Kickin' Carb Clutter

How to Make it Through the Atkins Induction Diet

2012-01-03T18:05:00.000-07:00

For most people, a low-carb diet helps to control hunger, but that’s only after the body enters the state of Ketosis. Until then, cravings and hunger can cause you to mindlessly grab for the cookies and bread. Generally, that takes about three days. In addition, no matter which low-carb plan you choose, the first three weeks will be rough. It takes about that long for the brain to switch to completely burning ketones for fuel. Since many individuals choose to stay with the Induction Diet for at least the first month, here are some tips to help you make the adjustment.

Getting Into Ketosis

The state of Ketosis occurs when glycogen stores in the liver fall below a particular level. For most people, that’s about half-empty. At that point, the body is designed to stop using the storage form of carbohydrates (glycogen) and break down the triglycerides stored in your fat cells into fatty acids.

One of the by-products produced from breaking down stored body fat is ketones. Since the body often has difficulty creating fatty acids fast enough to fulfill total body needs, these ketones are dumped into the bloodstream along with the fatty acids and used for fuel by almost all body systems, organs and tissues. The brain does need some glucose, which is where the hunger and cravings come into play.

When glucose first runs low, due to glycogen stores being depleted, the body will scream for sugar. So to head it off before hand, it’s a good idea to load up on plenty of protein and fats during the first three days -- without even thinking about calories or portion sizes. The liver can turn protein into glucose to satisfy the brain’s needs, so carbohydrates themselves are not needed; however, if you eat too much protein, the brain might not adapt to using ketones.

Assuming you’re coming to the low-carb table with a liver completely full of glycogen, for the first three or four days, the amount of protein and fat you eat should be high. Never, ever go hungry. At this point, it doesn’t matter where the hunger is coming from – mind or stomach – feed it! After you enter ketosis and your hunger and cravings lessen, there will be time enough to think about what a normal size portion is.

The Goals of Induction

Let’s face it. We have turned to a low-carb diet because we want to lose body fat. We want to reach normal weight and enjoy all of the blessings that go along with that goal. There’s no denying that. But, the Atkins Induction Diet isn’t about that. If you’re new to low carb, that might be a strange idea to you, but the main purpose of Induction is to help your body adapt to the metabolic switch as quickly as possible. Losing weight during that first month is a side effect.

So you need to get adequate protein, about 150 grams per day. You need to have an adequate fat intake, even if that puts your calories a bit too high. And you need to eat the amount of carbohydrates your individual plan allows. The idea is to give your insulin levels time to return to normal, if elevated, your blood sugar levels time to normalize, and your brain time to adapt to using ketones for most of its needs.

Once all of that happens, your other body systems will switch from using ketones to using fatty acids exclusively. So there is a lot happening internally during that first month.

Mentally, it’s going to be difficult – not just because your brain will be screaming for sugar – but also because a low-carb diet brings a dramatic shift in the types of foods you’re used to eating. If you’re overweight or obese, chances are your diet has been predominantly made up of carbohydrates. Thoroughly study the list of allowable foods, eat nothing that isn’t on that list, keep your meals simple, and give your body time to adjust before worrying about weight loss.

Induction is NOT the Atkins Diet

Atkins Induction is an introduction to a low-carb diet. It’s designed to reduce cravings quickly, get you into the state of ketosis and show you the benefits of eating low carb over a typical low-calorie diet. It is NOT the Atkins Diet! The Atkins Diet is a methodical method of discovering your own personal carbohydrate tolerance. Which means – the Induction Diet is not meant to be used in any other way other than as the beginning of the low-carb path or as a temporary corrective measure.

Now, it’s quite possible that you might discover your carbohydrate tolerance to be low, but that isn’t always true. There is nothing magical about 20 grams of net carbohydrates per day. In fact, Atkins’ original diet only allowed about 10 total carbohydrates per day, not net even. His aim was to design a diet that would hit the target of ketosis for almost everyone. Many, many people can easily get into ketosis and maintain ketosis at a carbohydrate level that is much higher than 20 grams of net carbs per day.

Personally, even with my current health issues, I can easily enter into ketosis at 60 grams. So don’t deify the 20-gram level. Give your body time to make the metabolic switch, and then – let go!

Do Low Carb Diets Work?

2011-12-30T10:17:00.001-07:00

It never fails. When January rolls around, and sometimes the week just prior, the low-carb boards and egroups fill up with folks who are returning to the low-carb lifestyle. Why? Because – despite their good intensions and strong determination to eat the low-carb way for the rest of their life, something caused the pounds to creep back on.

Sometimes, the detour was deliberate, but most of the time, something in themselves or their life caused them to lose sight of their goals.

Let’s face it: Eating low carb is not easy! Eating low carb is hard! It’s a radical switch from the way most people eat. It’s an almost primitive, backwards style from what health-conscious medical doctors and nutritionists recommend. It’s loaded with protein and fat, ignores the pleas from professionals and government agencies to eat lots of whole grains, and forbids almost all types of low-calorie fruits when you’re still in weight-loss mode. In fact, to most folks, it’s almost sacrilegious.

Those who enter into the low-carb world are deeply motivated to lose weight. They have to be to put up with all of the crap we put up with. Yet, all of those I-told-you-so taunts are not enough to keep us from putting the weight back on. “See, I told you: Low carb is not sustainable.” “A low-carb diet is dangerous.” “A low-carb way of life is boring.” Well, perhaps they got that one right – if your diet is as limited as mine is.

Here it is, almost January again. New Years’ resolutions bring us back for another low-carb diet round. Another year; another try to reach our goal weight.

In some ways, I can relate to the problem. Each time my body decides to start reacting to something new, I pack on a few more pounds. So my weight has slowly crept upwards from the 150 pounds I weighed when a low-carb diet stopped working for me, but that isn’t low carb’s fault. It’s mine. If I had listened Dr. Atkins’ Diet Revolution in the mid '70s and used Dr. Atkins’ advice to maintain that weight, I wouldn’t be where I am today.

But it’s hard for first-timers to believe that.

There’s a lot of opinion going around concerning the One Golden Shot Theory. Most low carbers don’t want to believe it. They can’t. It would destroy their hope, and hope is essential if we’re going to one day find and cross the finish line. However, I think it’s good to talk about it, rather than denying it exists, because people who are new to low carb really need to understand the risk they are taking if they jump ship.

A low-carb diet works. It works exceptionally well for those who have never low carbed before. I watched an uncle of mine go from severely obese to normal weight the first time around, and he is able to easily maintain it today by eating within reason. I, myself, lost all of my excess weight (about 40 pounds) back in the '70s within 2 months on the original Atkins diet – but I didn’t understand how important learning to maintain my weight was.

That doesn’t mean that if this is your second or third attempt you won’t do okay. You most likely will. It will come off slower, since your body already knows how many ketones to make, but it will still come off – provided your fat metabolism is in good working condition. A low-carb diet works for most people. It works particularly well if you’re willing and able to curb your fat and calorie intake to whatever is necessary to make it work.

And that seems to be the bottom line.

Unless you have particular health issues and biological problems that interfere with the science behind it, a low carb diet works if you want it to work. It works if you do whatever is necessary to make your weight loss goals happen.

Are Genetically Modified Foods Affecting Your Low Carb Diet Plan?

2011-11-27T14:05:00.003-07:00

Are you following a low carb diet plan, yet find yourself hungry, tired and feeling sick? Has your weight loss stalled? Thanks to the prevalence of genetically modified foods in the U.S., your low carb meals might not be as grain free as you think.

Most Cheeses Contain GMO Corn and Rennet

Many low-carb followers, especially those who do their own research, understand the effect that various sugars can have on the body when their metabolism no longer functions properly. In fact, most low carb diet plans, such as the Atkins diet or the Protein Power Lifeplan, place insulin resistance and other metabolic issues at the heart of the obesity epidemic.

Excessive dietary carbohydrates keep insulin levels too high for too long, which prevents fat mobilization for energy. Lower your carbohydrate intake and your insulin level drops quickly, keeping the doors to your fat stores open, so your body can use its stored body fat as needed. That’s basic low-carb philosophy.

Today, however, we have a new kid on the block that’s causing havoc: genetically modified organisms -- also known as GMOs. Unlike the results of traditional crossbreeding techniques such as the gluten molecule, genetic manipulation involves inserting or deleting genes in a lab. Generally, genes are transferred from one organism to another.

Since the resulting plant, fruit, vegetable, grain and nutritional value are said to be essentially the same as the original, manufacturers in the U.S. are not required to tell you when these altered foods are in the products you buy. GMOs are not a secret though; most people know they exist. Seeds have been altered for decades that allow farmers to use quite a bit more herbicide on their crops than they could safely use before. Safely for the plant, that is.

This is how much I knew about genetically engineered foods, until recently. As many of you know, I’ve been researching the role that various health issues and food sensitivities play when following a low carb diet long term:

I have been studying how and why a low carb diet works.
I’ve read every book that Dr. Atkins has ever published, including the book he wrote for the non-dieting general population.
I’ve read every book that Dr. Eades has ever published.
I've read almost all of Lyle McDonald's books.
I’ve read Dr. Atkins’ public interviews.
I’ve read all of Dr. Eades’ blog posts.
I've read everything on Lyle McDonald's website as well as his two forums.
I’ve read everything I could get my hands on concerning insulin resistance, diabetes, celiac disease, allergies, dairy sensitivity, and elimination diets.
I have bounced many of my ideas and theories off of a friend who has a Ph.D. in biochemistry.
I’ve spoken to various medical doctors and other medical professionals.

Why? Because I got stuck about halfway to my goal weight, and I wanted to know why! The success I have had so far was only brought about by a very low-calorie, very low-fat, low carb diet (rather than a typical high-fat, low carb one), and I wanted to know why that was necessary. I wanted to know why a low carb diet doesn’t quench my appetite, as promised. I wanted to know why I gain weight, the fewer carbs I eat. I wanted to know why a standard Atkins Induction sends my blood glucose levels into dangerous territory.

In my search for health, I’ve dumped gluten, dairy, and beef -- all of which, I’ve spoken about here on this blog -- in hopes of being able to help someone else who might be going through what I am. (I do cheat with the beef sometimes, but I itch like crazy whenever I do.) Recently, I talked about my beef sensitivity, my nightmare of a trip to Colorado, and having to live on Fritos and diet Coke for three days while there. The sad thing about that trip is that as soon as I got home, within only a day or two, I started reacting to “something,” but I didn’t know what.

At the time, I blamed it on a new brand of gluten-free pasta I had eaten, but that was only partially correct. I did react to the pasta, but not for the reason I thought. I didn’t react because it was not gluten free. I reacted, because it was made with GMO corn -- the same as Fritos. My guess is that having to live on those Fritos flooded my body with so much GMO corn that it tagged the corn as an enemy. It now only takes a fraction for my immune system to attack it in the same way it attacks gluten and dairy.

Okay…so just go back onto a lower carb diet, since the lower levels of the Atkins ladder doesn’t include corn, and then everything will be fine, right? Not exactly. That’s what I thought -- until I did a little bit of investigation. Did you know that:

When “natural flavor,” “natural flavorings,” “citric acid,” “lactic acid,” “alcohol,” “enzymes,” “amino-acids,” and other additives are listed on the label, they generally come from GMO corn.
Enriched products can be enriched with GMO corn-based vitamins.
Almost all sugar substitutes are derived from corn sugars. Maltodextrin is also a GMO corn.
Many stores and manufacturers dust the plastic that meat is wrapped in with GMO cornstarch to keep the meat from sticking.
Many stores and manufacturers place a lactic-acid or citric-acid-soaked pad underneath the meat.
The foam trays that meats and poultry come in are generally made from corn.
Poultry and other meats can be dipped in a corn-containing wash prior to packaging?
Poultry and other frozen meats can be injected with a corn-containing solution?
Fruits and vegetables are often gassed or sprayed with a corn-containing wax that doesn’t wash off.
GMO feed passes into the cow’s milk contaminating typical low carb foods.
Cheese is generally made with a GMO rennet.

That is just the tip of the low carb problem. There’s GMO corn in our pharmaceuticals and vaccines too. And that’s just corn. Add in the soybeans, the Canola oil, the individual modified ingredients like xanthan gum and you’re left with very little real low carb food. In fact, about 90 percent of the corn, soybeans, cotton, and sugar beets in this country come from genetically modified organisms. That means that most low carb diets are not as healthy as we think.

For me, I've found that genetically modified foods seriously affect not only my metabolism, but my blood glucose levels as well. By removing GMO corn and corn derivatives from my maintenance diet, my high pre-diabetic blood glucose levels have now returned to absolutely normal. Even with an occasional high-carb real cane sugar treat, I have yet to see my blood sugar go higher than 124. While I continue to eat a lower carb maintenance diet, I have high hopes that eliminating all GMOs, not just corn, might be the solution that finally gets an Atkins-type diet to work for me. Only time will tell.

One Way to Handle Holiday Temptation: Help an Autistic Child Instead!

2011-10-05T20:35:00.002-06:00

With the holidays right around the corner, low carb folks will soon be talking about how to handle holiday temptation. The solution varies, depending on whom you talk too. Right now, we’re starting into the curve known as Halloween; that means candy, candied applies, donuts, spiced apple cider, and other holiday goodies.

Some of them can be given a low carb twist, sure, but let’s be honest: with all of the genetically-modified corn and soy running around these days, the high volume of wheat protein in low carb products, the dairy, and the high glycemic sugar alcohols in sugar free candies – diet twists aren’t necessarily more healthy than the high carb foods they’ve been designed to replace. Low carb junk, and low carb frankenfoods in particular, are still junk!

Now, if we’re serious about making low carb eating a lifestyle, we can’t cave into the coming holidays without getting lost in one holiday after another, one party after another, one excuse after another – or we’ll find ourselves, come January, a little bit heavier at best. And at worst? Back to where we were when we first started low carb dieting. Course, giving in to a treat or two won’t make you fat; but, I’m not talking about controlled, flexible dieting such as that described and recommended by common-sense folks like Lyle McDonald.

No…I’m talking about individuals who find their cravings ignite with a single cheat. One piece of Halloween candy, a little hard apple cider, a couple of bites of a sugary hot-and-cinnamon-y red candied apple, and they wake up the next morning face-down into the white-flour pancakes swimming in imitation maple syrup.

Okay, maybe you’re trying to control yourself with a stack of low carb pancakes and diet maple syrup, but still…most folks struggle to apply the brakes for days afterwards, if they allow themselves a free holiday meal or dessert.

I haven’t been as devoted to my Facebook account lately as I should be; partly because my health has been downright crappy this past year, and partly because I’ve been spending hours upon hours researching the medical possibilities. But I happened to be on there the other day, and noticed that David Berkowitz, president and founder of Autism Advocacy and Technology News Zone Inc., had posted to my wall. (I’m talking about my personal Facebook account, not my author’s page.)

I first met David on Twitter where he asked me if I ever wrote articles about autism companies, explaining what they were currently trying to do. So, I checked out his website, did a little bit of research on him, and he gave me an interview. The result was two articles for Suite 101:

Give Your Old Tablet PC to Tech News and Help an Autistic Child

iPads for Kids with Autism: Tech News Zones Wants to Help

They explain in detail who David is (an Aspie dad trying to raise three aspie sons), and what he’s trying to do with his recently formed company (get iPads and other forms of technology, music, and the arts into the hands of autistic kids whose parents can’t afford them). However, despite his good intentions and hundreds of hours of devotion and time put into trying to get his company into the air, he’s bucking a lot of wind.

As he said to me on my Facebook wall, he’s holding a Rubios fundraiser at all three of the Rubios in the Las Vegas – Henderson area on 10/21/2011. Those who live in that area, or plan to be in that area on the 21^st of this month, can help support autism’s cause by downloading the pdf version of a fundraising flyer on his website, and then go to one of the three Rubios on the 21^st to help support the cause.

For those who don’t live in the Vegas/Henderson area, they can easily make a donation through David’s website, Technewszone. Only, according to the post David made to my Facebook account, NO ONE has donated anything yet. So I was thinking… (yeah, I know that can be dangerous, but…)

Maybe, instead of cheating on our low-carb diet this holiday season, we can donate the money we would otherwise spend on illegal goodies (or even a portion of the legal ones) to help non-verbal autistic children get the iPads they need to learn how to communicate. It’s a fallacy that because many children with autism can’t talk, that it means they don’t know what’s going on. They do.

Autism is a brain malfunction that often leads to developmental delay and sensory issues, but these kids still have ears that work just fine. When given the opportunity to learn how to communicate through visual means like iPads, computers, picture cards, and sign language they can make dramatic, significant headway.

So think about it. We spend tons of money on the holidays. We decorate the house with holiday décor. We buy Halloween costumes, pick out giant turkeys, and spend hours in the kitchen whipping up tons of food for a 30-minute Thanksgiving dinner. We buy Christmas trees, Christmas and Hanukah cards, party fair, and make platefuls of cookies, candies, and other Christmas and Hanukah goodies. We buy new clothes. And yes, we buy presents.

So if you want to do something just a little bit different this year…why not give up all of those extra pounds of fat we all tend to put on during the holidays, and instead of over-indulging, why not find room in your heart to brighten up the life of an autistic child? It doesn’t have to be money. Technewszone.com is about getting technology, music, and the arts into the hands of autistic children. They accept all sorts of non-monetary donations: Anything an autistic family may not be able to afford to buy, due to the high costs of therapy and specialty diets.

So check out my two Suite articles linked to above, think about adding the cause of autism to your holiday list, and then do something to help. As David’s website says, if everyone who visits this blog donated only 50 cents, then together we could bring a miracle into the life of an autistic child.

Crispy Sesame Chicken Wings

2011-10-03T18:13:00.002-06:00

Crispy Sesame Chicken Wings

I haven't experimented with chicken wings much; they are expensive in my neck of the woods. Used to be, if I was going to spend $5 for just the meat portion of a single meal, I'd pick up a nice steak or piece of Salmon. Since I can't eat either of those anymore, except on very rare occasions, I grabbed a marked-down package of chicken wings the last time I was at Walmart.

Marked-down wings are rare here too, but does happen now and then, so I guess I'll be on the look-out from now on, because these chicken wings came out crispy with just the right amount of mouth-watering ginger and sesame. Plus at $5 for two meals, it makes them doable.

My favorite go-to has always been a good old-fashioned hot wing recipe, with Heroine Wings coming in at a close second, but I can't do Parmesan Cheese anymore -- so I opted for a sweet Teriyaki. When doing a PSMF diet round once, I threw together soy sauce, diet maple syrup, ginger, and garlic and used that to baste my chicken breast; but I can't use diet maple syrup so I decided to switch out the maple flavor for some sesame.

In the late 90s, before good-tasting sugar substitutes were available, us Atkinites used a little bit of real sugar, and counted it at twice the carbs. I know that, today, die-hard Atkinites would cringe at that, but that's what we did. It worked just fine for me and many others, but that's not what I'm suggesting, here. I'm just saying...

Cause I've been reacting to corn lately (which I'll get to in another post soon). I've had to revamp my way of doing things. So even though I actually used brown sugar in this recipe, just use whatever type of sugar substitute works best for you. My husband isn't crazy about anything that's too spicy, so if you want to spice these up a bit, they could withstand a little minced chili pepper, dried crushed chilies, or hot garlic chili paste.

Crispy Sesame Chicken Wings

About 1-1/2 lbs of chicken wings cut in half and wing tips removed
1/4 cup soy sauce (San-J Organic Tamari)
3 tbsp water
2 to 4 tbsp sugar substitute
1 tbsp sesame oil
1 tsp minced garlic
1 tbsp minced fresh ginger
2 tsp sesame seeds

Place the chicken wings in a gallon zip-lock bag. In a bowl, combine the rest of the ingredients; stir well, then pour over the chicken wings. Marinate for several hours, preferably overnight. Bake on a wire rack in the center of the oven, at 350, until crispy -- about 1 hour.

*Photo by wEnDaLicious

Stumbling on Your Low-Carb Eating Plan? Here’s How to Find Success by Using the Back Door

2011-09-26T22:29:00.000-06:00

Find Low Carb Success Going Through the Back Door

Most folks who start a low-carb eating plan, begin by walking through the front door. They read the book, study the first phase of Induction thoroughly, and then just do it. Some throw out, or give away, all of the high-carb items in the house, stock the refrigerator and cupboards with low-carb foods, and map out a solid plan of action for emergencies.

Others take a more haphazard approach. They read the book, but skip over the boring information to get to the food list and rules. They don’t much care how low carb works, or why, they just want to know what to eat, and what not too. They may, or may not stock up on allowable foods, and they may, or may not think about what to do if they find themselves in a tight situation.

Both dieting styles can lead to problems sticking to a new diet, because no matter what your degree of motivation, switching to a low-carb eating style brings drastic change. Initially, you might have enough determination to get you through the first few weeks while your body busies itself switching from predominantly burning glucose to burning fats. You might even have enough strength to wait it out until the body understands that you want the brain to burn ketones for its fuel. But that doesn’t hold true for everyone.

When excess hunger and cravings arise, some choose to stuff their mouths with more fats and protein. Some choose to ignore what their mind tells them, and continue eating normal-sized portions until the craving goes away. And some cave into that plate of homemade chocolate chip cookies (or that slice of bread, or scoop of ice cream, or whatever their carbohydrate of choice) because they needed them to ease the migraine, or the nausea. Or because unconsciously, they didn’t wake up until it was too late.

Basic theories vary, but most believe cravings come from:

detoxing from carbohydrates or sugar
wheat or sugar withdrawal
erratic or quickly falling blood sugar levels
high insulin levels
liver glycogen stores getting too low

The bottom line? It doesn’t really matter why you have trouble sticking to plan. Whatever the truth, that knowledge doesn’t keep your hand from reaching out for those cookies and shoving them into your mouth. It really doesn’t. So, if you keep finding yourself cheating on Induction, or if you’ve been following a low-carb eating plan for awhile but keep stumbling – take heart. An easier way exists to work around the problem than trying to fight against your will.

