but I haven't " given up " anything.

-- Heidi JEan

[Guest guest]

>> A quick question and the Atkins people can probably

speak to it: What about the equation of CALORIES IN

MUST BE LESS THAN CALORIES OUT for weight loss to

occur? Is that out the window these days? <<

, one of the things that Atkins folks say is " We don't count calories,

but calories do count. " One of the things to look at if you're on a low carb

regimen and aren't losing is portion size, ie calories.

However, high fat, low carb, moderate protein plans such as Atkins do enable you

to lose weight while eating more calories than you can on a high carb, low fat

eating plan. I don't know why, although some on this list have said that the

body can't process all the calories from fat so that may be the reason. Here is

a short article I wrote about this for a magazine I write for:

Is a Calorie a Calorie?

How new research is turning weight loss upside down

by Christie

For decades, most medical professionals have viewed low-carbohydrate diets with

hostility. Articles about them featured photos of huge steaks dripping with

butter, and slabs of bacon nestled into a hefty portion of fried eggs. Who could

possibly lose weight eating foods like that?

Dr. Atkins insisted that his patients could, and did. They also beat type

2 diabetes, heart disease, and a host of other health problems. And they did it,

he said, while eating not only well, but luxuriously. He insisted it in the 70s,

when his diet book ruled the bestseller lists. He insisted it again, with more

scientific research and years of clinical experience to back it up, in a 90s

best-selling update called Dr. Atkins New Diet Revolution. But Atkins was

scorned as a charlatan, his diet a dangerous fad. Any weight loss you experience

on this diet, the experts said, would be due to water loss. It would harm the

kidneys and the heart. The high levels of fat in the diet would kill you. A

calorie, they said, is a calorie; reduce calories and increase activity and

you'll lose weight. It's as simple as that (although a difficult proposition

when your body is screaming with hunger and you are suffering from severe

fatigue and lack of energy).

So, is a calorie a calorie? It appears not. According to Atkins, studies on

subjects fed identical calorie diets but with varying levels of fat, protein,

and carbohydrate have shown repeatedly that those on low carbohydrate, high fat

diets lose more weight than those on higher-carb diets. One recent study from

the Journal of Adolescent Health compared two groups of overweight teenaged

boys, one on a normal low-fat diet that comprised around 1200 calories a day,

and the other on a low-carb diet that comprised over 1800 calories a day. The

boys on the low carb, higher calorie diet lost an average of 21.7 pounds, while

the boys on the low fat, lower calorie diet lost only 9.1. The low-carb group

also had an improved body mass index (BMI) score as well.

Dr. Atkins died this winter after a fall on an icy sidewalk. He didn't live long

enough to see the highly publicized release of studies showing that the Atkins

plan does not appear to harm the heart or kidneys, and that it is in fact

effective for weight loss. Many experts are still skeptical, but others are

giving his theories, and the science behind them, a second look. Could years of

recommendations of low fat, high carb diets to lose weight and improve cardiac

health have been wrong? Or as NY Times science writer Taubes asked in a

recent headline, " Has It All Been a Big Fat Lie? "

Christie

[Guest guest]

<pseudomass@y...> wrote:

> I'm the one who originally asked the question about

> loosing weight on NT. Thank you for all of the

> generous responses.

Hello

I have found that drinking kefir has dramatically decreased my

foraging expeditions into the pantry for a sugar fix. I have yet to

loss weight too which I am anxious to do. I'm glad you asked the

question!

Gayle

[Guest guest]

I've read that studies show people actually eat fewer calories on an Atkins

diet, like less than 2000.

Elaine

[Guest guest]

>> I've read that studies show people actually eat fewer calories on an Atkins

diet, like less than 2000. <<

Eat fewer calories than what? Than they did before Atkins? Than people on low

fat diets? Than people who aren't trying to lose weight?

I eat over 3000 calories a day and have lost nearly 90 pounds.

Christie

[Guest guest]

Sorry i was unclear. Fewer calories as in weight-loss calorie intake. Like

around 1700 to 1800. That was a study that looked at average calorie intake

of an Atkins eater. What magazine was your story in?

Elaine

> Eat fewer calories than what? Than they did before Atkins? Than people on low

> fat diets? Than people who aren't trying to lose weight?

>

> I eat over 3000 calories a day and have lost nearly 90 pounds.

[Guest guest]

>> Sorry i was unclear. Fewer calories as in weight-loss calorie intake. Like

around 1700 to 1800. That was a study that looked at average calorie intake

of an Atkins eater. <<

I did find one study on this on the Atkins Center website. It found that the low

carb group spontaneously ate fewer calories than the high carb group, but it

wasn't a study that controlled calories. This is not too unusual, as being in a

state of ketosis is known to suppress appetite and also, because the high levels

of fat are very filling.