How Sensory Integration Affects a Low-Carb Eating Plan

Your first or second time around the block, burning fat on a low-carb diet comes easier and quicker than it will for those who pop in and out for years. And yes, I’m talking about the One Golden Shot Theory. That theory holds true, but not for the reason most people think. Nor are the consequences impossible to overcome, for most.

All behavior results from sensory integration that takes place within the central nervous system (brain and spinal cord). As part of that integration process, the brain interprets the sensory data it receives, organizes a reaction, and then commands the body to carry out the plan. This reaction takes only a second or two, and occurs at the unconscious level. It makes change difficult. The body literally fights for survival.

A low-carb diet places the body in survival mode. So everything you think and do unfolds due to the alternative energy pathway (starvation) called into play when carbohydrates, and thus glucose, severely and suddenly drop, as they do during Induction.

If new to low carb, the body won’t have experience burning ketones for fuel, so it won’t know how many you’ll need. As a result, many partially burned ketones flush out of the body -- if you drink enough water. But if not new to low-carb eating, and your body knows a ketone is the perfect fuel for the brain, it will remember how many ketones it takes to replace the missing glucose, and you won’t overproduce them.

However, you will still have to suffer through the adaption process. This means, the body and mind will most likely fight harder, since you caved in to its desires before, each time you returned to a higher carb diet.

Entering a Low-Carb Diet Through the Back Door

The hindbrain is the first part of the brain to develop. It controls our unconscious body functions like heartbeat, breathing, and digestion. When you enter a low-carb diet, and you restrict the body’s fuel source, this hindbrain’s survival instinct kicks into high gear. It literally believes you are starving, so it will do whatever it has to, to make sure the body survives the famine.

When you drastically cut carbs, you bring that survival instinct to life. And when you expose your senses to smells, pictures, or imaginative images of food you miss, the central nervous system recognizes those smells and images as food and cranks up your desire to eat.

A backdoor approach slowly introduces the mind and body to a low-carb eating plan. It doesn’t do that by dropping carbohydrate consumption to a mere 20 grams per day, and shocking the body into ketosis for survival, but by gently correctly the energy imbalance that caused your body to store excess carbohydrates as fat.

According to Dr. Eades (author of The Protein Power Lifeplan), the body needs about 200 grams of carbohydrate per day, to meet the needs of the brain and other glucose-dependent tissues. How much it needs exactly differs from person to person, depending on activity level, metabolic rate, and body size. Most nutritional experts recommend a dietary approach that consists of about 50% of calories in carbohydrates. At 4 calories per gram, however, the 200 or so the body needs would only come in at 800 calories – that’s less than half.

Most individuals not following a low-carb regimen eat about 300 to 400 grams of carbohydrate a day, or even more. While it takes a little less than 100 grams to get into the state of ketosis, entering ketosis is not the goal of using a backdoor approach. It’s to begin making changes in that direction. So pick a comfortable carbohydrate level to begin. Whether you choose 200 grams, 150, 100, or 60 doesn’t matter. Just make it less than you current eat.

Give yourself a month or two at that level to adjust, and then begin taking steps to lower the carbohydrate level, again…and again…for as long as it takes. How much lower? And how quickly? That depends. A backwards approach doesn’t require the dieter to go down to Induction levels, ever, but to slowly incorporate carbohydrate restriction until you reach the level of carbs that allows you to lose weight. The back door takes a low-carb diet and actually puts it into practice, in reverse. You travel down the carb ladder (if so inclined) rather than up.

By following a low-carb eating plan backwards, you avoid shocking the body, and give yourself time to adjust to giving up your favorite carbohydrates (perhaps even one at a time). You also give yourself more time to find healthy and satisfying ways to replace them. In addition, you never have to suffer through the initial deprivation that has so far been working against you.

Granted, this describes a slower approach, and not for everyone. But for those who can’t seem to make it through Induction, or those who keep stumbling because you can’t give up your favorite treats all at once, knocking on the backdoor can offer a chance to make your weight-loss goals become a reality, rather than just a dream.

*Photo by Roger Ward

Are You Making One of These Two Low-Carb Diet Mistakes?

2011-09-18T11:39:00.000-06:00

A low-carb diet is an effective, but highly restrictive, weight-loss plan. It works well when you follow the rules. If you waltz into the room thinking you can do your own thing without having read and studied any of the weight-loss plans, you’ll probably find yourself asking, “Am I doing low carb right?” A dead giveaway that you aren’t.

However, if you’ve been carefully following one of the low-carb programs, and weight loss has slowed, or stopped, you might want to check and see if you’ve been making one of these low-carb mistakes.

Where Are Your Carbs Coming From?

Most individuals enter the Induction phase on a diet-high. Motivation is strong. The weight loss you experience from losing the glycogen needed to get you into ketosis keeps you pumped. Motivated by the new lack in cravings and sense of well-being, low-carb diet mistakes are few. You stick to the rules, start experimenting with new foods and recipes, and make the decision that this low carb stuff is going to be a lifestyle change – not just another diet.

But lifestyle changes don’t come that easy. Like anything else, even with a rock-solid foundation, we can reach a point where we start to slip back into our old ways of doing things. For some, that means giving ourselves permission to cheat once in a while. But for others, the tendency surfaces by trying to recreate the diet that got us fat in the first place – but from a low-carb perspective.

While there’s nothing wrong with attempting to low carb a favorite recipe or holiday treat, it’s easy to slip away from Dr. Atkins’ caution when moving into the Ongoing Weight Loss phase. “If you have decided to move to phase two, I want to remind you not to regard it as a time to cut loose and undo all of the good work you have just completed,” Atkins writes. Pretty much common sense. But then he adds that phase two is “very similar to Induction in that you will continue to derive the majority of your carbohydrates from vegetables low in carbs.”

While the carbohydrate ladder allows later additions of nuts and berries, phase two doesn’t lift most of the restrictions given for Induction. These daily limits are:

cheese (3-4 oz)
heavy cream (2-3 tbsp)
sugar substitutes (2-3 servings, counted as 1 gram of carbohydrate each)
salad dressings (without sugar, and no more than 2 grams of carbohydrate per 1 tbsp serving)
spices (without added sugar)
lemon juice (2-3 tbsp per day)
olives (20)
sour cream (1 oz – that’s 2 tbsp)
avocado (1/2)

Dr. Atkins also cautioned against using too many low-carb products. While he did mention that convenience foods were an option for when “you are unable to find appropriate food, can’t take time for a meal or need a quick snack,” he also warned to watch out for carbohydrate counts. Far too many products today, like low-carb breads, tortillas, and pastas, or low-carb shakes and bars have hidden carbs or digest exactly like the high-carb products they replace.

In addition, if you have wheat sensitivities, be extra careful with what you spend your carbs on, because most low-carb products are loaded with wheat protein. The same is true for many favorites like soy sauce. Also, keep in mind that some whole grains like soy flour and uncertified gluten-free oatmeal (which many low-carb bakers grind into flour) are also highly contaminated with wheat.

Are You Counting Your Carbohydrates?

Following a low-carb diet, rather than a traditional low-fat low-calorie plan, doesn’t get you out of having to play the numbers game. Do you know what your Critical Carbohydrate Level for Losing (CCLL) is? According to Dr. Atkins, knowing that number and “counting grams of carbohydrate is truly your responsibility. If you don’t count you could get into trouble.”

The idea behind the Atkins diet, or Protein Power, or any number of other low-carb plans is that your rate of fat loss is in direct proportion to the amount of carbs you eat. Knowing your CCLL, and staying at or below that number (or whatever level of carbs and protein The Protein Power Lifeplan assigns you) is like a safety net. That’s a little less than the amount of starch your body can deal with on a daily basis without having to store it as glycogen, or body fat if glycogen stores are full. Go above that number, and your weight loss will stall.

That’s pretty much what the carb ladder is all about too. Helping you make the best choice for whatever condition your current metabolism is in.

But too many times, we think we know better and we do something that sits outside the rules. Sometimes we get away with it, like eating low-carb tortillas, pasta, and bread way before step nine on the ladder. Or we stick to eating just allowable foods without actually counting the amount of carbs we are eating each day. If we’re lucky, we will continue to lose weight just fine. But sometimes we don’t. Sometimes those little inconsistencies and mistakes catch up with us, and our weight loss stalls.

Get Back on Track

When that happens, step one is always to get back to counting carbohydrates. After which it’s a good idea to examine closely where those carbs are coming from. It’s easy to get lax and stop reading labels, allowing a little sugar or high fructose corn syrup to slip into our diet through a store-purchased salad dressing. It’s also easy to forget what level of the carb ladder we’re on – when see others eating low-carb pasta and continuing to lose weight. And it’s even easier to devote ourselves to low-carb foods and ingredients than it is to drag out the measuring spoons and cups to find out exactly how many carbs we’re eating.

That’s because, when it comes to fat loss and staying on plan, most of the time, we are our own worst enemy. However, if we want to reach our weight-loss goals, we have to be willing to take a good look at ourselves, our current lifestyle, and weed out any low-carb diet mistakes that might be standing in our way. That certainly isn’t easy; it’s where I’ve been slipping down the slippery slope of fat gain lately. Not much – I weighed it at just three pounds over my current temporary weight maintenance goal – but three pounds is where I’ve personally chosen to draw the line.

So it’s back to lower carbs for me, for awhile.

Food Allergies, Neuropathy, and Blood Sugar Control on a Low Carb Diet

2011-08-09T16:35:00.000-06:00

Many things can interfere with the success of a low carb diet. Gluten sensitivity or celiac disease, thyroid problems, portion control issues, and food addictions are just a few. Recently, I’ve been looking at food sensitivities and allergies, since inflammation and the resulting water retention factor heavily into the vertigo and ataxia I suffer with. Also, I started having severe itching problems and a rash on my arms, along with drastic weight gain, whenever I ate beef.

Technically, the term “food allergy” describes an IgE antibody response launched by the immune system to a specific food protein. These antibodies interpret the offending protein molecule to be an invader and use mediators such as histamine – which cause the allergy symptoms. The skin, gastrointestinal tract, and respiratory system are the primary organs affected by food allergies.

However, when I was younger, most allergists did not believe in food sensitivities or intolerances. They only believed in food allergies that called forth these IgE antibodies. Skin-prick tests were popular back then, and considered the Gold Standard. So when I didn’t get a positive reaction to the foods, pollens, animals, and dust Kaiser tested me for, the allergist told me that even though my problems clearly fell in line with allergic symptoms, my problem wasn’t food.

“I believe your problem is chemical,” he said. “But I can’t test for chemicals. You’ll just have to go home and figure it out for yourself.”

In those days, the only option available to those with sensitivities and intolerances was an elimination diet. So that’s what I’m used to. For those of us who don't have health insurance, elimination diets continue to be the only course of action we have.

My husband and I did go through our county medical department here in central Utah a couple of years ago, and managed to receive partial funding to get our arteries checked out, our heart monitored, my gallbladder removed, and my bladder repaired. But our portion of the bill put us in so much debt we couldn’t afford to take on any new, additional medical expenses. So we walked away from that experience without actually finding out what was wrong with us.

An elimination diet is where you eliminate the foods you think might be causing the problem, or you cut out almost everything you’re eating for a few weeks, and then begin returning foods to your diet one at a time. When you go for a while without a food you’re sensitive to, and then reintroduce that food into your diet, your body over-reacts to that particular food. Due to the exaggeration of symptoms that results, it’s fairly easy to tell what your body doesn’t want you to eat.

In the 1970s, the Atkins diet functioned as an elimination diet. In fact, Dr. Atkins told those of us on the Atkins newsgroup in the late 1990s, that the initial design allowed only a little bit of salad, because most of his patients had gastrointestinal problems and the lack of fiber helped the intestines to begin healing. In those days, 1/2 cup of cooked vegetables wasn’t returned to the diet until week 3. And they were returned one vegetable at a time – not like they are today.

When I started seeing a strong correlation between dairy products and beef, and the vertigo, ataxia, Neuropathy, and blood sugar issues, I did a little bit of research and found a connection between those sensitive to dairy products, and those sensitive to beef. I talked about that discovery in the following post: Dairy Sensitivity, Beef, and the Atkins Induction Plan.

Since then, I’ve tried to eat beef a couple of times, but reacted to it in the same way I did before I eliminated it back in early May: with severe itching, and a skin rash.

I also bought some organic Monterey jack cheese when I was in Las Vegas a few weeks ago, visiting a friend, and reacted with the same neurological symptoms I used to get: ear swelling and pain, vertigo, tinnitus, ataxia (off-balance), slurred speech, and brain fog – within 20 minutes. Later on that evening, I also got intestinal inflammation and pain.

All that from a single ounce slice (or maybe less) of organic cheese.

Interestingly enough, simply eliminating all dairy products and beef corrected my wacky blood sugar issues within a couple of weeks, without me having to do anything else – probably because food allergies and sensitivities cause inflammation. Inflammation makes you less sensitive to insulin. Remove the inflammation, and insulin resistance improves, or corrects itself.

Now, I’m not saying that my pre-diabetes went away. At least, not right now. Because we recently took a trip to Colorado, and while we were there, I got seriously glutened from the friends we took the trip with. Plus we ate at Taco Bell a couple of times, and I got dairyed on the second day.

Cross contamination when you eat out, despite choosing gluten free dairy free food, is extremely risky, because most folks don’t “get it” – even when you take the time to thoroughly explain it to them. So I ended up living on Fritos and diet Coke for the rest of the trip. Not good for the blood sugar, I know. Not good for the Neuropathy. But at least my intestines and other neurological problems remained safe.

However, within the past week, something else has glutened both my husband and I. So right now, between Colorado and whatever we ate this past week (I’m suspecting the new brand of gluten-free certified macaroni I put in my pasta/vegetable salad), my blood sugar is higher than it has been.

My current numbers wouldn’t be helpful. But I can say that while I used to have to limit myself on maintenance to a mere 15 grams of carbohydrates per meal, or less, I can now achieve normal blood glucose levels eating 30 to 40 grams of carbohydrates per meal – except for breakfast – provided I stay completely away from gluten and casein.

But even better, my weight is now extremely easy to maintain. I’m still sitting at 160 pounds, as the extra weight I gained from the beef hasn’t melted, but the weight fluctuations have disappeared. And that means way less vertigo and ataxia, and no Neuropathy or other neurological problems, even at that higher carbohydrate intake.

Type 2 Diabetes and a Low Carb Diet – Essential or Dogma?

2011-07-06T15:44:00.001-06:00

The newest diabetes diet recommendations came out a few days ago: eat more carbs, and use drugs to keep your blood glucose under control. Scary stuff.

Diabetes Health Magazine recently ran an article by Hope Warshaw entitled “Type 2 Diabetes: From Old Dogmas to New Realities – Part 2.” In that article Warshaw first focuses on and ridicules weight loss for diabetics in connection with better glucose control, and then likewise attacks a low carb diet – calling both of them old dogma.

For those who have actually studied the principles and science behind carbohydrate restriction and/or have put them to the test, adversity against our own personal truth and experience isn’t new. But when someone looked to as an authoritative voice presents that, a minimum carbohydrate intake of 45% of daily calories is the new reality for diabetics, it’s hard to walk away and let that be.

Is Weight Loss for Diabetics Really Dogma?

When I was first diagnosed with pre-diabetes, my physician believed that if I could just lose 10 pounds, my fasting blood glucose levels (121 mg/dl) would correct themselves, and I would escape diabetes. In fact, he was so sure that was true, he never retested me to back up his view. Warshaw pegs that perspective as dogma, but the issue of weight loss and diabetes is far more complex than to shove it aside just because “research shows that the greatest impact of weight loss on blood glucose is in the first few months and years after diagnosis.”

Why? Because Insulin Resistance sits at the heart of Type 2 Diabetes. It literally drives pre-diabetes forward, and sets the stage for glucose toxicity. While “the biggest bang for the effort per pound is likely in the pre-diabetes phase,” as Warshaw says, that’s only because most physicians and patients don’t know anything about how and why a low carb diet works. And that makes articles like this one potentially dangerous.

Tell a Type 2 Diabetic that weight loss for him or her is fruitless, and you’re going to have hundreds of overweight and obese individuals giving up their efforts to overcome the effect of the obesity epidemic in their lives. Tell a Type 2 Diabetic (who has elevated insulin levels by definition) that “it’s time to progress to blood glucose-lowering medication(s), because it’s doubtful that weight loss alone will get and keep blood glucose under control,” and you’re going to end up with a world full of fat, sick, diabetics suffering needlessly with diabetic complications.

If you’re no longer pre-diabetic, just give up. Stop trying to diet. Just use drugs. It all sounds like a Big Pharma commercial to me.

The sad thing is, people shove insulin injections away for as long as possible for a reason. A good reason. A reason low carb dieters are very aware of – that higher and higher insulin levels (when insulin resistant, rather than insulin deficient) lock up body fat stores, and encourage the body to store more and more calories in your fat cells. While it’s true that calories count (even Dr. Atkins himself said that), when the body wants to up its fat reserves, (which insulin encourages), it simply slows down the metabolism to do it.

Is a Low Carb Diet for Diabetes Old Dogma or Essential?

While going on Metformin at diagnosis has been standard medical practice for as long as I can remember, and a med that hardly anyone fights against, the scary thing about this article is what it says about low carb diets: that they are no longer essential to achieve good blood glucose control, because that’s "old dogma."

The new advice? “Nutritional recommendations for people with Type 2 diabetes from the American Diabetes Association and other health authorities echo the recently unveiled U.S. 2010 Dietary Guidelines (1/31/11) for carbohydrate: about 45 to 65 percent of calories.”

Now that’s scary…because the fastest way to lower elevated insulin and blood glucose levels is with a low carb diet. And telling people with Type 2 diabetes that they should be eating more carbohydrate foods than their body can personally process, rather than less, sets them up for not only persistent overweight and obesity, but also serious diabetic complications.

Yet the article proposes a diabetic toss away carb restriction in favor of eating a minimum of 45% of their daily calories in carbohydrates. At 1,900 calories a day (my current maintenance level for 160 lbs), 45% of my calories would be 214 grams of carbohydrates per day, or over 71 grams per meal. That’s twice the amount of carbs it takes for me to maintain good blood glucose control! And four times the carbs to bring my blood glucose levels back down to normal quickly, if elevated.

Now, in all fairness, I am not diabetic. I’ve only been diagnosed with pre-diabetes. The classification that Warshaw says can be helped through dietary control. However, were I to eat at the levels this article recommends – 45% to 65% of my daily calories in carbohydrates – I “would” be diagnosed as diabetic, (with post-meal blood glucose levels over 200 mg/dl), because that’s how high my blood glucose levels would soar.

The only reason why I am not diabetic today is because my current physician only diagnoses diabetes from an A1c test, and I’ve been following a lower carb diet since January of 2007.

"Yeah, but the article says a low carb diet works to prevent diabetes progression," you may say. True. But give me the level of carbohydrates that this article recommends (over the course of a few days so the enzymes needed to digest that amount of carbs up-regulates), and my post meal blood glucose levels would be over the line for a diabetes diagnosis.

How do I know? Because the last time I ate 60 grams of carbohydrates per meal consistently, starting from a base level of a normal 84 mg/dl, my post meal blood glucose levels rose to 210 mg/dl, my fasting blood glucose to 127, and my basal levels to 110. Were I to eat 71 grams of carbohydrate or more at each and every meal, day after day, what do you think would happen?

Has the American Diabetes Association Made a U-Turn?

I was particularly shocked to hear Warshaw say that the ADA supports the current U.S. Guidelines for “healthy” non-diabetics as a ruler for those with metabolic issues, because their 2011 guidelines for diabetics talks about metabolic individuality, self management, and how important it is to find the “best mix of carbohydrate, protein, and fat” for any one particular individual that would help them “meet the metabolic goals and individual preferences of the person with diabetes.”

In fact, when it comes to low carb diets themselves, they even said that “Monitoring carbohydrates, whether by carbohydrate counting, choices, or experience-based estimation, remains a key strategy in achieving glycemic control.” And that “In one study, those subjects with type 2 diabetes demonstrated a greater decrease in A1c with a low-carbohydrate diet than with a low-fat diet.”

So why is there so much negativity directed towards a low carb diet? Why is Warshaw suddenly announcing that the ADA has changed their mind, and now wants to put all diabetics on a level of carbohydrates that will guarantee them perpetual glucose toxicity?

Glucose toxicity KILLS beta cells!

But an even bigger puzzle is that according to the ADA, “The RDA for digestible carbohydrate is 130 g/day and is based on providing adequate glucose as the required fuel for the central nervous system without reliance on glucose production from ingested protein or fat.” Now, if that’s true, then why or why is Warshaw recommending such a high carbohydrate level for diabetics? A hundred-and-thirty grams a day is quite a bit less than 45% of our daily calories.

The Same Old, Same Old Argument: No Long Term Low Carb Studies

At the end of her article, Warshaw uses an old, tired argument to manipulate her readers to move to her side of the fence. She says that “Countless research studies do not show long term (greater than six months to a year) benefit of low carb diets on blood glucose, weight control, or blood fats.”

While her argument is technically true, (most low carb studies do fit within the time period she holds up), the lack of data isn’t because those of us who have been following a low carb diet for years are unwilling to come forth with our stories and medical records. It’s because most scientific studies-to-date use individuals who are not interested in adopting a permanent low carb lifestyle. They go off the diet when the study ends or when the study instructs them to move to maintenance, return to their old eating habits, and gain the weight back.

Well…duh!!!

Shortly after my brother-in-law went in for double by-pass surgery, my husband and I went through thorough physical testing ourselves – from initial simple blood work to rather expensive stress and heart artery tests. The results amazed our personal physician as well as the cardiologists. In fact, the main cardiologist told me he had never seen arteries as clean as mine were. And while my husband’s arteries were labeled in “good” shape, my personal physician told me that mine were considered “excellent.”

The difference between my husband and I? A low carb diet!!!

At that time, my pre-diabetes was UN-diagnosed by my physician because it had completely reversed itself. In fact, my physician told me at that time, that I was the healthiest patient she had ever seen. She was totally amazed. And while she was in full support of my low carb diet, she didn’t understand how or why it worked.

The Bottom Line: A Low Carb Diet is Essential for Diabetics!

I’d like to say that after my test results, I was sold on low carb diets, and that my husband and I have lived happily ever after. But like all of those other scientific study patrons to date, I became a wayward low carb child this past year, and basically ran away from home. That was due partially to being sick from a serious flea bomb exposure, and partly because my husband and I found out that we both have celiac disease. My hope was that gluten was behind my metabolic issues.

Maybe initially it was. And maybe it wasn’t. There’s no way to tell. But running away from home only made things worse for me.

Like I said above, if I choose to eat too many carbs at a single meal, my blood glucose levels will soar into diabetic ranges. But if I keep my carbs to a maximum of 15 to 20 grams for breakfast and lunch, and a maximum of 40 grams for dinner, my glucose levels remain normal. On an ordinary day, I eat fewer carbs than that – that’s just the maximum I can have, that will keep my Neuropathy from surfacing, and my weight stable at 160 pounds.

What I have on my side so far is that a lower carb diet does keep my blood glucose levels within tight targets. I don’t eat anything that causes my levels to rise above 140 mg/dl at one hour, or to stay elevated above 120 mg/dl at two hours. Most of the time, I try to eat what keeps my levels at or below 120 mg/dl at all times, because that’s a more normal blood sugar target.

Were I to follow the advice given me in this article, that kind of drugless control would not be possible. My Neuropathy would have me on pain medication, and Big Pharma would be supporting me with Metformin and/or insulin injections. If the bottom line (according to this article) is really to “Take action as early as possible after diagnosis. Don’t delay, don’t deny. Get and keep your blood glucose, blood pressure, and blood cholesterol into recommended target zones,” then I can honestly say that a low carb diet has helped me to do exactly that.

The Nutrition and Metabolism Society is Working to End the Madness

The goal of the NM Society is to fight against all of the misinformation presented these days against the effectiveness of low carb diets – false and dangerous information such as the madness introduced in this article. Ridiculing low carb and calling it old dogma hurts diabetics, and those suffering from the complications of overweight and obesity, because low carb diets offer a way to correct the metabolic imbalances at the heart of many of those problems.

If you wish to join with the Nutrition and Metabolism Society in the fight for truth, consider paying a visit to their website, and join in their cause and goals. Your help can make a difference in the world.

*I am not being paid by the Nutrition and Metabolism Society. All views presented in this blog post are my own.

Recipes Archive Now on a Separate Page

2011-06-22T09:33:00.000-06:00

I felt my blog was getting way too cluttered, so I revamped a few things yesterday. My contact info is now in my short profile paragraph, and I put all of the links to the low carb recipes I've posted over the years on a separate page. You can find that Recipes Archive link in the bar above.

I organized the links a bit to make it easier to find what you may need; and then starred the recipes that fit into Induction, and clearly marked the ones that are currently gluten free (GF), or gluten free, casein free (GFCF). As I was going through the listing, I noticed that several recipes could be adjusted a bit to fit into the GF or GFCF categories (by giving either safe brand names or alternatives) - so I'll be doing that in the days ahead.

My next project is to begin making a site map so that older posts that are still relevant can be found easier.

I recently had several folks come through a link that was posted at the Atkins Nutritionals website. One individual remarked how surprised they were that my article on sugar substitutes was still relevant. While relevant, it does contain some inaccuracies that I've learned about since it was posted - so I also intend on updating some of my older posts. I want to give you, my readers, correct information. So that means I might have to completely rewrite posts, when necessary.

Both of these projects will be works in progress - so you'll be able to get to what I've done so far through a link at the top, the same as I did for the recipes. Plus I plan on posting a notice whenever I update something with new or corrected info. Since both are lengthy projects that I'll be working on concurrently, I thought that would be the best way to handle it.

I'll be doing the same thing to my other blogs, which will go much faster, since they don't have as much archived as this one. And don't have anywhere near the amount of readers that this blog has...yet.

While I intend on re-trying and updating some of the recipes, I can't do that for all of them since I no longer eat gluten or dairy products. If I update a recipe, I'll place a notice that I've done that here too. I also have plans to cross-over recipes from one blog to another, if they fit within that blog's mission and goals.

I haven't posted new recipes lately, because I've been busy trying to adjust to eating gluten free, casein free. But I've reached a point where I'm getting bored to death (even at maintenance level of carbs), so I've started looking around for new ideas.

Within the low carb community, GFCF recipes are extremely rare, so I realize I'm going to have to go outside the box to find what I'm looking for. But that just adds to the fun and the challenge.

Testing Blood Glucose Levels on a Low Carb Diet – Facts and Myths

2011-06-20T18:29:00.002-06:00

Last month Jimmy Moore started testing his blood sugar after eating popular low carb products. Here’s the facts and myths about blood glucose levels when eating low carb.

Saturday was the first time I heard about Jimmy Moore testing his blood glucose levels after eating some of his favorite low carb foods. While Twitter is a great place to keep in touch with your favorite bloggers, it’s easy to miss important tweets – unless you think to pull up their most recent posts. While most low carbers stop by Jimmy's blog every day or two, I quit doing that about a year ago when videos became the norm there. At that time, I didn't have a high-speed internet connection, so wasn't getting anything out of that blog.

Saturday, I just happened to be reading the tweets of the people I follow on Twitter when Jimmy announced his blood sugar testing results from eating Julian Bakery’s CarbSmart breads was in. Since I now have high-speed access, I clicked on the link he provided, and began to read the post.

Dreamsfield Pasta Digests the Same as Regular Pasta

It quickly became apparent that in my absence, I’d missed Jimmy’s first test using Dreamsfield Pasta; so I followed the link back to that first experiment. When I saw what he actually did – how he compared the coated pasta to regular pasta – I gained a new respect for him. I never thought I’d ever see him confront low carb products in the way he’s currently doing. However, there are a few myths about blood glucose levels and low carb diets that need addressing.

A lot of diabetics can tell you from their own experiments that Dreamsfield Pasta digests the same as regular pasta, and that’s what Jimmy’s self test clearly showed as well: there is no such thing as protected carbs. However, he stopped testing his blood sugar after 180 minutes. Pasta takes 5 to 7 hours to digest completely; and most diabetics and pre-diabetics see a sharp rise in glucose somewhere between 5 and 7 hours. For those who don’t, they generally see much higher fasting glucose the following morning.

Also keep in mind that while both the Dreamsfield and regular pasta curves on Jimmy’s chart are within safe margins for glucose toxicity, you can clearly see that Dreamsfield’s pasta digests slower – but that means potentially higher insulin levels over a much longer time period, since blood sugar levels kept bouncing. Plus, we don’t know what happened between the significant 5 to 7 hour period.

Julian Bakery’s CarbSmart Breads

When eaten the way Jimmy would normally use bread, Jimmy’s curves fit well within safe margins for glucose toxicity – even when eating regular wheat bread. What we learn is that his blood glucose levels tend to spike much faster than the average person. If testing at 1 and 2 hours, as recommended, you could easily be deceived.

At 1 hour the low carb breads left Jimmy’s sugar level at just above or just below 100 mg/dl; and at 2 hours, the raisin-free bread was back to his typical fasting level. Even the raisin bread stayed about the same as where it was at 1 hour. The chart is extremely enlightening, because the 9-grain bread (not low carb) actually gave Jimmy the best blood sugar control.

Low Carb Myths

Now, you may be tempted to interpret these results as Dreamsfield Pasta and Julian Bakery deceiving low carbers; that low carb bread and pastas must have more carbohydrates than what the label claims. But that isn’t necessarily true. Why? Because blood glucose control doesn’t fall in line with how many carbs you eat. That’s a low carb myth.

The glycemic index is another myth that spawned the South Beach Diet and other low glycemic plans, but the folks who participated were healthy non-diabetics. That makes the chart (even the glycemic load chart) useless for those with insulin resistance, pre-diabetes, or diabetes. Eating low and lower glycemic foods like berries or even vegetables doesn’t guarantee good blood sugar control.

So What About Low Carb Dieting Itself?

When you eat only low carb foods, the body down-regulates basal insulin levels, the amount of insulin you store, and the enzymes needed to digest carbohydrate foods. If you haven’t been eating carbs and you suddenly eat something like bread or pasta, your blood glucose levels will rise higher than they otherwise would – if you ate that amount of carbohydrates on a daily basis.

Results won’t be accurate – unless (like Jimmy) you just want to test these foods within a low carbohydrate context. If you want to know your true level of glucose control, you must eat carbohydrates for at least 3 or 4 days prior to testing. You can’t just go from 20 or 30 grams per day to 60, 80, or 100 grams without raising your blood sugar levels for a couple of days while your body re-learns how much insulin to store, and up-regulates necessary enzymes.

The Role of Food Sensitivities

In my own experience, food sensitivities play a major role in blood glucose control. If you have undiagnosed celiac disease, gluten intolerance, or a wheat allergy or sensitivity, low carb products can raise your blood sugar higher than safe, even though it might not raise someone else’s. That’s because the inflammation produced by allergies, sensitivities, and autoimmune issues keeps your body in a state of alert.

The body uses extra glucose to both heal inflammation and fight off invaders. Plus higher cortisone levels also keep blood sugar and insulin levels elevated, as well. But there is also the strange phenomenon of food individuality.

Since I began testing my glucose levels, I’ve learned that the number of carbohydrates I eat doesn’t accurately predict the amount of glucose produced from food, nor whether or not my body is able to store and dump enough insulin to handle what I eat. It doesn’t predict whether my insulin receptors are working properly. Glucose control depends on what type of defects I have in my metabolic system, and whether or not my immune system is working properly.

That translates into some pretty freaky results. For example, my daughter-in-law (a diabetic) can eat white rice with her meat and veggies, and her blood sugar stays within acceptable limits. But if she tries to eat the same amount of brown rice, her glucose levels go through the roof. That’s backwards to what the glycemic index says should happen.

If I eat 40 carbs of homemade gluten-free oatmeal bread (2 slices like Jimmy ate in his experiment), my blood glucose levels go above 140 mg/dl at 1 hour – putting me in glucose toxicity. In fact, the homemade gluten-free hamburger bun I tried last week sent my sugar level soaring to 175 mg/dl at 1 hour, and stayed high for 2 hours before dipping back down below 120 mg/dl (the safe zone). But – if I eat a 40-carb baked potato, my blood sugar level only goes up to about 105 and then returns to normal, around 84, by the 2nd hour. That makes white potatoes a perfectly acceptable maintenance food for me.

Everyone is Not Insulin Resistant

The biggest myth floating around low carb circles today is that if you’re overweight or obese, you’re insulin resistant – period. Carbohydrates will raise your blood sugar, low carb diets will automatically correct that, and lowering insulin levels is a good thing. However, some of us don’t make enough insulin. We’re insulin ‘sensitive’ – not insulin resistant. Lowering our current insulin levels can result in glucose toxicity. That’s not a good thing.

But that’s why testing your own blood sugars and finding what foods work for you is so important.

Low Carb Veggies, Fruits, and Pesticides

2011-06-13T15:29:00.002-06:00

The Environmental Working Group released their latest “Dirty Dozen” and “Clean 15” listing for pesticide contamination today. So how did low carb veggies and fruits do?

Avacados make a great low-pesticide choice

Non-starchy vegetables and low-glycemic fruits are the mainstay of a healthy, low carb diet. High in fiber and nutrients, and low in carbohydrates and calories, they help to keep blood glucose levels from spiking too high. However, environmental contaminants like PCBs, arsenic, dioxin, cadmium, bisphenol A, and mercury can interfere with the body’s metabolic processes.

A low carb diet is designed to lower fasting and post-meal insulin levels, allowing the body to have ready access to its fat stores. But pesticides (including herbicides and insecticides) can increase or impair insulin secretion, or damage beta cells themselves. While most organic vs. non-organic arguments stem from what feeding your family organic vegetables would cost, many scientific studies clearly show environmental toxicants are associated with an increased risk of diabetes and metabolic syndrome.

The path to diabetes is paved with insulin resistance, fatty liver, autoimmune problems, and beta cell damage or death – so there’s much more at stake for ignoring the part pesticides play in our metabolic issues than just cost.

The Worst Low Carb Veggies and Fruits

Most low carb dieters zero in on how many carbohydrates a particular vegetable or fruit has per serving, while ignoring everything else. But if you look at the Environmental Working Group’s updated “Dirty Dozen” list published today, you’ll find many low carb diet staples are loaded with pesticides:

celery
strawberries
spinach
bell peppers
blueberries
lettuce
kale and collard greens

Those strawberries, blueberries, and raspberries low carbers hold up to the world as proof that yes, we do eat fruit, could actually be doing you more harm than good. The EWG found 13 different pesticides detected on a single sample of strawberries; and raspberries were even worse – they had 51! Celery weighed in at 13 different chemicals and came in at #2 on the dirty list, bell peppers had 11, and collard greens had 10; but cucumbers, a low carb salad staple, contained as many as 68. The lettuce and spinach greens themselves? 66!!!

So what about those famous “can’t live without” Jalapeno Poppers? The Dirty Dozen only lists sweet bell peppers, not hot peppers. However, according to the EWG’s website, farmers might treat hot peppers with as many as 97 different pesticides; and if you minced them into a bowl of homemade salsa with cilantro, the cilantro adds even more.

The Best Low Carb Veggies and Fruits

Onions, corn, and asparagus had no detectable pesticide residues on 90% or more of the samples. The others on the list were very low, so if you can’t afford to go completely organic, the following listing is a great place to cut corners:

onions
corn
avocado
asparagus
sweet peas
eggplant
domestic cantaloupe
kiwi
cabbage
watermelon
sweet potatoes
grapefruit
mushrooms

While most low carb dieters generally shun corn, peas, and sweet potatoes, starchy vegetables and tubers have their place on the Atkins Carb Ladder and make good pre-maintenance or later-on OWL additions to the diet, when you can afford to spend more carbohydrate grams. A 5- to 8-gram carb serving of melon is extremely small, so it too is best to save for later on.

Benefit of Eating Pesticide-free Vegetables and Fruits

When you eat organic produce, pesticide levels in your tissues begin to drop. That creates less stress on the body, and less risk for getting diabetes and other metabolic problems. Some pesticides are endocrine disruptors. They:

disrupt beta cell function
interfere with carb metabolism
are toxic to the immune system
impair mitochrondria function
can cause intestinal inflammation
impair insulin secretion
cause pancreas to over secrete insulin
destroy beta cells

Because of how hormones work, endocrine disruptors can have opposite effects, depending on the dose. So pesticides can be accumulative – though some studies show damage from a single exposure. While most beta cell death is actually caused from glucose toxicity (blood sugar levels higher than 140 mg/dl), pesticides' insulin secretion impairment leads to that toxicity.

While pesticides are not the only chemicals that can harm your endocrine system (meds like cortisone, prednisone, and SSRI’s also can contribute to metabolic issues and diabetes), always consider their potential for harm when choosing which low carb veggies to buy and eat.

*Photo by Eric Skiff

Peas Are Not Evil!!!

2011-06-08T12:14:00.001-06:00

I stopped by The Lighter Side of Low Carb’s Facebook fan page the other day, and noticed that Cleo had posted a picture showing what her personal USDA plate looks like. She had 3 strips of bacon, an egg, and 3 peas smiling up from the plate. While most of the comments shared how they would personally alter the foods in the graphic (I would have added another egg and more peas, myself), the one comment that caught my attention said - “Peas are evil.”

There seems to be a common tendency within the low carb community to demonize foods not listed on the Atkins 2002 Induction menu chart. But I don’t know how or when that ever got started. I took a quick trip back to 1970 (one of the two Atkins’ books that survived the flea bombs that destroyed almost everything I owned last year), but Dr. Atkins’ advice didn't even insinuate that peas are evil. He said:

“…additions are interchangeable and flexible. You can make any of these additions any week that you choose. I could be very arbitrary and specify exactly what you may add each week. It would be simpler, much less confusing, and with less possibility for error. But I don’t impose that rigidity on my private patients, so why should I do that to you? I am so committed to making this a livable lifetime diet that I am letting you select your own variations, within the rules set up by your biological rule book.

PUT BACK WHAT YOU’VE MISSED MOST. The idea is simply to gradually return to your diet first what you missed most. You may not choose to put back any of the small carbohydrate additions I’ve suggested. You may prefer something different that you will pick out of your carbohydrate gram counter. Custom-tailor the diet to suit your life-style.

All that matters is that you add back to your diet a little carbohydrate at a time, and that you stop adding carbohydrate when you’ve reached your CCL.”

So that kind of rigidity didn’t come from the original Atkins’ Diet. Nor did it come from the versions published in 1992 or 1999. In those mid-range books, Atkins’ Induction was even more lax than it was in the 70s, because dieters had the option of tossing out the Induction menu chart, and just eating anything they wanted, provided they only ate a maximum of 20 carbohydrates per day (not net) for the first 2 weeks.

Dr. Atkins Changed His Diet Plan in 2002

In 2002, Dr. Atkins introduced the Carbohydrate Ladder. This ladder specified which foods were best to add back, and in what order, to help with blood glucose control – because at that time, Dr. Atkins believed the glycemic index was correct. But even so, he still did not make the carb ladder a rule. What he said was:

“Look at ‘The Power of Five’ on pages 150-151 for other suggestions of foods you can add to your daily menu. Most people find it best to add back foods in a certain order – what I call the Carbohydrate Ladder.

Note that few people will be able to add back all these food groups in OWL. Those on the second half of the list tend to rank higher on the glycemic index and are more commonly introduced in Pre-Maintenance. Following this order tends to minimize blood-sugar surges that could reactivate cravings.”

Now, the glycemic index was created using people who did not have metabolic syndrome (insulin resistance), pre-diabetes, or diabetes, so it’s of little use if you’re interested in minimizing blood-sugar surges. In fact, my recent experiments on myself have showed no correlation between the number of carbohydrates eaten at a meal, and the amount of blood glucose that’s still in the bloodstream one or two hours later.

The Carbohydrate Ladder Does Not Demonize Peas

What I find interesting about this carbohydrate ladder is the actual foods Dr. Atkins lists, because if you hang around low carb individuals for a while, sooner or later, you’ll hear them demonize most of these foods - especially peas, corn, beans, and whole grains. In fact, if a newbie dares to admit they ate something from this list, they’re apt to get told that what they ate isn’t allowed on a low carb diet.

So what are these foods that Dr. Atkins recommends?

more salad and other vegetables on the acceptable foods list
fresh cheeses (as well as more aged cheese)
seeds and nuts
berries
wine and other spirits low in carbs
legumes
fruits other than berries and melon
starchy vegetables
whole grains

Sounds like what used to be called a natural, whole foods diet. Which means peas are not evil – and saying so can give newbies and oldies alike, a distorted picture of what a low carb diet actually is – which isn’t true.

The real Atkins’ Diet is about finding your own personal level of carbohydrate that will allow you to keep losing body fat most weeks. And while some of Atkins theories and beliefs haven’t withstood the test of time and scientific testing, his diet continues to be about personalizing the foods you choose to fit your likes, dislikes, and lifestyle.

While it may be quite accurate to say “peas are evil for me,” – that evilness doesn’t hold true for everyone. I’ve lost over 100 pounds to date on some form of a low carb diet, and I’ve done it eating corn, corn tortillas, peas, mixed veggies, and other starchy vegetables. If I’d had to stick with only the vegetables listed at level 2 on the carb ladder, I’d never have come as far as I have.

The New Atkins For a New You

It’s my current understanding that the most recent low carb diet supported by the Atkins Nutritionals company doesn’t talk about the carb ladder at all. That it limits added dietary fats to 1 tablespoon of good fats (like olive oil) per meal, raises the consumption of veggies to something like 6 cups per day on Induction, and that it attempts to move folks in a more realistic direction of understanding serving portions.

However, most low carb dieters who entered the fold with the 2002 version of the Atkins Diet reject most of those ideas. Like the individual who left a comment about Cleo's plate graphic, they have no problem screaming "peas are evil," even though that isn't true.

The version they grew up with works for them, so that’s the diet they want to keep following. Nothing wrong with that. I just wish that more of them would extend the same courtesy to those of us who entered the fold with the 1970 and 1992 versions; because it can be quite lonely sitting out on that limb.

Why Does a Low Carb Diet Make You Feel Shaky?

2011-05-30T14:56:00.000-06:00

It’s a myth that all overweight people have insulin resistance and/or metabolic syndrome. It’s also a myth that everyone’s insulin and blood glucose levels soar into the clouds when they eat carbohydrates. If you have normal blood glucose control, your body’s sensitivity to insulin will quickly take care of the small rise in glucose you get after you eat. In fact, typical folks never see a rise in blood sugar levels much above 120 mg/dl (6.6 mmol/L) – no matter how much starch and sugar they eat.

The problem comes for those of us with an abnormal response to the carbohydrates we eat. Reasons for that vary, but taking the necessary steps to correct the problem can often make us feel ill.

The Atkins’ Flu, Detoxing from Sugar, and Carbohydrate Withdrawal

The first two weeks of a low carb diet can send the body into a tizzy. We’re restricting the body’s first-used fuel source, emptying out glycogen stores, dumping a lot of excess water, and coaxing our liver to begin breaking down stored body fat. While these changes can seriously disrupt our electrolyte balance if we don’t get enough sodium and potassium (The Atkins’ Flu), we can also feel tired and crave our favorite foods as our blood begins to clean out the allergens.

While the labels the low-carb community has adopted for this situation aren’t technically accurate – we don’t get the flu, detox from sugar, or go through carbohydrate withdrawal – we do experience body changes and cleansings that sometimes take several weeks to adjust too. One of those changes is a drop in our basal insulin level, a lower glucose response to the foods we are now eating, and therefore a lower post-meal insulin response as well.