However, there are a lot of other studies that DID control calories, and they

found that, depending on the exact levels of macronutrients, low carb eaters can

lose more weight at the same calorie level as high carb eaters, or can lose

similar amounts of weight at higher calorie levels than high carb eaters.

I don't think there has been a study that looked at the average caloric intake

of Atkins eaters. I've never heard of anything like that. Dr. Atkins basically

recommends that you eat until you're satisfied, but not stuffed, and if your

weight loss slows or stalls, you look at your calories. He suggests that 10-12

times your body weight is usually good for weight loss, but of course, Atkins

eaters who are at their goal weight will eat more calories than that for

maintenance.

I think there is a certain metabolic advantage to high fat, low carb eating, but

I also believe that high fat, low carb diets do reign in cravings and

overeating. So I think that both things can be true.

>> What magazine was your story in? <<

CoastViews Magazine, a regional monthly in the San Francisco Bay Area. I used to

be editor of this magazine and still contribute to it.

Christie

[Guest guest]

At 01:37 PM 4/4/04 -0700, you wrote:

>This is not too

>unusual, as being in a state of ketosis is known to suppress appetite and

>also, because the high levels of fat are very filling.

Okay, so can someone give me the distilled version of what exactly

" ketosis " is (or maybe what I'm really thinking is the NN version hah).

Don't MAKE me sift through 7,321,486,306 google hits.

[Guest guest]

>> Okay, so can someone give me the distilled version of what exactly

" ketosis " is (or maybe what I'm really thinking is the NN version hah).

Don't MAKE me sift through 7,321,486,306 google hits. <<

LOL. Burning stored body fat instead of dietary carbohydrate.

What is the NN version? What IS NN?

Christie

[Guest guest]

At 01:55 PM 4/4/04 -0700, you wrote:

>>> Okay, so can someone give me the distilled version of what exactly

> " ketosis " is (or maybe what I'm really thinking is the NN version hah).

>Don't MAKE me sift through 7,321,486,306 google hits. <<

>

>LOL. Burning stored body fat instead of dietary carbohydrate.

LOL right back. Gee, and there everything that ends in " osis " makes me

automatically think it's a BAD thing.

>

>What is the NN version? What IS NN?

Pssssst. Look at the thread title. See it?

MFJ

These sprouts are still growing as they enter your mouth. ~ Anton

[Guest guest]

>> Pssssst. Look at the thread title. See it? <<

Oh god.

Red facedly yours,

Christie

[Guest guest]

At 03:02 PM 4/4/04 -0700, you wrote:

>>> Pssssst. Look at the thread title. See it? <<

>

>Oh god.

>

>Red facedly yours,

>

>Christie

>

Ah, but if you knew how many times I've done worse ...

Hugs and Red Faces,

Godessa

[Guest guest]

>Okay, so can someone give me the distilled version of what exactly

> " ketosis " is (or maybe what I'm really thinking is the NN version hah).

>Don't MAKE me sift through 7,321,486,306 google hits.

It depends who you ask, but the classic version is that your

cells have 3 energy-creating modes:

1. Fat+glycogen. This is considered the " normal " mode ... your

body breaks down fat plus a littly glycogen, and gets energy.

However, this takes oxygen too.

2. Glycogen only (glucose). This is considered the " anaerobic " mode ...

when you need energy FAST and there isn't enough oxygen. Like,

during wind sprints.

3. Ketosis. This happens when there is only fat available, no

glycogen. The body burns just the fat, but doesn't burn it

completely, so ketones get produced. Ketones get excreted,

so you are using more calories. But the brain can also

run on ketones (your brain can't burn just fat -- it requires

glucose or ketones).

Mode " 3 " burns the most calories, so you may lose fat faster.

However, the body can turn protein into glucose too ... true

carnivores (and Inuit) don't go into ketosis even though they

eat few carbs. It is possible that many Americans are stuck

in " 2 " because of the constant intake of glucose ... the fat

just kind of sits there because there is so much blood sugar

(and the cortisol/insulin hormones are screwed up).

In THEORY you should be able to live off fat and stored glycogen

and not get hungry, but I was never able to do this without

getting " low blood sugar " symptoms, which is one reason I

switched to the Warrior Diet (which is supposed to retrain

your system to work as it was designed). Now I find I can

work all day out in the yard (as I did today) with no food

and no hunger.

-- Heidi Jean