Pseudohypoglycemia Makes You Shaky

If you’ve had moderate or high blood glucose levels for any length of time, after a couple of days on a low carb diet, you can feel downright awful. That’s because the body gets used to all of that higher glucose running around. Improving your numbers through healthier food choices causes the body to panic, believing you’re in a dangerous low blood sugar situation. Stress hormones like cortisol and adrenaline swiftly coax the liver to dump more glucose into the bloodstream, even though your blood sugar level might still be above normal.

This reaction is known as pseudohypoglycemia; and there isn’t a whole lot you can do about the shakiness, pounding pulse and heat beat, sweatiness, and anxiety – except wait it out.

Real hypoglycemia kicks in when your numbers consistently drop below 70 mg/dl (3.8 mmol/L), with the key word here being consistently. It’s not unheard of for a low carb dieter to find their glucose dipping down into the 60s after liver glycogen depletes. But that’s generally a temporary situation. Converting stored body fat into fuel isn’t as fast as using glycogen, so occasionally the body can find itself in a slightly hypoglycemic condition.

When Stress Hormones Interfere with Your Life

A low carb diet helps correct metabolic imbalance. It does that through restricting carbohydrates – if you give your body the time it needs to adjust to normal blood glucose levels. However, the 20 grams of carbohydrate per day that The Atkins Diet recommends for Induction isn’t a hard-and-fast rule. It’s a recommendation meant to get as many people as possible into Ketosis easily.

If you’re having a difficult time dealing with the consequences of cortisol and adrenaline secretion, Atkins Nutritionals advises that you add an additional 5 grams of vegetable carbohydrate per day and see if that fixes the problem. What you don’t want to do is go back to the food choices that caused your high blood glucose levels in the first place.

While eating a bowl of Lucky Charms or snatching up a couple of chocolate chip cookies might make you feel better, it won’t help correct your metabolic issues. It will just prolong the time it takes for your body to adjust to and learn what normal blood glucose levels are.

A Low Carb Diet Helps You Attain Safe Blood Glucose Levels

If you have metabolic problems, high glucose comes from eating more carbohydrates than you can process. Until your body learns what a normal blood sugar level is, you may have to grin-and-bare several stress hormone reactions. Many low carbers have learned to handle the difficult times by calling these problems “detox” or “withdrawal symptoms.” While that isn’t exactly true, a low carb diet does work in the way that a good, solid elimination diet does.

An elimination diet is extremely restrictive, much like Atkins Induction. You go into it knowing (and hoping) the restrictions are only a temporary measure. A diet you can build on one food at a time.

In the same way that Atkins asks you to return 5 grams of carbohydrate per day to your diet (at realistic intervals), elimination diets do the same thing. While initially these metabolic-healing programs are hard, and the shakiness can make you want to quit and walk away; a low carb diet can help you discover which foods will keep your blood glucose within safe parameters. And that can well be worth the effort.

How Do I Get Back Into Ketosis Faster?

2011-05-20T16:23:00.002-06:00

You went out to eat at a restaurant or you went to a party. You think you ate on plan. But the Ketostix this morning stayed beige, the scale bounced up a pound or two; and now, you just don’t feel like you’re in Ketosis anymore.

You want to fix the problem – fast. Get the sticks turning lavender again. Lose the excess water weight. But most importantly, you want to feel the euphoria that comes when you’re predominantly burning fatty acids for fuel. So what’s the fastest way to get back into ketosis?

What Happens When You Overeat Carbohydrates?

The body has four options when it comes to fuel: glucose, protein, fatty acids, or ketones. At any one time, the body switches back-and-forth between these fuel sources, depending on availability and immediate needs. When you follow a low carb diet, the body “predominantly” burns fatty acids for fuel, but when glucose becomes available, it burns that first.

When restricting carbohydrates, the glucose most often burned comes from vegetables, incidental carbs, or amino acids. But sometimes life interferes and you accidentally (or intentionally) eat more carbohydrates than you can use. When that happens, the body immediately burns as much glucose as it can, then chauffeurs the rest to the liver where it converts into glycogen, the storage form of carbohydrates.

Refilling glycogen results in a weight gain of a pound or two, because the body deposits water along with the glycogen for later processing. It’s not fat though. So as long as you get right back to your diet plan, it won’t do any permanent damage. If glycogen stores are full, however, that’s when carbohydrates find their way into your fat cells. So a single free meal, or restaurant accident, creates only a temporary setback.

But What is the Quickest Way to Get Into Ketosis?

When you first go on a low carb diet, the body uses liver glycogen to keep your blood glucose within a narrow, tight margin. Fatty acids fuel this process, with ketones the resultant by-product. Within a day or two, the glycogen level drops so low that the body begins to use the ketones for fuel, because it can’t break down fatty acids fast enough to take care of the body’s needs.

Once the body adapts to ketosis, and the brain, kidneys, and heart begin using ketones for much of their glucose needs, the amount of fatty acids the rest of the body requires goes down. And fat loss slows.

When you refill glycogen stores, returning to your diet program simply starts this process all over again. The length of time it takes to return to a state of predominantly burning fatty acids for fuel depends on how full your glycogen stores were, as well as how many carbohydrates you ate. Therefore, the fastest way to get back into ketosis is to eat a minimum amount of carbohydrate and up your activity level.

While it isn't necessary to cut back to a diet of just "meat and eggs" (personally, I do an Atkins '72 Induction after a free meal or refeed), a lot of low carbers do choose to cut carbs to a bare minimum, since sugar, wheat, and other food sensitivities from eating off plan can cause bloating and discomfort. If you need fast correction, then a no carb diet and extra movement will get you there the quickest.

Is a Low Carb Diet Best for Burning Liver Fat?

2011-05-13T13:08:00.001-06:00

I ran into a horde of regurgitated news release type articles the other day that pointed me towards a new study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition this month. It was a short-term study – just two weeks long – but it clearly showed how a low carb diet burns more liver fat during Atkins Induction than a low calorie diet does.

I didn’t read all of those articles, because the first two were just copies of the original press release put out by UT Southwestern Medical Center – the sponsor of the study. So I took a trip over to PubMed where I actually found two studies published this month comparing how low calorie diets and low carb diets affect fatty liver disease.

What is a Fatty Liver?

Even though the researchers of the two-week study say fat in the liver “is due, in part, to increased hepatic synthesis of fat from carbohydrates via lipogensis,” The American Liver Foundation says a little bit of fat in the liver is normal. Maybe that’s because so many Americans obey current recommendations to eat lots of whole grains and complex carbs; so for them, liver fat would be expected.

However, the liver foundation does say that if you have more than 5 to 10% in your liver by weight, that it moves up a notch and receives the classification of non-alcoholic liver disease (steatosis). For many folks, that’s all it is, though – just a fatty liver. No symptoms (other than possibly being overweight or obese), and no liver troubles.

But for some, the fat shoved into the cells inflames the liver. For them, the diagnosis upgrades to non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). This type of fatty liver can create scarring which plugs up the cells and damages the liver. NASH ranges from mildly inflammatory to severe cirrhosis and even liver failure; so it’s not something you want to fool around with.

Comparing a Low Calorie Diets to Low Carbohydrate Diets

In the two-week study, JD Browning actually put his subjects on a true, low carb diet. We don’t actually see that very often, so it makes the results highly valid. The participants got less than 20 grams of carbohydrate a day. While, the press release from Southwestern compared that amount to a small banana, most of us know that if you use mostly vegetables for your carb sources, the restriction still gives you plenty of food.

I don’t know if the researchers expected the results they got or not, because one of the reasons they stated for running the test was that carbohydrate restriction studies have received “little attention.” But in the conclusion, after seeing a significant difference in the way low carb diets burn liver fat, they clearly stated that they didn’t know why. At first, I found that a bit amusing, but then I realized that perhaps for them, low carb science is new.

In the six-month study, S. Haufe didn’t find a significant difference between the two diets. Both diets worked equally well to burn liver fat – which is why the two-week study is so significant; at least as far as the researchers are concerned. While cutting down on calories will eventually encourage the body to burn excess fat in the liver, if time is of the essence, a low carb diet will improve fatty liver disease quicker.

But then, most of us already knew that, didn't we.

Dairy Sensitivity, Beef, and the Atkins Induction Plan

2011-05-05T14:02:00.002-06:00

I’ve wrestled with myself for the past couple of days about “where” to place this post. I didn’t want to discourage anyone from entering into, or sticking with, a typical low carb diet. Atkins and The Protein Power Lifeplan both work equally well for most individuals, though they do differ in application. Honesty finally won. But since the relevancy of this topic falls across several of my blogs, I’ve decided to focus here on how my current problem relates to general low carb diets.

Recently, I decided that since my weight had reached the upper limits for a maintenance phase, I would enter into Atkins Induction to carve off the body fat I’d gained – knowing that the first week’s weight loss would be mostly glycogen and water. That held true; I weighed in at 158 pounds last Friday, down almost 5-1/2 pounds for the first week.

But I didn’t expect what happened next.

I have one more day to go to keep my Atkins Induction commitment, but…I’m seriously reconsidering that decision today, because my Neuropathy is back. It first started threatening me earlier this week, coming and going, but not too painful. Today, it finally decided to stay. I don’t have any glucose testing strips on hand to check my blood sugar level, but in the past, Neuropathy has always signaled elevated glucose levels for me. I have no reason to believe that isn’t the case today.

The last time I had this problem I was following a no carb diet. Back then, blood glucose flew into diabetic territory and Neuropathy reared its ugly head to warn me. In addition, I put on an unaccounted-for roll of belly fat – even though my diet consisted of only beef and water. This time, however, a typical Atkins ’92 Induction has resulted in the same thing. Over the last two weeks, my vertigo and ataxia (off-balance problems) have grown worse. This week? My weight started going in the wrong direction, and my measurements increased.

So what gives?

I started my maintenance phase last Thanksgiving, and found maintaining the 30 pounds I’d lost on my last PSMF diet round (a protein-sparing modified fast) fairly easy. I weighed myself every day, and designed my meals to reflect the calories and carbs I needed to stay within my maintenance allotment. Even with a couple of homemade, gluten-free chocolate chip cookies, fully accounted for, I wasn’t going over 150 pounds – ever. So when I started packing on body fat, the cookies were the only thing that made sense.

I quickly returned to the Atkins Diet to stop the upward climb, which it did that first week. But then, everything started to go wrong. The only new thing in my diet? A bunch of home-grown beef someone gave me, because they’d butchered out one of their cows.

A couple of days ago, I ran into an interesting question. Someone who is dairy sensitive wanted to know about the possibility of also being sensitive to beef. That question hit me hard. I’d never thought about a connection between beef and dairy before. Beef is very expensive here, so we’ve always eaten it sparingly. Plus elimination diets do allow beef since it’s not one of the 8 major allergens. But…it got me thinking, especially since I’ve been itching all over ever since we started eating beef regularly.

If you visit any number of low carb forums or blogs, you’ll find many individuals are dairy sensitive. They don’t call it that; they say dairy stalls their weight loss, or dairy provides too many calories, so they’ve cut it out for now. But technically, that’s what it is: an allergy or food sensitivity. Regardless of which type of immune system response dairy products give, the treatment is the same: you have to give up dairy products.

Now, some can cheat a bit and give up most dairy products, rather than all of them – which is the path that I’ve been following. I use a little heavy cream in my hot cocoa, a small pat of butter on my vegetables, an ounce or two of cheese a day, if that. I also occasionally make whipped cream for my strawberries or a nice Alfredo sauce for my chicken. But I do mean occasionally.

I know I’m sensitive to dairy, there’s no doubt about that. In fact, when I first went gluten free I didn’t eat dairy at all for the first 6 months. What I don’t know is if the problem stems from the celiac disease, or if it’s a problem with dairy itself.

The tips of the villi in the small intestines produce enzymes needed to digest dairy, so until the villi have fully recovered, many individuals with celiac disease have problems eating dairy products. And since it’s the tips that produce the enzymes, that problem is generally the first to surface when you’ve been glutened – which seems to happen a lot in my life, even though I’ve tried to cut gluten out of my environment as much as possible.

What I’ve read is that cheese and heavy cream contain fewer of the troubling proteins, so when I do eat dairy, I’ve tried to restrict myself to those types of products. But what if there really is a strong connection to beef?

I tried to do an internet search for information, but that’s next to impossible these days – since Google has changed its algorithm. But I did happen to come across an article on Wikipedia that referenced a scientific study published in the Annals of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology that makes a solid connection between beef and milk.

The study dealt with beef allergy in children with cow’s milk allergy, and said that “in the literature, between 13 and 20% of children with cow’s milk allergy also have beef allergy.” But from their own personal study of 28 children allergic to beef, they found 26 children (92.9%) were allergic to cow’s milk. So for those allergic to dairy there is a possibility of also being allergic to beef, while those allergic to beef are almost always allergic to milk.

We only have a couple of rib steaks left, so not eating much beef will return shortly, but in the meantime, I have to get the Neuropathy to calm itself down. Once the body is in hyper-drive, however, that’s not as simple as just moving away from beef. When I last walked away from a no carb diet, I tried all sorts of gimmicks to get my blood glucose level under control, but nothing short of going completely out of ketosis worked.

Course, I didn’t know about the connection between dairy and beef back then – so maybe, once the body is over-reacting to beef, it over-reacts to dairy too. Only time will tell…I guess.

(For a follow up to this post, see: Food Allergies, Neuropathy, and Blood Sugar Control on a Low Carb Diet)

Where to Find My Weekly Weigh Ins

2011-04-29T11:30:00.000-06:00

This blog is dedicated to traditional and slightly tweaked low carb diets. But what I do personally doesn't always fit that mold. So even though I'm currently doing a round of Atkins Induction to get firmly into ketosis before looking at the results and making any needed adjustments, I've decided to post my weekly weigh ins over at my PSMF diet blog.

A PSMF diet is a protein sparing modified fast. Traditionally, it's protein and little else. Which means setting your protein at 1 gram per pound of lean body mass (or up to 2 grams if you're weight lifting and/or highly active) plus just enough vegetables to keep you full. Still low carb, but way less dietary fat than Dr. Atkins, or even Dr. Eades, recommends.

Lyle McDonad's PSMF version recommends fish oils, 2 servings of non-fat or low-fat dairy products, and at my current level of body fat, a weekly refeed. I can't do the fish oils because they give me vertigo, so I bought a bag of pre-ground golden flax seeds at the health food store yesterday. While flax doesn't convert into the essential fatty acids we need as easily as fish oils do, at this point, they are my best choice.

This past week, however, I've been doing Atkins '92 Induction. And while my liver glycogen is emptying out nicely, I don't expect the weight loss to continue much longer without having to lower my fat intake. So I think that my Sharing the Magic of Low Carb Living blog will be a better fit for my Friday morning weigh in.

If you're interested in seeing how the week went, and how I've learned to cook my chicken legs to provide less toxic fatty drippings, but still the crispy skin I love, check out today's post about my half way through Induction results.

From now on, that's where my Friday weigh ins will be, without a formal announcement here.

Metabolic Resistance and Atkins Induction – Clearing Up the Myths

2011-04-28T11:44:00.000-06:00

The Atkins Induction phase of a low carb diet often symbolizes the beginning of a new lifestyle. Excitement is high, motivation is strong, and since most turn to carbohydrate restriction after attempting several different types of diets (and failing), hope has actually dared to poke its head out of the covers again.

What happens during this initial dieting phase is crucial to our success; that’s why Dr. Atkins designed it as he did. But over the years as his program evolved, misunderstandings regarding metabolic resistance and the weight loss experienced during those first few weeks have left many individuals scratching their head, confused.

What is Metabolic Resistance?

In 1970 there was no chart to label us metabolic resistant if we didn’t lose a certain number of pounds during the first week. In fact, Dr. Atkins defined resistance to weight loss as those who follow an 800 or 900-calorie well-balanced diet and still can’t lose body fat. He didn’t flag metabolic issues by speed. We were an average loser, a slow loser, or ahead of the game – but not inaccurately labeled metabolic resistant.

Metabolic resistance actually describes a condition called metabolic syndrome, and high insulin levels interfering with fat loss accounts for only a single aspect of that condition. Many other factors apply, most dealing with cholesterol issues.

Can you have metabolic syndrome and still not be resistant to weight loss? Sure. I’m a perfect example of that. The first time I went on the Atkins Diet I lost 7 or 8 pounds the first week, and 5 pounds consistently each week after that – even though I upped my carbohydrates each week, as suggested. My metabolic syndrome did not hinder my fat loss in any way.

What began to hinder my fat loss was the yo-yo low carb cycle I fell into over the years.

What’s the Atkins Induction Phase Actually For?

Over at the Atkins Nutritionals website Colette Heimowitz has a blog post where she discusses metabolic resistance. While I don’t always agree with what she has to say, her statement about the purpose of Induction is right on:

“During Induction you were consuming about 20 grams of carbs a day. The carbohydrate level was extremely low to demonstrate that it’s possible for virtually everybody to experience lipolysis.”

That’s exactly why Dr. Atkins limits Induction to 20 carbs. It’s not because 20 carbs is the magic number for everyone. It’s because we are not his patients, so he needed a level that would enable most individuals to burn body fat from that very first week. However, the body fat that burns that first week or two is to fuel the liver as it converts glycogen stores back into fatty acids.

Where Do the Drastic Weight Losses On Induction Mainly Come From?

The drastic weight losses seen on Induction come from glycogen and the water attached to that glycogen – the body’s form of carbohydrates stored in the liver (to keep blood glucose levels steady) and muscles (for quick energy purposes). That’s why we tend to lose a lot of weight the first week or two.

Some of those losses are body fat, but not much. Most of it comes from water as the body empties out about half of its fuel reserves. Those initial losses are not about metabolic resistance. They set the body up to switch metabolic pathways where we predominantly burn fats for fuel instead of glucose. With predominantly being the key word here.

It's only after the Atkins Induction phase that we see metabolic problems surface, if there are any.

Atkins Induction Diet Plan: Which Version is Best?

2011-04-25T16:29:00.000-06:00

Struggling to figure out which version of the Atkins Induction Diet is right for you? Today, Atkins offers many different Induction programs to choose from.

However, when I returned to a low carb diet in 2007, I started with Dr. Atkins’ New Diet Revolution, 2002 version, due to its availability. When I bought the book, I didn’t know the diet had evolved into something different. Mainly because many Atkins followers I had run into on the web thought that particular program was the only “true” Atkins’ plan.

Problems with the 2002 Version of Atkins

A small group of us had problems with that particular plan. While our issues differed, it didn’t take very long to figure out that if we stuck to the current Atkins’ program, as written, the way most devoted to the cause demanded, we could chuck the goal of reaching target weight good-bye. We stalled, gained weight, or endured serious cravings on that plan.

That’s why I’ve always been a strong advocate for tweaking. Because after losing a mere 2 pounds on Induction, 2 more by the end of that first month, 5 total after 2 months, and nothing more – I knew I had to do something different or I wasn’t going to make it to the finish line. With a 256-1/2 pound start, and still weighing in at a whopping 251-1/2 pounds on a very short, 5-ft frame three months later, something had to change.

Reason Why Dr. Atkins’ Original Diet Revolution was so Strict

For me, and a small group of online friends, that meant dropping most of those vegetables, and pulling in the reins on the gross amounts of cheese, sour cream, pork rinds, and low-carb products everyone else was eating. Why? Because in the 70s when Dr. Atkins invented The Diet Revolution, most of the patients who came to him had wheat and/or bowel problems. He believed that taking them off the fiber found in vegetables, as well as the sugar and starches, would allow their intestines to heal quicker.

That’s what he personally told the Listserve I belonged to in 1999 – when folks from that online group questioned his statement about allowing net carbs provided the dieter only deducted for soluble fiber. They also wanted to know if they needed to buy the new book; but Dr. Atkins told us no – that between 1992 and 1999 his statement on fiber and net carbs was the only change to the diet he’d made. And it wasn’t a rule; it was optional.

Low Carb Induction Plan Changes in 1992

In 1992, Dr. Atkins did change the Induction plan in his original diet from the version in the 70s when he discovered many of his patients cheating, yet still losing weight. So he introduced some of what his patients were doing into his 1992 plan.

While Dr. Atkins designed his original diet to ensure that even the most stubborn of metabolic resistant individuals could get into Ketosis within a couple of days, in 1992 he relaxed some of the strictness. You could choose between 2/3 of a cup of cooked vegetables or a loosely-packed 2-cup salad at lunch and dinner.

Or better yet, you could just chuck that whole idea of him telling you what to eat, and design your own plan by counting a daily total of 20 carbs – but with no deduction for fiber. This was the plan most of us followed, because it allowed more variety and the ability to make that diet our own.

2002 Brought More Changes to the Induction Diet

In 2002, when rules returned with a specific carb ladder attached and higher volumes of heavy cream and vegetables, many began to have trouble finding success. Especially when Atkins’ Nutritionals took over the steering wheel and tweaked the plan to raise vegetable consumption to an even higher amount of 12 to 15 net carbs.

Most problems stemmed from a program that was no longer individualized. It had evolved into a diet for the general population, what they could get away with and still enter Ketosis in a matter of days – not for those with specific metabolic and/or health issues that needed something less. Dr. Atkins make that very clear in several interviews; yet followers still held the 2002 book up as the bible of low carb.

The New Atkins for a New You

While the newest Induction plan attempts to correct some misunderstandings regarding fat consumption, and gives examples of what a proper serving of fat is, it also raises the bar for even more vegetables – making the Atkins Nutritionals’ requirement easier to reach if you want to count veggies by the cupful.

Sorting Out the Induction Programs – Finding What Works for You

Many individuals brought up with the 2002 version have refused to make the move to The New Atkins for a New You, just like many of us refused to travel from 1992 to 2002. Which begs the question: which version of the Atkins Diet is best?

Those who believe in the 2002 version will vote for that book, and those who believe in the 1992 version will tell you that one is. Those who haven’t been able to lose without reverting back to Atkins 72 will stand up for that plan being best. So which is it?

The correct answer, of course, is – it depends. That’s because there are so many variables that come into play:

degree of metabolic resistance
amount of intestinal inflammation
overall insulin levels
speed of metabolism
body’s reaction to vegetables
individual carbohydrate level for losing
calorie consumption
ability to digest/absorb dietary fats properly

And probably many more. A low carb diet, as written, isn’t a single shoe that fits everybody. Dr. Atkins used to state that, how he formed the diet to fit the lifestyle and personality of his patients. How he tweaked some of the restrictions and requirements to fit their health issues and preferences. But few remember that today. Most fight to stay back in 2002.

The best form of Induction is whatever works for you; because no one knows your body better than you do. So take some time to get to know the different Induction programs. Think about what each plan offers; especially your individual health problems and degree of metabolic syndrome, before deciding. And don't look at your choice as non-negotiable. Be ready to do whatever is necessary to make your dream of thinness come true.

Why is Weight Loss So Hard to Maintain?

2011-04-18T08:46:00.003-06:00

My experience with low carb dieting began in the 70s when I ran into Dr. Atkins’ original diet book at the library. At the time, it made a lot of sense. I could relate to everything he shared – and when I tested it, the plan worked better than anything I’d tried. I was 19, weighed in at a hefty 160 pounds on a 5-foot frame, and with virtually no metabolic resistance, that one golden shot earned me maintenance within only 6 weeks.

I realized the other day, that’s exactly where I’m sitting again today. I’m back to where I started from in 1975. A whole lot older, hopefully wiser, but despite finding out how to deal with my health issues, I’m still at the same starting line.

Yes, I managed to shed a whopping 80 pounds in 2007; and another 30 pounds last year – but that was above where I first began my low carb journey. I’ve regained a good 10 pounds of that last 30 though. So what gives? WHY is weight loss so hard to maintain?

Atkins 72: What was the Original Atkins Diet Like?

I can tell you what happened in 1975. With no internet helps available, I wasn’t creative enough to figure out how to make the original Atkins diet permanently work for me. Back then, low carb dieting consisted of:

meat, poultry, fish, or eggs
two small loosely-packed 1 cup salads with oil and vinegar dressing
4 ounces of hard cheese
the juice of 1 lemon or lime
4 teaspoons of heavy cream
2 servings of D-Zerta gelatin

That was Induction, except that you could also use butter or mayo on your meat. If you wanted whipped cream on your jello, you had to drink your coffee black. There was no sausage, hot dogs, or lunch meat allowed; no cream cheese, cooked vegetables, or sour cream. The taste of artificial sweeteners sucked. And while Induction lasted only a single week, the 5- to 8-carb additions were equally limited.

Low Carb Blogs, Diet Forums, E-Groups, and Other Helps

I honestly can’t use boredom and a lack of imagination as an excuse today. Today, you don’t have to be creative to turn your low carb way of eating into a lifestyle. There are literally hundreds of creative people out there willing to help you stick to your diet for weight loss. Like the low carb blog I discovered yesterday. With a title like Kicking Carbs to the Curb, I couldn’t help but check it out.

After briefing through the current posts where I found a large number of enticing low carb recipes, and saw that she also sells an ebook on low carb salads for an extremely affordable price of 99 cents, I headed for the start of her blog where I generally can find the author’s weight-loss story. And what I found rather shocked me.

I’ve read many weight loss blogs over the years, and listened to many stories, but this was the first time I ran into a history that sounded pretty much like my own. Except for the mono and PCOS, you’d think that the path that led the author to choose a low carb diet was mine.

Wow.

Asthma, heavy prednisone and the resulting adrenal fatigue, and finally finding weight loss success with a PSMF diet. Not exactly like me, of course, since it’s the celiac disease and resulting fat malabsorption that made me turn from Atkins to a protein sparing way of eating – but still…

Facing Why I Crave Chocolate Chip Cookies

So what is it about gluten-free cookies that drives me to start throwing away the pounds I’ve lost? Why am I willing to lose ground after easily maintaining for weeks at a time? I can’t blame it on the wheat opioids this time around. Nor the lack of diet help. That only leaves myself; but is that about willpower and carb addiction?

I used to think so, but lately I’ve had to face those yummy cookies head on and answer WHY they are so important to me. Especially when I started talking about chucking the whole idea of weight loss and no longer wanting to strive to maintain what I’ve accomplished.

I initially chose a low carb way of eating because it made sense to me, and because I was curious to see if a different approach to counting calories held any truth. Was Dr. Atkins right? Was it all about the carbs? Like any diet book penned for the masses, the answer is yes-and-no. Each of us must tweak the basic principles of any diet to fit the confines of our own health problems. But I’d already done that.

As the feature writer for the Autism section at Suite 101, I recently wrote a series of articles on Sensory Processing Disorder; so that’s been on my mind lately. Chocolate chip cookies snugly fit into the realm of taste. That sensory system’s defects can range from hypersensitivity to hyposensitivity, or anywhere in between. However, I wasn’t experiencing an aversion to foods; like many low carbers, I tend to experience the opposite.

While allergies, sensitivities, opioid addictions, and all of that still holds true for some; I have come to realize that I eat homemade cookies to excess for the pleasure that sense of taste brings. That’s a hyposensitive taste defect; not an addiction. Similar to when I completely lost my sense of taste for salt and sweetness several years ago. At that time, I kept adding more, and more, and more salt and/or sugar trying to get what I couldn’t taste.

So Where Do I Go From Here?

My size 12 jeans are tight, tight, tight; had to literally stuff myself into them yesterday morning. So my maintenance phase is coming to an end. But what about the cookies? Well, the Rapid Fat Loss Plan I follow is a carb and calorie cycling plan, which does allow free meals and/or refeeds depending on how much body fat you have to lose. However, that’s side-stepping the real problem.

Pondering the issue of taste, I’ve come to realize over the last few days that I’ve never taken the time to find highly-flavored low carb foods and recipes I’d actually want to keep eating on maintenance. I’ve always made “on diet” food choices to get me by until…I traveled into a maintenance break and chucked all that bland, boring stuff – because I was now “off” my diet.

I'm beginning to understand that to be successful at making lower carb eating a lifestyle, I've GOT to find some low carb food choices that I love enough to make a part of my life forever. So that's what I'll be seeking this time around.

A Low Carb Diet Success Story – What Can We Learn?

2011-04-14T15:30:00.002-06:00

Amy is a short, 20-something young lady who weighed in at 267 pounds when she started a low carb diet on January 6, 2009. Slightly heavier than I was, but she’s also a little taller than me. Currently, she weighs 117.4 pounds – that’s just beneath her goal.

Wanna see her success? If you need a boost of motivation, check out these before-and-after pictures she recently posted at Low Carb Friends. And while you’re there, make sure you scroll down to the additional set of pictures located in post #3. They are absolutely stunning!

What Can We Learn from Amy’s Low Carb Success?

For many low carbers, Amy’s story will puzzle them, because she didn’t follow the typical wisdom that says to “pick a low carb diet plan and do it exactly like the book tells you to.” She reached her goal by tweaking the Atkins Diet and Dr. Eades’ Protein Power Lifeplan into something she could stick with. Something that fit her lifestyle. Something that worked for her.

The specifics? She didn’t measure out her low carb foods (not even vegetables), and only loosely counted carbs. She ate whatever she wanted, whenever she wanted, as long as the food was low in carbohydrates, and within a reasonable serving size. She ate on a small plate, rather than the extra-large dinner plates so popular today. She didn’t embrace a large low carb breakfast; she simply indulged in her beloved coffee with heavy cream. She also didn’t engage in a formal exercise program.

If you look closely at these details, you’ll find that her method doesn’t fit into any of the typical recommendations often thrown at newbies or stalled oldies today. While certainly low carb in principle, her diet program didn’t follow an author’s footsteps; instead, she designed her own weight loss plan. Something I’ve been recommending for a very long time. Why? Because it works!

That doesn’t mean she didn’t give in to temptation now and then. But she did decide to incorporate a more flexible approach than most. Occasionally, this caused her to go off her diet scheme a meal here or there, give into an eating binge, and splurge on a holiday meal – behaviors that many of us also struggle with.

The difference? She didn’t beat herself up over it. She simply decided that for her, a low carb plan wasn’t something to view “as a diet.” And while that’s a popular mantra among low carbers today, if we want to enjoy success with this alternative way of eating, we need to make sure our low carb meals are livable.

Personalizing Our Low Carb Meals

It’s nice to view the before-and-after pictures of those who’ve achieved success with their low carb diet plan; and it’s wise to check out how these goal-weight individuals got there. But it won’t grant us real, honest-to-goodness motivation to apply to our own diets unless we figure out how to implement those lessons into our lives.

Effective weight loss is possible, but it requires us to take a good, hard look at ourselves: our personality, lifestyle, health issues, and especially our passions. Think about your tendencies:

Do you want to eat breakfast and/or lunch everyday? Or just sometimes?
Do you eat only when you’re hungry, or do emotional issues come out to play?
Do you enjoy counting carbohydrates? Calories? Or neither?
Do you need the heavy structure of rules? Prefer no rules?
Do you love eating vegetables and salads? Fatty meats? Or carbs?
Do you drown your food with luxurious condiments like butter and mayo?
Do you smother everything in sour cream and cheese?
Do you have any health issues that might interfere with your current program?
Do you love to cook, or experiment with new recipes and cooking styles?
Does your lifestyle interfere with your ability to stick with low carb foods?
Do you turn to and/or crave comfort foods when stressed?

While this list certainly isn’t all inclusive, it will get you thinking in the right direction. The idea isn’t to copy what Amy did, but to design your own personalized diet program. Something you can actually live with for the rest of your life.

And while you’re thinking about personalized passions, take the time to create a list of your favorite low carb foods. You know the ones I mean. Those absolute comfort foods you ate a lot when you first started a low carb diet, but somehow forgot about them when you found yourself in a sticky situation. The type of comfort foods you need to help you stay on plan.

For me, that’s bacon and eggs, cheesecake, strawberry pie, hot wings, chicken alfredo over broccoli, Alice Springs chicken, a nice juicy pork chop or rib steak, fried chicken, pork rinds or just-cheese crackers and dip.

Okay. Now it’s your turn. What are your favorite low carb foods? Have you tweaked your diet program? Why not leave a comment and tell us about it.

Is a Low-Carb Diet for Life?

2011-02-07T14:16:00.000-07:00

A 3-page thread over at Low-Carb Friends caught my attention this morning, and I had to take a look-see. It's called Are You in This For Life? While the greater majority of answers regurgitated the generic low-carb party line, I was surprised to see that the original poster had approached the question with a healthy, honest perspective:

"Honest answer...I don't know. I will never look at food the same way though."

I signed into Low-Carb Friends, thinking I might want to say something, but by the time I waded through the un-realism, a cat-and-dog fight, and all of the "I have no other choice," "There is no other healthier way to eat," "I don't want to get diabetes" and 'this isn't a diet - it's a lifestyle' type of replies, I was no longer interested.

Why? Because when you're in the beginning of a low-carb diet, when enthusiasm and determination is high, when the weight is coming off, and you're convinced a low-carb eating style is the only way to go, you're not ready to hear anything different.

Blinders go on, walls get thrown up, and belief systems get defended; because if we didn't behave that way, we might have to face reality - which most folks in the low-carb community are not willing to do. Heck, look at all of the people who actually believe the state of ketosis is magick.

One of the major threads running throughout the various replies was a solid misunderstanding of what "normal" eating actually is. They've learned through trial and error that returning to their old ways of eating, which was obviously un-normal, would cause the pounds of unwanted body fat to return. So they've vowed to stay at un-normal carbohydrate levels for a lifetime claiming that's the only safe, sane approach to their problem.

And for some...it definitely is.

What disturbed me (and what always disturbs me) are those who began preaching their solution as the only viable one. The only healthy way to be, because it helps them control their own distorted view of what normal eating is.

I'm willing to bet that most of them have never truly looked at what a normal portion size is. (Next time you're feeding your family rice or mashed potatoes, measure out 1/2 cup and put it on the side of a regular-sized dinner plate - you might be surprised as to just how much that really is.) We get hooked into the extravagance and luxury of what works when we weigh 256-1/2 pounds; and convince ourselves that we can eat that way forever.

Truth is...we can't. And we can't do that even by picking all low-carb foods. We will stall out part-way to our goal, as many of us have learned.

The amount of calories and dietary fats we could eat when we started this journey is not the amount of calories and dietary fats we can still eat at the end. For some, the solution to that problem is to give up when our weight loss catches up to our current level of calories and fats. Content to just maintain where we are at, we continue to eat a low-carb diet and convince ourselves that we're grateful for what we've accomplished.

Nothing wrong with that solution.

But for the most part, low-carb folks can't see from a viewpoint other than their own. They say you can go and do what you want, but then in the next breath are telling you that "I do not believe that anyone can go on a diet. This has to be a commitment for life. There is no such thing as a diet."

Well...I'm living proof that is not true.

Now the poster was right in that you can't return to the way we used to eat and maintain what we've accomplished. That was an un-natural, un-normal eating style. However, the choice isn't between a low-carb diet for life and gluttony. What most miss is that there is more than just 2 paths. Science shows and proves individuality. It doesn't prove low carb is best.

In the beginning of my journey, I was like all the rest. I fell hook, line, and sinker for what Dr. Atkins believed. But it wasn't long before I came to realize that Dumbo's magick feather wasn't real. Especially when my Leptin levels began to crash about 1-1/2 years in.

If you've ever reached a point where you've lost a lot of weight and despite being on a low-carb diet your hunger suddenly goes through the roof, you'll know what I'm talking about. The body fights back if you stay in starvation mode (the alternative metabolic pathway) too long. At least, that's what I've learned about myself. My body will only tolerate partially-full glycogen levels for so long.

Now, maybe you're luckier than I. Maybe your Leptin levels have never crashed, you digest dietary fats properly, and you aren't sensitive to gluten. Maybe it's your first or second time on a low-carb diet and your body hasn't adapted to Ketosis yet so you're still basking in the light of your "One Golden Shot." I've been there...done that...so I do know of what I speak.

Science has yet to prove that living the rest of your life with partial glycogen liver stores is safe and healthy. But even if it does, that won't change my experience with a low-carb diet, nor the experience of many others whom I used to converse with several years ago here in the comments section of this blog.

Despite what low-carb folks want to believe, most of the time if you want to make it all the way to goal weight, you gotta bend the rules. Tweak the plan to fit your personal health issues and metabolism. That's what Sherrie from the Pinch Of... blog used to tell me; and upon following her advice, and a little bit of realism I acquired from a poster who goes by the name of 2 Big, I found that to be true.

The way I see it...success with a low-carb diet isn't guaranteed just because you demonize carbs. Nor is it a lack of commitment as most of those in the Low-Carb Friends' thread claimed. If I'd sat back and continued to believe all of that, I wouldn't be where I'm at today: over 100 pounds lighter.

The way I see it...it's about having the courage to seek out our own personal truth, and then experiment to discover what's real. It's about not giving up, and settling for less than we could have, because we don't want to let go of the low-carb magick. It's about having the strength to DO whatever it takes for us to reach our goals, even if that means "adding" more carbohydrates to our diets, not less.

But I'm only an n=1 so...how do YOU see it?

Brian Deer vs Dr. Wakefield Sparks Low-Carb Maintenance Lessons

2011-01-27T09:08:00.000-07:00

I wrote an article a couple of days after Dr. Wakefield made a public statement addressing some accusations brought against him by Brian Deer and the British Medical Journal. Dr. Wakefield was the lead researcher in a study that was published in the Lancet back in 1998 that involved 12 children referred to the Royal Free Hospital for gastrointestinal problems by their personal physicians.

Several of the parents believed their children's issues had been caused by the MMR vaccine, but Wakefield's study found no such link. His paper clearly stated that. "We did not prove an association between measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine and the syndrome described." His findings? "We have identified a chronic enterocolitis in children that may be related to neuropsychiatric dysfunction. In most cases, onset of symptoms was after measles, mumps, and rubella immunisation. Further investigations are needed to examine this syndrome and its possible relation to this vaccine."

No where in the entire study does Dr. Wakefield and colleagues say, or even suggest, that vaccines cause autism. In fact, my article wasn't even about that. It addressed Dr. Wakefield's response to Brian Deer's accusations; it addressed the fears, concerns, and frustrations of the parents involved in that study. It gave a link to the study itself, a link to a video where the letter the parents of the children involved sent to the British medical review board could be heard, a link to a film about the parents side of the issues could be viewed, and a link to a lengthy investigation done on Brian Deer.

The comments I got about my article, Dr. Andrew Wakefield Speaks on Brian Deer, Autism, and Vaccines clearly showed that the individuals hadn't visited my links, had not even read Dr. Wakefield's study, or "heard" a single word I said. So far, most have responded with a statement of criticism that speaks to their own agenda and totally ignores what my article was about: the parents of the Lancet 12.

Rethinking over those comments this past week, the blindness and tunnel vision displayed, and in particular one individual's legitimate question and her follow-up that appealed to the writings of Brian Deer himself (an article he was paid to write for the pharmaceutical-controlled British Medical Journal) for the answers she sought, I couldn't help but see a comparison within the low-carb community - and probably all communities, for that matter.

WHY do we have such a hard time accepting the opinions of others as being legitimate perspective? Even to the point of declaring that there is no other side? Why do we have such a hard time understanding that everything is not about us? Everyone doesn't have blood sugar issues and hyperinsulinemia. Everyone should "not" be eating a low-carb diet. While it's a healthy way to eat, it fails many individuals.

I was amazed at the lengths the commenters on my article went to, to try and discredit me - all because I wasn't preaching their version of the truth. Many within the low-carb community do exactly the same thing. We can't get past a specific list of foods we consider low carb. We can't get past the idea that maybe...just maybe...some folks NEED to find a different way of doing things.

A lot of us have bought into the idea of low-carb magick. A lot of us really can't see the world through someone else's viewpoint other than our own. I really had this point driven home to me over the past couple of days. It's something I've been thinking about for awhile now, ever since I read Big Daddy D's question on his blog about why some of us are unable to stick to a low carb diet.

Why do we cheat?
And why can't we get back on the wagon?
Why is a low-carb diet so hard to live?

When I look at those who've gone all the way to goal, I find those who are happy eating strictly low-carb foods. I find some who jumped on the low-carb wagon and made it all the way to goal before their body stalled out. I find others who have gone at this a couple of times, but were not so far away from goal that they couldn't trick their body into giving up their fat stores before the body caught on to the game. I find individuals who metabolize dietary fats properly, so that approaching goal didn't mean eating next to nothing. In a real sense, those for whom a low-carb diet WORKS.

The reality that I've come to face this past week, really faced (and probably why I've had such a struggle writing about low-carb diets the past couple of years), is that quite frankly eating nothing but low-carb foods is not the way I want to spend the rest of my life.

However, with that said, there are many low-carb foods I enjoy eating, and I also came to that realization this week too. When I'm "on" a low-carb diet, I eat them. When I'm "off" of a low-carb diet, I don't. That's flat out crazy, because I LOVE chicken alfredo and spinach cream-cheese pie and strawberry cheesecake.

I'm beginning to understand that the lessons I've learned from following a low-carb diet, just like the lessons I've learned from following the old Weight-Watcher's exchange program, Lyle McDonald's Rapid Fat Loss Program (PSMF), Kimkins, and hHCG and all of the others, are lessons I must carry with me into my maintenance program. If I make a low-carb diet the foundation for a maintenance plan, I can seriously conquer and overcome the eating issues standing in my way.

That doesn't mean I can't put 1/2 of a small left-over baked potato in my scrambled eggs for breakfast. A half of a small potato did not get me fat. We're talking 10 carbs. It does mean that I have to change enough...enough to keep my weight from soaring back to what it was. If I want to keep what I have accomplished, I have to eat like a person who weighs what I currently do. I can't eat everything I want whenever I want to; but I can eat whatever I want. I just have to pick and choose what I'm going to eat...for today.

I've heard a lot of talk about how the Atkins Diet has evolved over the years, which is true...it has. Whether that evolvement came from science or a money-making scheme doesn't matter. However, I still find his original maintenance plan (published in 1972) to be worthy of consideration. His idea? Weigh yourself everyday, and give yourself a 5 pound maximum limit. When you reach that limit, go back onto Induction until that 5 pounds is gone.

I think the 5 pound limit is arbitrary. I've been using 3 pounds as my maximum weight-gain limit this diet break, and it's been working wonderfully for me. Not your typical low-carb maintenance plan, but it's been keeping my weight stable, and teaching me what I can and cannot eat for more than one or two days at a time. The trick is to make sure, doubly sure, you lower your carb intake at the point where your maximum weight gain is reached. For me, that has made all of the difference this time around.

Mercury in High Fructose Corn Syrup

2011-01-13T09:33:00.005-07:00

Folks in the low-carb community have demonized high-fructose corn syrup for as far back as I can remember. I used to think that was a bit nutty and off-the-wall, especially when someone freaked out about the minute amounts found in salad dressing sprays. Arguments surrounding HFCS always center around blood-sugar issues and hyperinsulinemia. The problem with those arguments? Not everyone who is overweight experiences a dramatic rise in blood glucose levels when they eat sugar. My husband is a good example.

Recently, I applied for a Feature Writer position in the Autism and Asperger's Syndrome section at Suite 101. With no articles published in that section at the time, part of the application process required me to write 10 articles on the topic. Feature Writers in the writers' forum had previously suggested to Contribuing Writers that they write across the topic. So I divided my 10 articles between the various subtopics of research, education, treament, and autism types, as well as writing on the subject generally. The reasoning behind that advice? The application would look better if you demonstrated the experience, knowledge, and ability to cover all areas of the topic.

My experience with autism centers around the work I've done with autistic adults over the years. I am also involved in the life of the autistic son of one of my friends. But I'd never looked into the research behind what causes Autism, nor the reasons why many parents of autistic children feel the mercury in vaccines is to blame. That was a whole new area of exploration for me.

Despite the current lynching of the head researcher of the journal article that originally linked the MMR vaccine to autism, what I found in my research was mind-blowing. Not only did it point towards detoxing difficulties in autistic kids, same as me, but it also solidly placed the blame at the feet of mercury. It turns out that mercury is a pretty nasty heavy metal toxin, because it destroys body enzymes that enable the digestion of wheat and dairy. It shuts down the body's ability to detox other toxins, as well as the mercury itself.

You pretty much end up becoming a toxic soup walking around. At least, until enough mercury or other toxins build up in the body to the point where the body throws itself over the edge, resulting in one or more autoimmune problems, diseases, and syndromes. It's all muddy water though, because people spend so much time chasing after magical cures for autoimmune issues, diseases, and syndromes, with hardly no one looking at what the bottom block is that's holding all of these health problems up.

We have drug companies scrambling to invent and then sell us drugs that relieve symptoms. We have doctors trained in medical school to diagnose our ailments (sometimes) and then prescribe us meds that relieve symptoms. Yet, if you look at a child stacking up a pile of blocks, and then remove the bottom block, or bottom layer of blocks, what happens? The autoimmune issues, diseases, and syndromes being held up by whatever those bottom blocks are come crashing down. That makes the "cause" of all of these problems much more important.

And yet...there's a smear campaign to take the focus off the bottom block (mercury) and keep it on treating the symptoms of the resulting health issues and complaints, because there isn't any money to be made if the pile of blocks comes crashing down. If you remove the catalyst to disease from your environment, a lot of businesses would have to find another way to stay in business.

There's no debate that mercury is nasty stuff. The medical community clearly admits it. They even admit that it's extremely dangerous to the brain of a developing fetus. What mom does, what mom eats, what mom breathes, how toxic mom's body is before pregnancy, all passes to and affects the child being formed. And yet many people, especially those in journalism, go out their way to convince their readers that none of this matters.

The guy who wrote the scientific journalism article linking the MMR vaccine to autism forged the data; therefore it puts to rest the whole idea that vaccines cause autism. Thiomersal was removed from vaccines in 2001, and because autism has continued to rise, vaccines do not cause autism.

Well...not exactly.

But then, that's the problem you run into when you need to please your sponsors and advertisers. Rather than stepping back and looking at the whole picture, like where else could these autistic kids and/or moms be getting mercury from, journalists zero in on the fact that vaccines themselves don't cause autism. Of course they don't. Never did. But it's still a matter of blocks. It's a matter of detoxing defects. A matter of detox overload. A matter of mercury and other toxins and pollution overly soaking our society.

It's no surprise to low-carb dieters that high-fructose corn syrup should be avoided. In fact, it's common knowledge within the low-carb community that refined sugar in all of its forms makes you fat. But I think the reason has nothing to do with the sugar-fructose combo that's often held up as the demon. The corn manufacturers and high-fructose corn syrup manufacturers are right. There's very little difference between the percentages of fructose in HFCS and refined table sugar.

However, the problem goes far deeper than blood glucose issues. Metabolic problems from eating even tiny amounts of high-fructose corn syrup probably come from mercury. That's because for years Chlor-alkali plants used a mercury-cell processing method to make the hydrochloric acid and caustic soda they sell to high-fructose corn syrup manufacturers.

But...that's an outdated more-expensive method than what's used today, the corn association claims.

However, when Dr. David Wallinga, director of the Food and Health program at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy put that claim to the test, it came up short. Taking common, brand-name foods off the supermarket shelves and testing them, many products that listed high-fructose corn syrup as the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd ingredient tested positive for mercury residues.

Now, while only about 10% of the manufacturers in the U.S. still use the mercury-cell method to produce the ingredients needed for high-fructose corn syrup, in a video on Mercury In High Fructose Corn Syrup, Dr. David Wallinga estimates that at least 1/3 of manufacturers overseas still use this method. That's like playing Russian Roulette with ourselves. We don't know which products with high-fructose corn syrup are contaminated, and which products are not.

So if you eat enough food products with mercury-contaminated high-fructose corn syrup, in combination with other places mercury resides in the environment today (like flu shots, hepatitis shots, smoke from forest fires, acid rain and snow, and meds like Prednisone) and you could end up in a serious health mess like me.

While I don't know for sure that mercury is behind my health problems, I've decided to concede to all of the low-carbers who've preached at me over the years that high-fructose corn syrup is downright deadly to my health, and rid my life of as much of the stuff as I possibly can.

For more information on the studies behind high-fructose corn syrup and mercury, and the role that cross contamination plays in all of this, read my article: Autism and Mercury in High Fructose Corn Syrup – HFCS Dangers. The information in that article just might change your life, as much as it has mine.

I Joined the 100 LBS Lost Club This Week!

2010-10-19T14:30:00.000-06:00

This past week was a major milestone for me, but I didn't realize it until I updated my stats at the sidebar. Since September 7th, I've been doing my own diet plan, the same one that was working for me when all of the Kimkins' junk hit the fan in 2007.

Due to my current success, once again, I now realize how important it is to zero in on individual food sensitivities and health issues. In my own case, due to the celiac, that would be protein/carb/fats malabsorption and dairy sensitivity (at least currently). I also have come to realize how important it is to actually use that information to put together a diet plan that works for you.

I did myself a very big disservice by listening to those on the internet who proclaimed to know, dumping what was working well for me, and running back to what I perceived to be the Atkins diet: a high-protein, high-fat, low-carb diet. But the only thing that did for me was cause me to stall. That's because, as a celiac, I do not metabolize dietary fats very well. And as a pre-diabetic, I tend to turn all excess protein into glucose.

The bottom line is that I haven't moved forward since then. From the very moment I started listening to others, rather than to what my own body was telling me, I began to struggle – inwardly, as well as physically. Chasing one new promise after another, one new diet after another, I never got anywhere because no matter which diet community you hook up with, the mantra is always the same: if you aren't doing it by the book, you aren't doing...Atkins/South Beach/Lyle McDonald's PSMF/Zero-Carb/Dr. Simeon's Protocol.

Just fill in the blank with whatever diet you're currently following, and the advice you will always get from those who have chosen to follow the groups leader/doctor/author is: you have to do it by the book to be successful. Regardless of your health problems and inadequacies, tweaking a diet as written is absolutely not allowed if you want to hang around with us.

What's unconscionable is that no one seems to care if you're losing your excess body fat, or not. The mantra still holds true, and is still preached because...well, you aren't really doing this for the fat loss, you're doing this for your health. No one seems to catch on to the fact that if you aren't getting rid of your excess fat stores, you're not actually doing anything for your health by eating low-carb foods.

I finally had to face that realization.

And that's when I also realized that to fix the problem, my problem, I had to seriously return to the diet plan that I know works for me. There really was no other way.

This morning I weighed in at 154.4 lbs – that gives me a total loss of 102.1 lbs since I started this low-carb journey, January of 2007. A major milestone, it firmly places me within the 100 lbs lost club. There was a time when I was struggling, trying to figure out how to make one of the various low-carb plans work for me, that I thought I'd never be able to finish the journey. That was true...for awhile. As long as I was listening to the low-carb community.

I suppose that for each of us who stalls in our journey, there comes a moment when an honest-to-goodness decision has to be made. For me, that decision came when my husband turned to me one day and said:

"The reason most people don't reach their weight-loss goals is because they aren't willing to make the sacrifices necessary to get there."

I would also add, that sometimes that sacrifice requires us to step outside of the low-carb diet box we currently find ourselves in. Whether that's adding more or less carbs than typical, or less fat and/or calories than typical for a low-carb diet, if we fail to make the choice that results in success then we've chosen to fail.

Is the Atkins Diet a High Fat Diet?

2010-09-30T13:33:00.000-06:00

Drop into any low-carb diet board or egroup and you'll soon hear the Atkins Diet described as being a high-fat diet. But the truth of that description depends on who you ask, and who you want to believe.

Those who are entering the diet for the first time do find a great metabolic advantage, initially, while the body discovers and learns how to use an alternative metabolic pathway it hasn't used before. In the process, it does exactly what Dr. Atkins claimed: sneaks calories out of the body through incompletely burned ketones, a by-product of the breakdown of fats in the liver.

Hence Dr. Atkins advice in the 2002 version of the diet while introducing the dieter to the initial phase of Induction was that "liberal amounts of fats and oils are permitted." However, eventually the body learns to use this alternative pathway to best advantage and begins milking each and every ketone for every molecule of energy it can. At which point, the state of being keto adapted contains little to no metabolic advantage.

If following the program, as written, most dieters would be part-way up the carb ladder by that time, and would have learned how to make more healthy food choices, learned their own carb tolerance level for losing body fat, and would be consuming less dietary fat than they were initially. However, the honest truth is that few dieters do the Atkins plan by the book, which is why there is so much misinformation circulating among the low-carb diet groups these days.

If you listen to what the greater majority of individuals say on these groups, you'd easily be led to believe that the Atkins Diet is a high-fat diet, (must be a high-fat diet, in fact), because fat is the miracle nutrient that makes it work. Having trouble sticking with the diet? Add more fat. Stalled for a few weeks? Add more fat. Can't get rid of sugar and carbohydrate cravings? Add more fat.

No matter what the problem is, the answer is always to add more fat.

I've had a knee-jerk reaction to that line of thinking for awhile now; partly because I personally have not found that fact or advice to be true. But also because I knew I'd seen a quote somewhere where Dr. Atkins himself had proclaimed his diet to not be a high-fat diet.

Well, I ran into that quote a couple of days ago, in a book published in 1981 called "Dr. Atkins' Nutrition Breakthrough: How to Treat Your Medical Condition Without Drugs." I thought I'd share it, because it flat-out contradicts what the greater majority of low-carb folks believe.

Considering this quote comes from a time when the Atkins Diet contained very little "green," it's particularly enlightening:

"Those of you who read my first book, Dr. Atkins' Diet Revolution, know what diet to follow -- there was only one. Millions of dieters simply called it the Atkins Diet. It was a very low carbohydrate reducing diet (not a high-fat diet, as many of my nonreading critics asserted)."

Now consider that this was said in 1981 when the original form of the Atkins' Diet was all there was: meat and eggs, 2 cups (per day) of loosely packed salad (made with various forms of lettuce, cucumber, celery, and radishes only) and dressed with oil and vinegar, 4-ounces of hard yellow cheese, 4 teaspoons heavy cream per day, diet gelatin, powdered or regular mustard, worcestershire sauce, soy sauce, the juice of 1 lemon, herbs and spices with no sugar, and sugar substitutes of the day. No catsup and no tomato products allowed.

While 1/2 cup vegetables (including tomatoes), cottage cheese, nuts, and berries were later added depending upon the dieter's tolerance for carbs, the original Atkins' Induction was a severely limited diet. A pat of butter was allowed on top of your steak, or some mayonnaise mixed into chicken or tuna salad or smeared on top of salmon, and a little oil was allowed to be mixed with vinegar to dress the salad -- but that's about all the extra fats there were.

This design was intentional. According to Dr. Atkins:

"One of the big reasons why this diet works so successfully is because you eat protein and fat. And you eat them in just about the sixty to forty proportions in which they usually occur together in nature: in a reasonably lean cut of beef for example." (From Dr. Atkins' Diet Revolution: The Famous Vogue Superdiet Explained in Full)

Hmmm. Nothing like what is preached within the low-carb community today, is it. Folks read to eat protein and fat, then stop reading (or listening) before they get to the part that describes how they are supposed to do that: by eating reasonably lean cuts of beef, and consuming fat and protein in the proportion it is found in nature.

As originally written, the Atkins' Diet was not a high-fat diet, nor was it ever intended to be such. Low-carb products and high-fat, homemade low-carb recipes and treats are all modern-day additions to the diet Dr. Atkins personally used with his overweight clients.

Now granted, fats help with blood sugar control, allow a bit more variety to the diet, and help to keep dieting from being such a hardship. They make a diet livable and contribute essential fatty acids necessary for normal metabolic function. However, they were never intended to be abused to the extent that most low-carb dieters abuse them today. They were originally intended to be a helpmeet; not a diet mainstay.

The bottom line is that once a dieter becomes keto adapted, all of the calories in the diet matters, especially fat calories, because their non-carb status causes them to be overlooked. So if struggling with your current weight-loss plan, take a little advice from Dr. Atkins and look at your fats consumption. Are you eating them in the same proportions found in nature, or are you eating them mostly in low-carb products and high-fat recipes?

You just might be surprised to find that you're eating far more calories than you think.

Getting Back on the Wagon – It's Time!

2010-09-26T16:15:00.000-06:00

Photo by: Joe Mabel

It's been months since I last climbed back into the wagon and attempted to go the rest of the distance to my weight-loss goal of 125 pounds. Not since I tried out a zero-carb diet in hopes of using it as a kind of elimination diet to get better control over my gluten intolerance. That bad experience took months before I was able to overcome the consequences of a runaway gluconeogenesis.

With my blood glucose finally back to normal (now that I've partially recovered from my flea-bomb fiasco), I came to the realization a couple of weeks ago that despite my kickin' and hollerin' against it, I really needed to just buckle down and do the type of diet that I know works for me.

While I was wishing and hoping a more moderate-carb diet would have worked (and it probably would have if my in-laws hadn't thrown a wrench into my plans, since that's the way I got the gluconeogenesis to stop), I had to finally face the truth: that a typical, high-fat, low-carb diet is not going to take me the rest of the way.

At which point the question suddenly became one of what are you going to do about that? I had been following a typical low-carb diet for a few weeks prior in an attempt to get my blood glucose levels back under control (which worked well all of a sudden, to my surprise) when I had to face that truth. The scale wasn't budging, hadn't budged, and wasn't going to obviously.

But gosh...lowering my fat intake and returning to chicken breast (which I can't stand) and other lean meats was not something I was looking forward too. I kindda wanted to keep my dairy addiction intact.

Still, I'd reached a point where I realized I was faced with only 2 choices: continue to tow the low-carb party line and stay fat, or move to a diet with a lower fat and calorie content, and see if my body was ready to give up the rest of its excess fat stores.

So after an unplanned weekend that my husband and I spent in Las Vegas (we went down there to help a friend of ours who was moving there), I returned to my own personalized diet plan. The plan I was following just before the Kimkins stuff hit the fan. The way I lost the greater majority of my excess weight so far. Yucky is putting it mildly; but at least it's working as well as it did then.

After our unexpected vacation weekend (where I'd put on a good 5 pounds due to the excess carbs; I consider it great if I can get her to understand no gluten), I started this diet round at 177.8 pounds. With all of that being glycogen/water, it came right back off within the first few days, plus more.

So my return to dieting has gone well. In fact, with my 3rd week almost behind me now, my weight is just above where it was when I quit and gave up on Weight Watchers due to my metabolism tanking. I'm just slightly above my set point, and my body is starting to go kindda wonky about that. The lowest I was able to go on the old Weight Watchers diet (back in the exchange list days) was 160 pounds.

Today I weighed in at 161.8, so I've crashed through my low-carb set point of 170; but as I head towards my Weight Watchers' set point of 160, my weight has been bouncing up and down all week. To be expected I guess, but no matter how long you've been low-carbing, you still keep hoping that this time, it's going to be an easy ride.

Saturated Fat Debate and the Reliability of Scientific Studies

2010-09-01T14:51:00.001-06:00

While going through my email box this morning, I ran into an old Metabolism Society Newsletter. The articles were focused on saturated fat and the fallacy that it causes heart disease.

Not really news for low carbers.

I did find it interesting that the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) in connection with the World Health Organization (WHO) studied the issue way back in 2008 and came to some new conclusions. At least, new for them, and probably new for most medical authorities.

Their findings were published in the Annals of Nutrition and Metabolism, "Fats and Fatty Acids in Human Nutrition," 55:(1-3), 2009. But I wasn't able to get into the full length report - either because my computer froze up on me (I have badly damaged RAM), or because the availability was taken down due to the nature of the report.

I was able to get into the introduction (that's what the link leads to) that did claim that "today we have a better understanding of how particular fatty acids are metabolized in the body" and that "Fats and fatty acids are now considered key nutrients affecting both early growth and development, as well as nutrition-related chronic diseases later in life."

However, I couldn't verify the information where they stated that saturated fatty acid intake is not associated with coronary heart disease events, nor that fatal coronary heart disease was not reduced by low fat diets. If someone is able to get into it and verify that info, I'd appreciate a heads-up.

I was able to get into a meta-analysis that came to the same conclusion: that there is insufficient evidence from scientific studies to date to be able to conclude that saturated fat is associated with an increased risk of heart disease, stroke, or even coronary artery disease. And that does back up Gary Taubes' opinion.

But don't get your hopes up that the truth will be coming out any time soon, because these researchers also found what appeared to be publication bias. Studies that showed associations between saturated fat and heart disease tended to be received more favorably for publication, and those that didn't never made it into print.

That sheds some pretty disturbing light onto scientific studies as a whole, doesn't it, and the conclusions that are drawn from those studies. How can they be trusted when they aren't likely to be published unless they tow the party line?

I'd read awhile back the opinion that scientific studies are always slanted toward the findings that those funding the study want to find, and that they are manipulated and even falsified to that end; but since the source was controversial, I didn't know if that was true or not.

But now...I'm not so sure that it isn't.

It's more than a little disturbing, to say the least, that we can't actually get the health information we need; like why many of us stop losing weight part-way to goal, no matter what we do. And it's downright crazy if scientific journals are adverse to publishing studies that don't side with what authorities want us to believe. Or do.

Because that means many of us will have to continue hanging out to dry - until someone important deems it necessary for the public to know the truth. Could be an awfully long wait....

Real Low Carb Eating Plans vs Tweaked Low Carb Diets

2010-08-31T13:10:00.000-06:00

Ever been involved with forums and egroups who specialize in telling those who come to them for help with low-carb eating, to just read the book?

While I can see their point, that a particular diet plan, especially a low-carb diet plan, needs to be understood before a dieter jumps into the water with both feet, diet books themselves are written from the vantage point of the author's experience. As such, the most they can offer the reader is a single perspective; what the author currently believes about low-carb weight loss, and understands.

That's not necessarily bad. After all, there really is a lot of conflicting information out in cyberspace: blogs, forum and egroup posts, podcasts, and internet videos all offering the low-carb dieter their single, come-follow-me approach. But are diet books and tweaked low-carb approaches any different? What makes "just read the book" better advice than answering the potential dieter's questions?

Granted, most who succeed at low-carb weight loss tend to read lots of books, blogs, and websites. They join low-carb online communities, stay involved, and get the results they are seeking. But results can only take you so far. Take those who play low-carb diet, for example. They buy the book, read it to the best of their ability, but still don't actually know what they are doing. That's because they only hear what they want to hear.

They continue eating cold cereal for breakfast, because...well, they NEED their cereal in the morning. They take low-carb wraps to work for lunch (even on Induction), eat cans of mixed nuts and bags of sugar-free candy over a single weekend, because...well, they're low-carb foods; and besides, sugar alcohols don't count anyways. They don't take the time to actually keep track of how many carbohydrate grams they are eating per day because they're too busy, and don't have time for numbers. They'd rather guess or round off instead.

When their low-carb meals don't give them the results they're seeking, they begin telling everyone that low-carb eating don't work. That the Atkins' Diet doesn't work. Rather than taking personal responsibility and admitting that they were never following a low-carb eating plan, they justify their decision to quit by convincing themselves, as well as others, that low-carb diets don't work.

Now, the sad thing is: there most certainly is a place for tweaked low-carb meals. In fact, for a great many individuals they're a necessity. However, I'm beginning to think that very few individuals have the capacity to sift through all of the info that comes their way: to critically appraise blog and forum posts offered by those who think they know.

With all of the book parroting and out-dated science being used to justify their current low-carb meals, the well-known diet book authors who understood their diets worked but not really how or why; I'm no longer convinced that telling a low-carb newbie to go and read the book is good advice.

Is there actually a fat-mobilizing hormone? Are protein shakes dangerous? Do you have to eat vegetables? Will you starve or ruin your metabolism on a lower fat diet? Do calories count, or is it just the reduced carbohydrate in the diet that results in fat loss? Is there really such a thing as normal fat stores and abnormal fat stores? Will 2 weeks of eating at low carbohydrate levels actually fix insulin resistance?

Let's face it. Diet books, including low-carb diet books, not only vary in the details, but they also vary in the level of truth they contain. Reading the book won't necessarily give a dieter the facts. Approaches differ widely; and are basically a road map to a single author's view. From a low-carb perspective, perhaps, but they are still written from that author's current believe system.

Now I'm not saying that low carb diet books are bad. They are born out of the author's experience. However, the most that an author can offer in regards to low-carb eating is a few facts and lots of opinion. Which means if you're seeking after low-carb weight loss, you just gotta choose what you will, or won't believe, what you will or won't follow; and in the end, do whatever is best for you personally. Because not all low-carb books agree with each other, any more than forum posts, or blogs, or egroup members.

We can say this was my experience, this is what I learned from that experience, and this is what it might do for you. But the truth is, nothing is cut-and-dried. Our results won't necessarily be the same as yours. Everything is fluid. And everything changes.

Lame Low-Carb Diet Excuses: Get Back on Program

2010-08-10T15:48:00.000-06:00

Whether considering going on a low-carb diet and stalling around a bit, or stuck in-between diet-rounds making lame excuses for not getting back on program, there comes a point where reality plows into us. That point, for me, was driven home a little more than a week ago.

I was standing in the kitchen, frying up a cast-iron pan full of potatoes, and my husband had just walked outside to have a cigarette. In Utah, there's an extra state tax placed on the darn things, so they are really, really expensive here.

I had been mourning our current situation, worried because my blood glucose levels were over-the-top with all of the fried potatoes and brown rice I'd been eating daily. Due to circumstances beyond our control (known as: no work = no money), and no food storage of any kind to fall back on, we were eating the cheapest foods I could get our hands on: eggs, potatoes, rice chex, pork, a bit of marked-down ground beef, and brown rice.

My blood sugar levels were so bad, I began skipping the bowl of rice chex for lunch awhile back, and cut myself down to 2 meals a day to give my poor pancreas a rest. At least for a few hours. And I kept telling myself that as soon as things improved, I would return to low carb and right things. Except things didn't get better. In fact, they got worse.

Our saving grace was the owner of the house we're currently renting told us we could work off July's rent by fixing the sprinkler system and taking down the wall paper in the bedroom, among other things, so we took him up on the offer.

As I stood there in the kitchen that morning, cooking breakfast, I was suddenly struck with the financial reality I'd been denying for weeks. That the cost of a week's salad and veggies was no more than a pack and a half of cigarettes, even at Utah prices. More than 10lbs of potatoes and a 2lb bag of rice, yes, but we were maxing out one credit card after another, or spilling over into our checking account's overdraft protection program to get my husband his cigarettes in-between jobs.

So who was I kidding, saying that we couldn't afford for me to go back onto low carb?

The only person I was hurting with my lame, low-carb diet excuses was me. I'm the one with messed up blood sugar levels. I'm the one who is suffering with neuropathy. And I'm the one who is in danger of becoming diabetic if I don't get my blood sugar back down to normal as fast as possible. So even though we really couldn't afford to spend the money, we took the next little bit that came our way and got me the salad, broccoli, carrots, and green beans I needed so badly.

The surprising outcome was that while we were shopping, a friend of ours happened to be there, and shoved a ten-dollar bill into my husband's pocket while he was looking at some fresh plums. Even with a few pieces of fresh fruit, the bill only came to $9.50.

The take-away lesson for me was that low carb is only too expensive if you want it to be.

My Life Has Been Really Messed Up

2010-07-08T15:34:00.000-06:00

Okay; keeping in touch didn't work out so well. Sorry. And neither did the house I last posted about. It was tiny, tiny, tiny. Wouldn't have been able to get through the bedroom door once my queen-sized bed was in there. Plus it had 3 gas steam-type heaters of some sort (the pipes were running along the kitchen and living room wall) with 2 of them not vented to the outside properly.

So we passed....

That put us living outside in the backyard in a tent for nearly a month before another possibility opened up. As I said in my last post, we ended up losing everything, and it was extremely frustrating trying to get folks to understand just what that meant. My in-laws felt we should either live in the yard and continue to pay the mortgage and utilities (while being exposed to the pesticides each time we went to the bathroom, took a shower, or did the laundry), or move elsewhere and then pay rent to them while all of our things were still in the house.

I have to say that one of the biggest lessons I've learned throughout all of this mess is that you honestly don't know who your friends and family truly are until you need them.

Needless to say, this whole thing has caused a serious rift between my husband and his brother, because not only did my in-laws deliberately flea bomb the house out of spite, knowing that I cannot live in a house that has been treated with pesticides, but their attitude and actions after-the-fact has been a power-struggle of manipulation.

For the first few days, we ran and stayed with a friend of ours, but there was so much gluten in her home, and I got so sick from being there, that we decided to go home and try to save what we could. My in-law's first response was to make us the bad-guys. We don't have to move out, my sister-in-law kept saying. It was an accident. But if we wanted to, and we thought we could make it without them...and their help... She then went on to say that she needed to learn that this was not her house, and that she keeps forgetting that.

You know...I'm normally a very un-violent person, but boye did I really want to HIT her for that. I really did. Because we've invested 5 years into this little adventure.

The mortgage each and every month of those 5 years was always paid by us (except for one month over this past winter when my brother-in-law paid it out of his income tax return; not because we asked him to, but because he volunteered). The utilities, even when in-laws come home and they go up dramatically, have always been paid by us. Home improvements have been on us, except for a little bit of insulation they bought a few years ago.

Now granted they put in a water filter in the kitchen (but it wasn't good enough for them to drink out of it), and bought a log splitter when they came home one winter and realized they were going to have to split the wood by hand. They also put an air conditioner in the kitchen window. But everything else we have paid for ourselves.

I don't know where my sister-in-law gets off trying to say that we cannot make it without them. They have been a liability to us, since day 1. They have never honored the upfront agreement to have no scented products in the house; and now, no pesticides, on the property. We tried to get them to stop bringing gluten into the home, but that was a new thing, and not part of the original agreement; though their disrespect in that regard was going to come to a head pretty fast since they totally ignored my husband's request for them not to do so.

All I can say at this point, is that I'm extremely grateful we are out of the situation.

One of the people my husband has been working a lot for recently ran down each and every vacant house here in Spring City for us. The result was that the very last name on the list agreed to rent to us, although it wasn't something he was originally considering; so it took a few days for him to decide.

It's bigger than we wanted, bigger than we need, but we were able to work out a suitable arrangement between us (kind of like a care-taker situation) where we can work off most of the rent in exchange for fixing up the place. So that's what we've been doing. Busy, busy, busy cleaning up the place, and doing some repairs.

I don't have a weight scale anymore, so I can't tell you what my weight is doing. I can tell by the few work clothes we managed to save (I had a couple of pairs of cut-offs and a few old-stained tee-shirts in a small end-table dresser in my bedroom, as well as the clothes on my back that day plus an extra set we grabbed when we left the house) that I've put on a few pounds from eating far too many carbs when we were living outside, but at least they still fit; so I'm considering that another maintenance success.

The unfortunate thing is that most of what we brought with us here, (we only brought what we absolutely had to have) including my computer, is outgassing pesticides still. Even the stuff we had sitting outside for over a month; so we are going to have to replace everything. We were hoping that we could save the stuff in the bedroom since our door was closed, but that doesn't look like it's happening.

The good news is that I don't know how long we are going to stay here. We recently received a job offer from someone who is planning on moving to Arizona. If it works out, it's a situation too good to pass up. So some good might come from all of this after all.

I'll Be Absent for a Bit Longer

2010-05-30T10:32:00.000-06:00

My sister-in-law flea bombed the house a few days ago, even after we told her not too (due to my Multiple Chemical Sensitivity). We've lost everything, have to move as soon as we can get someone to rent to us, plus come up with the move-in monies, so I won't be blogging for awhile. I'm not gone permanently, though I might decide to give up my new ones I started. Don't know quite yet. I WILL be keeping this one, just can't be in the house for longer than a couple of minutes at a time. Right now, I'm living outside in the back yard in a tent. We did find a house about 6 blocks away, but the person living there right now won't be out for another week, and we haven't seen inside yet, due to him not being home right now. So I'll keep in touch as I can.

What is the Secret of Reaching Your Low Carb Goal?

2010-05-10T15:02:00.001-06:00

While doing a bit of research this week on the role that calories play in a low carb diet, I ran into a very interesting thread over at the Maintain Lane of Low Carb Friends. It's called: "How many of you maintainers had to tweak things to get to your goal."

I absolutely loved it, and will probably spend a bit of time over in the low carb maintenance section for awhile, because it was both inspiring and helpful.

When most people begin a low carb diet it tends to work well, as written, especially if they're new to the game. Yo-yo low carb dieter's might not experience the same results, but generally the diet works well enough to keep everyone moving forward.

For some it takes a bit of an adjustment getting used to the new low carb food choices, and leaving the carbs behind. But once the dieter has overcome their fear of not being able to lose weight on the large portion sizes and high fat foods, they tend to settle in nicely, loving their ability to smother everything they eat in butter, mayo, sour cream, and cheese.

Initially, this type of low carb diet behavoir helps the dieter adjust to the major changes in lifestyle, and since body fat is falling off, everyone just expects it to continue that way. For a low carb newbie, it just might happen that they can make it all the way to goal that way, especially if they are fairly active and began the journey at the overweight level, rather than being obese. But for the greater majority of folks, it doesn't seem to quite go down as expected.

Watch any low carb forum, egroup, or blog, and you'll see that it's true. While a lot of people make it to goal weight, and become shining examples for the rest of us; the greater majority of folks who adopt a low carb diet plan, do not. In fact, some of them end up gaining back part, or all of the weight they lost.

The reasons vary, depending upon our own individual psychological issues regarding all of this. But there seems to be a few recurring themes that cause a lot of stumbling.

For some it's opioid addiction, which makes it especially difficult for the dieter to stay away from low carb products that are loaded with wheat protein and/or sugar alcohols. For others it's a misunderstanding regarding the various metabolic pathways; how and why a low carb diet works. For some life interferes, and they don't know how to maintain what they've accomplished. And then there are those who get fed up with their lengthy stall, and chuck the whole darn thing.

The common thread is that most of us who fail either don't understand the process of change, the adaption and continuous evolving that's necessary to achieve our weight loss goals, or we are totally unwilling to do so. We want things to stay and be like they were in the beginning. We want things and results to be like they were the last time we tried to follow a low carb diet.

We want things to stay the same.

But none of that is real. Most of it is fantasy. Including quite a few of our low carb notions and beliefs. Calories matter. Portion sizes matter. Even the amount of dietary fats we eat matters. We don't want to believe any of that, of course, we want to continue believing that a low carb diet and the state of ketosis is a magic feather. We want to continue believing that we need that magic feather in order to fly.

So we fail...we stall...and some of us even return to the path we came from, because we aren't willing to face the truth. We aren't willing to do what it takes to change. We've bought into all of the low carb myths, and can't bring ourselves to let go of the feather and do whatever it takes to fly on our own.

Now, I'm not talking about abandoning the low carb diet. It's healthy and effective. I'm talking about coming to our senses and looking at things logically and realistically. Because that's what the greater majority of those who have reached their goal weight have had to do.

When you weigh 256.5 lbs, like I did, you can eat a heck of a lot of low carb food, and still be in a calorie deficit. You can eat lots of fat and still not be eating what you need to completely fuel the day's activities, even if your lifestyle is sedentary. You're going to be making lots of ketones and throwing a lot of them away.

But somewhere along the line, the body is going to adapt to ketosis and begin making only enough ketones to fuel the brain. If you continue eating the same sized portions you ate when you began your low carb journey, if you continue eating the same amount of fat after you've lost a lot of weight, even though you aren't at goal, energy in is going to balance energy out. And you're going to stall. Permanently. That's just the way it is.

The truth of the matter that few low carb dieters want to face is that a smaller body needs less fuel than a larger body does. In fact, 2Big says that the difference is so great that a 75 lb weight loss (like I have accomplished so far) will drop your BMR requirements by about 675 calories per day!!!

As low carb dieters, we understand that we have switched from burning fats and glucose for fuel, to burning predominantly fats for fuel. And yet we don't take the time to actually figure out what that means. Somewhere, we've gotten it into our heads that if we keep our carbs low enough, and as a result our insulin levels low enough, we can eat all of the fats and calories we want because they don't matter.

Dr. Eades says "it doesn't work that way." That a calorie deficit is necessary to lose weight. The authors of the New Atkins for a New You agree. But us? We'd rather hold onto our false ideas and fantasies of what we wish Dr. Atkins was saying when he told us not to fear fat when beginning Induction. Because that's what we want to be true, not what is.

If fats are how we fuel our body on a low carb diet, and our smaller bodies now need less fuel, why is it so hard for us to add 1+1 together, and get 2? Why do we keep coming up with 3 for an answer? Probably for the same reason that we keep insisting that we need a magic feather to fly.

Expensive Chocolate Toddler Drink Has Blogger Moms Screaming

2010-05-06T11:47:00.000-06:00

Newspaper articles, nutritionists, and blogger moms this past week are all rising up against a new product that hit the shelves a couple of months ago. A transitional type formula from Mead Johnson Nutritional Co., that's flavored with vanilla or chocolate, and packed with 19 grams of sugar per serving.

Low carb advocates all know what that means. Getting our 1-year old toddlers hooked on the addictive power of carbohydrates before most of them can even talk and walk.

I can't help but wonder...how many of these newspaper authors, nutritionists, and screaming blogger moms are really giving their children healthy choices. Granted a chocolate milk that sells for $1 a serving, and boasts of added omega 3s and probiotics isn't exactly a sane idea. But when a toddler begins to pick and choose what he's willing to eat, what types of foods is that? Fruits and veggies? Hardly. Generally it's fistfuls of Cheerios, hand-held crackers, slices of bread, and mashed potatoes.

Not particularly healthy fair anyways.

I suppose what I don't quite understand is: why out of all of the junk foods on the shelves, and all of the new food products that come out yearly targeting children, like fancy colorful fruit-flavored chewy things being tooted as fruit snaxs, are blogging moms concerned with flavored milk?

Yes sugar is listed as the third ingredient, which makes it quite high, but so are chocolate chip cookies that kids are eating along with that milk.So is sweetened chocolate powder or liquid that moms buy and add to plain milk. And so are the chocolate milk containers that come on a school's lunch tray.

Perhaps it's a way for these folks to stand behind the attempt to get healthier food into the federally run school lunch programs, loaded with carbs and sugar. And perhaps it's a way to influence other moms out there who might be buying and giving their toddlers this expensive transitional milk without taking the time to think through the choice rationally.

But other than that, I quite frankly don't see the point to all the ranting. We're not talking about a blogger or two, we're talking about dozens of newspapers all running the exact same story, using the exact same quotes and pointing to the same nutritionist and mom blogger, and then nutritionists and bloggers themselves all using the exact same argument and concerns.

If something doesn't fit into your lifestyle and opinion of what a human being should be eating, especially babies, then just leave it on the shelf with all of the other processed junk.

As a low carber, I find I have to do that quite often myself.

A Better Life Perhaps, But the Cost is Obesity

2010-04-30T11:00:00.001-06:00

I was reading an article in the online edition of the L.A. Times this morning called "Life Has Never Been So Good for our Species." A modern-day technology-slanted approach, comparing hunter-gatherer days to today -- regarding money earned per person, accumulated goods, crime rate, leisure time, and pollution.

The piece was meant to paint a rose picture of today's life, even with all of its current financial and environmental problems, to yester-year. Except what jumped out at me was the noticeably missing tidbit regarding health care costs and obesity.

When you add the fact that more money and consumer goods, and more leisure time with less labor-intensive jobs has taken our overall obesity level from 20% in 1997 to over 34% today (the overweight category stayed about the same at 1/3 of the American population), it doesn't look like modern life is as good for us as the article claimed.

Nothing new to low carbers. We understand there's a strong addiction component inherent within the context of carbohydrate foods, be it added processed chemicals or higher-glycemic index reactions. But there's a lot of those on a low carb diet who are stalled and stagnant, a lot who are still addicted to processed foods, as well as TVs and computers. We don't get off the hook just because we've stopped eating sugar. Genetic factors, environmental, behavior, and socioeconomic factors still apply.

Look at any low carb board, egroup, or community and you'll see dozens of folks saying "I'm Back!" Because we're just as susceptible to food advertisers, emotional whims, and social-engagement feeling-left-out-of-the-loop events. Real Life, as Dr. Atkins used to call it. Only we're ill-equipped to handle the food issues and social Mac trucks that plague our efforts. We don't seem to be able to rid ourselves of the dieting mindset.

It's easy to say "It's a lifestyle, not a diet." But much harder to put that into practice.

Were the hunter-gatherers really so poor? Were they missing out on what current, modern-day society offers? Maybe not. It might have been a harder life, but if the cost we are paying for that extra ease and luxury is risk of diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, and death, it might not be worth the price.

A Personalized Diet Plan, Switching Mindsets

2010-04-24T10:36:00.002-06:00

I haven't done much of anything this past week, other than writing for Suite 101.

Partly because the Meniere's is going bi-lateral on me and I'm having trouble adjusting to, and catching myself, when I fall to the left, rather than falling to the right. And partly because I'm finding it a real struggle to break free from a high-fat mindset in order to implement my personalized diet plan.

Finances are playing a role, since for all the work we went to advertising my husband's handyman business last month, nothing has materialized; even though our poster is sitting in the window of almost every business throughout the entire county. But I'd be lying if I said that was the issue. Because it's not. Changing mindsets. That's the issue. It's harder than I thought it would be.

After reading a recent comment from a few posts back, I came to the realization the other day that the Atkins Diet has firmly infiltrated itself into my life. My whole life. I've literally bonded with it. So much so, that despite the knowledge that I don't digest fats very well, and despite the fact that I've spent a lot of hours thinking about what type of healthy diet plan I'm going to go to next, my meals are still loaded with fat.

I began with the Atkins Diet. I always revert back to the Atkins Diet after each attempt at switching to something else. And I guess that's what happens. It becomes a part of you, because that's what you've done for so long.

Alfredo sauce made with real, heavy cream. Lettuce salads loaded with homemade Thousand Island dressing. Sugar-free cheesecake. Chicken and tuna salad with lots of mayo. Deviled eggs. Homemade sugar-free hot cocoa with extra heavy cream. Bacon or sausage and eggs. It's just how you eat when you're doing Atkins.

But I'm not supposed to be doing Atkins anymore; I'm supposed to be doing a personalized version of South Beach. I don't think my mind has completely wrapped itself around that idea yet, because all of my diet food ideas lately have been high fat still, and my body is not very happy about that. Another reason I've fallen so behind in my blogging as of late.

Despite the physical issues, I don't feel very inspired myself, so how can I inspire someone else?

It hit me this morning that it's a lot like tunnel vision. You begin a low carb diet, and if we enter it with the proper mindset, we start to make it the very foundation of our lives. We learn and follow the rules. We learn the current science that backs up whatever plan we're doing. We believe in it so strongly, we want to go out and revolutionize the world. But it doesn't take everyone to goal. It really doesn't.

I'm beginning to understand that if I continue clinging to that foundation, long after it has run its course, I can do myself more harm than good. Yes, I can stay where I am, maintain my current weight, and stay relatively healthy now that I've quit my job, and have a gluten-free home. But it's stagnant. It doesn't help us fulfill our goals. It just blinds us to the truth, that if we're not moving forward, we're not growing.

For some reason, I forgot what a few have tried to tell me over the years, that as we travel this path our body is going to change. Whether that means we now need fewer carbs, more carbs, less fat, or more fat, less calories, more calories, or even refeeds and carb cycling is individual. And really doesn't matter. What does matter is that we take the initiative to move.

It all comes down to respecting our body enough, and what it's trying to tell us to do, which isn't necessarily what everyone in the low carb community is saying and doing. What's okay for them, might not be okay for us. Just gotta accept that. It's not healthy for me to live my life in the bathroom, just because the biochemical science behind low carb in general says fat shouldn't be feared.

Now...if I can just figure out HOW to do that--

A Low Carb Diet -- To What Lengths Should We Go to Promote It?

2010-04-11T21:49:00.001-06:00

There was an article in the New York Times a few days ago, written in question and answer format, where someone supposedly asked the NYT, "Other than celiac disease, is there any reason to avoid gluten in the diet?" The answer written by C. Claiborne Ray has the celiac community a bit upset.

Celiac forums are taking about it, celiac bloggers are talking about it, commenters are talking about it, and for good reason. Because the answer was flat out ridiculous.

Regardless of the sarcastic, condescending tone against those of us who are self-diagnosed celiacs -- having put ourselves on an elimination diet that proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that if we aren't celiacs already, we're most definitely on that path -- the answer the author put forth was as much a blow to the low carb cause as it was for those who have gluten sensitivity.

So I couldn't help but wonder...

To what lengths is it okay to promote the low carb agenda?
To what lengths is it okay to preach our beliefs and opinions as fact?
To what lengths is it okay to get the idea of a low carb way of life into the hands of those who need it?

It was downright scary to think that this gastroenterologist was allowing his belief in a low carb diet to influence his beliefs in regards to gluten sensitivity. Crazy. And it was downright scary to think that the author of the article was just as blind, running around parroting the stupid idea that if you remove gluten from your diet and you feel better, and lose weight, it's not because gluten was making you sick. It's because you lowered your carbs in the process!!!

Okay. Whatever. But...what about all of those poor gluten sensitive individuals who are now going to believe these two? What about all of those poor overweight, gluten sensitive individuals who have been going from doctor to doctor trying to get one of them to help them with all of their accumulating autoimmune diseases and neurological disorders? Only to be told they don't know WHY they are ill, with wonky blood glucose levels and non-diabetic neuropathy. And who knows what else.

Having been there myself, I can tell you that it gets pretty discouraging. Especially when you just keep getting sicker and sicker each year.

What about all of the readers who now believe that gluten sensitivity doesn't exist because some opinon piece printed in the New York Times said so? What about all of those readers who have been persuaded that low carb is now the way to go, because if you believe you're gluten sensitive and lower your carbs, it's gonna fix it all. Low Carb Magic.

When those readers pass the torch, and pay it forward, how are they going to do it?

I don't know. The whole thing left a bad taste in my mouth, because 1) gluten sensitivity DOES exist, and 2) it was like the guys believed in low carb so badly that they were unconsciously doing the very thing they were accusing gluten sensitivity believers of doing.

On one side of their mouth, they were saying that those who believe in gluten sensitivity were blaming all of their ills on gluten. But they were blaming all the fatness in the world on carbs. Saying that a gluten free diet helps those who are overweight lose fat due to a reduction in carbs, not because they are no longer eating gluten.

The irony, of course, is that the theory itself doesn't hold water. At least, not in my experience. So I don't know how much all of this matters, if anything. All of those low carb products that most low carbers can't live without, like tortillas and wraps and pasta -- are loaded with wheat gluten. So it's not just about the carbs. Plus gluten free substitutes that most folks going gluten free also gravitate towards, myself included, are NOT low in carbs. Which means going gluten free is not necessarily low in carbs unless you make it so.

So where does that leave us? Right in the middle of some mud hole, is my guess. A lot of B.S. Does the ends justify the means? I don't think so anymore. At least, not when some folks, like those with gluten sensitivity, are being sacrificed on the alter of agenda.

I Got Two New Blogs Up and Running Today

2010-04-09T18:55:00.001-06:00

I spent most of today working on two new blogs that I've been thinking about creating for some time now. Partly because I couldn't find anyone else doing what I want to do with them, when I tried searching this past week, and partly because I know I've been getting far too negative about low carb dieting lately.

I'd like to get this blog back to its original intention - support and information about the low carb lifestyle.

The first blog is called Gluten Free Journey to Health, a gluten free blog that will deal with nutrition and health. When I did a search on google for gluten free blogs they were all gluten free food and recipe blogs, or gluten free product blogs. I couldn't find a single one, not that there isn't one out there, that dealt with real honest to goodness celiac disease health and information. It made me think about eating disorders. But then, maybe that's just the writer coming out in me.

The second blog is called Life After Low Carb, and it will pick up where I personally am in my own weight loss journey, higher carbs, and cover balanced nutrition and lower fat living. Similar to what I'm doing here, but it will be more focused towards those doing a moderate carb, lower fat diet. More in line with a modified South Beach, rather than a typical low carb diet.

As for here, I'll be doing more low carb stuff. And maybe personalize it a bit more, since most of my research will be in regards to a more balanced lifestyle. However, if I run into something interesting that pertains to low carbing, I'll most definitely be placing it here. I'm pretty apt to do that, since I'll also be doing a lot of health research for my Suite 101 writing as well.

Overall, there won't be a whole lot of difference, except I promise to stop being combative against low carb. And take my daily frustrations elsewhere.

Portion Control -- Do Calories Really Matter?

2010-04-08T19:36:00.001-06:00

Portion Control is a hot topic that surfaces now and then on low carb boards. Each time, it sparks quite a bit of discussion and lots of controversy. Those who've had to watch their portion sizes believe in the idea, and those who haven't gotten to that point in their journey yet, do not.

It's human nature to struggle to see the world, as well as each other, through something other than our own experience. But when we start clinging to our false ideas as if they were low carb gospel, we do both ourselves and each other a disservice.

Case in point is calories.

A low carb diet, irregardless of the plan, is structured in such as a way as to cause newcomers to disbelieve that the calories-in versus calories-out way of thinking is true. On a low carb diet the main focus is on restricting carbohydrates, not calories. So the dieter often begins his weight loss journey married to a few misunderstandings.

As time goes on, those misunderstandings tend to get embedded along with other misnotions about ketones and ketosis, until the pot is so full of myths and truths that we can't tell the difference anymore.

The natural tendency among low carbers is to ignore the calories when eating zero, and nearly zero carb foods. Which works initially when one has dozens of pounds of fat to lose. The downside of doing that, is it reinforces the idea that calories don't count.

Because...well...we're able to eat all we want to, and still the pounds keep peeling off.

Eventually, if the portion sizes aren't reduced, the low carb dieter reaches a point where calories eaten come into balance with calories expended. At which point, we stall. Maybe our metabolisms have slowed down for whatever reason. Maybe we're not as active as we were in the beginning when we were excited and eager to put a new exercise program into play. And maybe it's something else.

Part of the problem is that Dr. Atkins called the calorie theory a myth. He put that belief in big bold type, so it stuck firmly in our minds. However, if you read that section of the book very carefully, (the 2002 version), that isn't what he believed at all. What he said was:

"Now, it has always been supposed that gaining weight results from taking in more calories than you expend through exercise, thermogenesis (the body's heat production), and all the body's other metabolic functions. And, in fact, this is quite true."

So he believed in the calories-in versus calories-out theory. But went on to qualify that belief by saying what wasn't true was the erroneous conclusion that the only way to lose weight was by strictly restricting calories. Dr. Atkins believed that different types of diets produced different kinds of effects, and that by forcing the body to take a different metabolic pathway than the one it was used to, effects could be manipulated into giving the dieter a metabolic advantage -- as far as energy output is concerned.

It's still about calories-in versus calories-out, Dr. Atkins says, because if a person eats fewer calories, as most people do on a low carb diet, they'll lose weight very fast. The metabolic advantage doesn't mean we are free to ignore the issue of portion control. It means that when we begin a low carb diet, more energy output will be dissipated as heat, or possibly even sneaked out of the body unused.

Now, Dr. Atkins really did use the word "POSSIBLY." In fact, he had a tendency to pick his words very carefully. Which is why a lot of folks miss, and even misinterpret, a lot of things he said. Like how the metabolic advantage is temporary. It's what one experiences when they begin a low carb diet. No where does Dr. Atkins claim, or promise, that the metabolic advantage one has of sneaking calories unburned out of the body will continue past the time of keto adaption.

What he says is that the metabolic advantage will allow the dieter to "eat as many or more calories as you were eating before starting the diet and still begin to lose pounds and inches."

The problem with what most low carbers believe is that two to four weeks into the diet, when the brain adjusts to using ketones for fuel, the liver doesn't need to make as much glucose through the process of gluconeogenesis as it did before. At that point, the dieter is left with the same calories-in versus calories-out equation as any other diet. The liver will dismantle only enough fatty acids to make the glucose it needs to fuel the cells without mitochondria. Which means fewer fatty acids will be taken out of storage, unless we need them for energy purposes.

No more wasting of ketones. No more sneaking them out of the body, because the liver only produces the exact amount, plus a tiny bit more for safety purposes, that the brain is going to need. That's it. Metabolic Advantage OVER.

No matter what we want to believe, a low carb diet isn't magic. It's specifically set up the way it is to control hunger to the point that the dieter will reduce his calories spontaneously without having to count them. If you don't do that, if the satiety mechanism isn't working properly such as it doesn't with celiac disease, you can't forever continue to eat the amount of food you were eating when you first started this journey.

Regardless of what you want to believe right now, you will one day need to focus on portion control. Whether that's becoming aware of your portions and keeping paying attention to the volume you're eating, such as with South Beach, or whether you have to actually go to all of the trouble of counting calories -- one way or another, the new slimmer you needs less food than it used to.

The idea behind a low carb diet is force the body to take an alternate pathway where more fatty acids are used as fuel. Giving the dieter a jump-start on fat loss. As Dr. Eades describes it, lower insulin levels is about keeping the door to the fat cells open. But that doesn't mean the body has to use the fat we have stored away. It can easily be getting all of the fatty acids it needs from our diet.

And that's just the thing. Our bodies are smart, and will adapt to whatever we're doing. The name of the game is survival, and our bodies know how to play the game very well. So gluconeogenesis will lessen. Making the dismantling of fatty acids lesson. The amount of calories our bodies need overall as we grow smaller and smaller will lessen too.

So at some point, portion control and reduction in calories becomes a necessary evil for most of us, in order to reach our goals.

Finding the Right Diet Plan -- A New Beginning

2010-04-05T11:35:00.002-06:00

Finding the right diet plan isn't always as easy as a lot of people make it seem. The advice that I hear over and over again is to study the various plans carefully, looking for one that fits into your lifestyle and tastes, then pick one and do it like the book.

The problem with that line of reasoning is that it generally comes from someone who is doing the Atkins' diet, and someone who believes that Atkins is the plan you're going to pick. Come back and tell them that you're going to do something different, something more in line with South Beach, something lower in fat, and see what they do.

That's exactly what I've been watching over at Low Carb Friends. (I know...I know...I need to find a different place to hang out at.) Someone picked a diet called "Ideal Protein," and when she shared what was involved in the initial stages of that eating plan (20g carb, 60-75g protein, and 2-3 tbsp of fish oil or olive oil per day) she got confronted by the very folks who normally preach to pick a plan and do it by the book.

Now I wouldn't call 3 tbsp olive oil per day a low fat plan, but that was the term she used, "low fat", and it caused all sorts of folks to come crawling out of the woodwork in a goodwill effort to manipulate her into switching to their plan of choice. THEIR plan of choice.

Gosh. They went from cannibalizing her muscles, to researching the different low carb plans and picking one, to scaring her with heart disease if she didn't eat lots of saturated fats, to sending her to wikipedia to research rabbit starvation, to telling her that low carb is not a low fat plan -- then...pushing Atkins 72.

Knew they'd get around to that one. Which only served to prove the conclusion I've been coming to lately. That researching the various plans and picking one is always dependent upon you choosing to do what they are doing.

No Thanx.

Because I'm coming to realize, and actually beginning to get it through my thick head, that if I keep on doing what I'm doing right now -- bouncing back and forth between a low carb diet and maintenance, researching until I'm blue in the face but not actually getting anything accomplished -- I'm going stay fat. No doubt about it. I have got to make up my mind. Because it time to move forward. It's time for a new beginning.

So how does one go about finding the right diet plan that will allow them to meet their goals?

A lot of us are pretty attached to the idea of demonizing carbs. We've literally bonded ourselves to that idea. That carbs are bad. Even though realistically it isn't the carbs that made us fat. Nor is it the carbs that make us hungry. Association isn't cause. So yeah these things happen, but not for the reasons we've been taught.

For example, it isn't the state of Ketosis that keeps our hunger at bay. It's the release of CCK from eating higher protein and fat. That means that if you structure a higher carb diet to include what we've learned from doing low carb, making sure you get more than adequate protein and "good" fats in your diet so that you'll be releasing plenty of CCK to keep you satisfied, you can most definitely make a higher carb plan work -- without being hungry all the time.

I'm seriously leaning towards the idea of doing exactly that. Raising my carbs enough to keep my blood glucose level happy, my body from feeling sick, but taking into the structure of South Beach all of the lessons and principles and research I've learned from and accumulated all of the years I've been married to low carb.

Pretty much, my intent is to do my own thing. Because with the leaky gut, I don't tolerate olive oil very well, and canola oil sends my inflammation issues soaring. Which means I'll be eating more saturated fat than South Beach advises, but less total fat than what the Atkins' folks like to push.

So I don't think I can honestly place myself firmly within either camp. But then I don't feel the need to be. I just feel the need for a little forward movement right now. The need to make a new beginning.

South Beach Diet Thoughts and Reflections

2010-04-03T13:55:00.000-06:00

I try to balance my weekly reading by visiting several different types of forums, and sections within forums. One of the topics I've been particularly interested in lately is the South Beach Diet. I really like the way in which it is structured. And regardless of the glycemic index controversy within the low carb community, you can't deny that for a lot of folks The South Beach Diet works rather well.

What I find a bit disheartening is the tunnel vision that seems to be quite prevalent among low carb dieters. That their way is the only way. For example, over at Low Carb Friends the other day, someone raised the question as to whether low carb diets ever stop working. Since they were someone who suffers from lots of water retention, a yo-yo low carb dieter who was attempting this way of life for the upteenth time, she sincerely wanted to know the truth.

But the truth is not what she got. Sadly, the greater majority of comments and advice were myth, false perceptions about low carb itself, lots of fantasy (what people wish was true), and possibly a little bit of projection.

The most disturbing thing about that thread was why low carbers continue to believe in, and preach to others, all of the inaccuracies about low carb that keep people fat and unhealthy. How many years does one have to keep doing whatever isn't working, before they are allowed to look for success elsewhere? How many times do we have to continue listening to the often parroted consensus that if low carb has stopped working for us, it's our fault. Or its our thyroid.

Honestly, I'm sick and tired of all of this outdated garbage advice. Especially since no one has anything other than private opinion to back any of it up.

Which is why I've been focusing on, and investigating, The South Beach Diet lately. It's why I've been looking at individuals who are doing a more moderate carb diet, and wondering...

Can our bodies actually reach a point where they don't want to take the starvation pathway any more?

Could it be, that for those who don't make a straight path to the finish line the first time around, that the body becomes too efficient at creating and using ketones for our own good? Could it be that for some, our bodies grow tired of having to neutralize all of the excess cortisol created from the stress placed upon it when we try to follow a low carb diet for too long?

Granted, these types of issues aren't applicable to everyone. Lots of folks enter into a low carb lifestyle, struggle to their goal weight, then happily maintain it healthily for the rest of their lives. But the fact that they are applicable for some, means low carb itself isn't the overall, magical, one-size-fits-all answer that so many within the low carb community claim.

And yet -- those who tend to stop living the definition of insanity, those who look in a different direction are looked down upon and ridiculed, and even shamed. Warned that they are are going to be hungry if they eat carbs. Warned that they're going to destroy their health if they don't tow the party line.

Why can't we, as a community, be more supportive of those who seek to find health another way than ourselves?

It really disturbs me that those who follow, and are having lots of success on The South Beach Diet are met with opposition from those who should be the most supportive of their attempt to find something that works for them. And it really disturbs me that so many within the low carb community who could be helped to reach their goals by following a plan a little less strict than what most define low carb to be, are not receiving that help due to the errors of belief that keep getting thrown at those for whom low carb has stopped working.

In an attempt to reach out to some of those people, I recently wrote an article for Suite 101 about how to modify a South Beach meal plan to make it gluten free. I also plan on starting a new blog this coming week about a more moderate carb lifestyle. I've been meaning to do that, as well as start one on gluten free living, for awhile now; but just hadn't gotten around to doing that.

But something Jimmy Moore said to me in the comment section of my journal blog the other day when I was really in a depressive funk, and upset about all of the low carb gurus who haven't been able to make low carb work for them, really struck home.

Life is about growing. And growing is about gaining strength to stand up and be who and what we are. It isn't about becoming a follower and doing whatever everyone else we are hanging out with is doing. It's about choosing to do for ourselves what needs to be done to succeed, regardless of what anyone else thinks about it, or does.

So if high-fat, low carb is working for you -- GREAT. Keep on doing what you're doing. But if low carb isn't working for you, then it's OKAY to find a different path that will.

"This is YOUR life and you do what's best for YOU."

Do We Burn Ketones for Energy?

2010-04-02T14:44:00.000-06:00

There are many misunderstandings among low carbers that I hear from time to time. One is that when we go on a low carb diet, we are burning ketones for fuel. The idea was probably born due to the fact that the heart and a few other body tissues prefer to use ketones over any other fuel source. But preference doesn't mean they get to.

Initially, when we restrict carbohydrates, we are using glucose predominantly for fuel. But when the blood glucose level falls, the body converts the glycogen it’s stored in the liver to glucose. It does this by using dietary fats and stored body fat to fuel the process of Gluconeogensis.

Normally, the body has a high requirement for glucose. Dr. Eades claims we need somewhere in the area of 200g of glucose per day. But in the absence of carbohydrates, the liver is able to get the glucose the body needs by breaking down muscle tissue and dietary protein into amino acids. Plus a little bit of glycerol. Fifty-eight percent of all dietary protein is broken down in the liver to make glucose.

Ketones comes from this process of Gluconeogenesis. When someone is said to be “in” Ketosis, that doesn’t mean they are burning ketones for energy. That means the liver is using fatty acids to fuel the process of making glucose, because glucose availability is low. The result is the synthesis of ketone bodies. The liver can’t use ketones, which is actually a safety measure to make sure the liver dumps them into the bloodstream for the use of other body tissues.

For the first few weeks of a low carb diet, muscles and all other body tissues do use ketones for fuel. This is a preservation mechanism, and the purpose is to save any available glucose for the brain. But this is only a temporary situation, until the brain becomes fully adapted to using ketones for the greater majority of its needs.

Once this adaption takes place, ketone production drops because the body doesn’t need to make as much glucose as it did before. At that time, muscles and other body tissues that don’t need glucose for fuel switch to using fatty acids, in order to save the body’s precious ketones for the brain.

The average length of time it takes for the brain to adapt to using ketones is three weeks. But it can take as long as six or more. Therefore, ketones are only an alternative energy source when there isn’t enough glucose available. Once the body adapts to being in Ketosis, the brain is the major body organ that uses ketones. All other body organs and cells, including those that prefer to use ketones, use glucose or fatty acids for fuel. Unless there are extra ketones floating around that the brain doesn't need.

Not a very likely occurrence, especially if you've been low carbing for awhile. The body gets more and more efficient in using ketones, and tends to make just enough to fuel the brain.

But...How Do I Feed My Family?

2010-03-26T13:47:00.001-06:00

I've been noticing lately that one of the questions a low of newbies tend to ask is in regards to how to feed the family. They've read the book that accompanies their plan of choice. They understand the do's and dont's, the why's and what not's, but because they are new to this way of life, they can't quite wrap their minds around how to feed their family when they are doing low carb.

For some of us that really isn't an issue. We cook for the family the same way we cook for ourselves. And they either take regular lunches to work to get the extra carbs they need, or they snack on carbier choices. But for some, that isn't always an option for whatever reason.

I went to check out the blog of one of my new commenters the other day. It's called Tami's Kitchen Table Talk. And I particularly liked the way she does something called Menu Mondays. Now for myself, I'm not good at sticking to a weekly menu since my health tends to interfere with that more often than not. But I know how well the idea works because I used to do a weekly menu each week for the Boys Home.

What caught my attention at this particular blog, was the way in which she did two menus each week. One for the family, and then one adapted to low carb for herself.

I've been planning on spotlighting this blog ever since, but have been putting it off, because I wanted to take the time to collect for you the links to several weeks' menus, so you could see what I'm talking about. But when I went to Tami's blog this morning, I was completely surprised to see that Tami has now changed her blog format. Or maybe it was always like that and I was just dense the other day, LOL. I don't know.

We have low carb pictures of recipes and menus on the left, and pictures of recipes for the family and their menu on the right. And links to several of her other weeks' menus right there.

A particularly nice set up that you ought to check out.

Is It Safe To Stay In Ketosis Indefinitely?

2010-03-23T16:07:00.001-06:00

There seems to be a lot of focus on the state of Ketosis these days. With lots of folks asking the same questions:

Am I in Ketosis? How many carbs does it take to get thrown out of Ketosis? What should I do if the Ketostix aren't showing that I'm in Ketosis anymore, even though I'm only eating Induction level of carbs? Is it safe to stay in Ketosis indefinitely?

And while some of these questions are certainly important, like just how safe of a diet is this long-term, overall it seems that we are putting too much emphasis on the process of Ketosis and not enough on nutrition.

While I haven't read the new Atkins' book that came out earlier this month, due to personal financial reasons, what I've been reading on the web about it, and what folks who have purchased the book are saying about it, is fairly good. Like a long discussion and tips on realistic "good" fats intake, and no more recommending you check for the state of Ketosis with Ketostix.

Course, with so many different versions of Atkins out there, and people still doing all of them, I don't see the questions going away anytime soon. So I thought I'd take a moment and do a post on my own personal views about Ketosis.

In the 70s, the whole Atkins' diet was built up around the idea of Ketosis. And like everyone else, I rushed out to the drug store and bought myself a bottle of testing strips -- Ketostix, because that's what they were called back then.

They were actually for diabetics who needed to test for the presence of Ketoacidosis. So those are the type of ketones you are actually looking for when you test: the ketones that prove a diabetic is in trouble. The sticks don't test for the state of dietary Ketosis, because that is actually measured by ketones in the blood. But at the time, Dr. Atkins felt that Ketostix were an accurate enough test of the presence of ketones to put his "Revolution" into play.

Since then, we've discovered they aren't that accurate of a measure. When I went on Atkins for the first time, I registered dark purple no matter how much water I drank. When I went on Atkins again, the color was somewhat lighter, but still moderate. Each time I returned to Atkins, the strips grew lighter and lighter, until today...I don't register on the sticks at all, even when doing Induction.

So in my opinion, they're pretty much worthless. And was very glad to see them no longer recommended because they only serve to confuse folks. That's because you can be in Ketosis without turning the sticks any type of color. You can register dark purple on the sticks, yet still not be burning body fat. In fact, those types of things occur despite the number of carbs you eat. There's NO standard. Everything is individual. Everything depends upon your own circumstances, goals, and metabolic damage.

And here's the clincher. You don't even have to be in Ketosis to mobilize your body fat stores!

The original idea was supposed to be about insulin. Lowering our basal levels back to normal, so the doors to our fat stores stay open. So there's no possible metabolic interference with mobilizing our body fat for energy. So we avoid all of the pitfalls and health consequences associated with Insulinemia and Insulin Resistance. But that isn't the only pathway. It's just one of many.

Somewhere along the way, things got a bit tilted. Somewhere along the way people started thinking that low carb meant some kind of free-for-all. Stay in Ketosis and you can eat all you want, whenever you want, and whatever you want. Including lots of high-calorie, fatty foods. Stay in Ketosis and your body fat stores, regardless of the amount of calories you eat, will just fall off of you. Because carbs are the demon, not calories. Stay in Ketosis, and you'll experience Atkins Magic: no hunger, easy fat loss, and permanent goal weight.

Promises that didn't exactly deliver to most of us.

The problem, as I see it, isn't with the Atkins' diet per se, it's with us. We read the book cover to cover, but only saw and retained what we wanted to see and remember. We didn't think about how it was structured, the different phases and steps we were supposed to move along with, because afterall, Dr. Atkins did say that if you have a lot of weight to lose, it was okay to do an extended Induction.

Okay. An extended Induction. With extended being the key word here. Now we totally loved the idea of faster weight loss, faster fat loss, and we embraced the idea of doing a very low carb diet because we are totally into FAST.

What we failed to understand (and this happened in the latter 90s as well as it does today), is that an extended Induction does something to the metabolism. I don't know what that is exactly, it could be a thyroid issue, it could be a total body metabolic issue, a metabolic adaption so-to-speak, but I watched people do it to themselves in 1999, and I've watched people do it to themselves today.

Whatever carb level you chose for the better part of your "diet" phase, is pretty much the carb level you've sealed yourself into living with for the rest of your lives.

Did you get that?

The original Atkins diet, and even all of his later versions were never meant to keep you in Ketosis forever. They really weren't. They were designed to get you into Ketosis initially, where hunger and cravings could be controlled long enough to teach you how to add more carbs to your diet slowly, so that you could learn your own personal tolerance for carbohydrate -- and learn how to stay within that tolerance.

What most people did instead, was stick to Induction level of carbs for faster weight loss, or just barely above that, and stayed there for so long that their bodies literally adapted to that carb level. Created a new set point for carbs. So now when they try to up their carbohydrate level, even after the week or so required to upregulate the enzymes needed to process carbs, they can't do it without replacing the body fat they've lost at lower levels.

In a very real sense, people who didn't NEED to stay at those reduced levels literally screwed themselves out of a more moderate maintenance diet -- all in the name of faster fat loss.

So we really need to THINK about what we're doing to ourselves. Right Now. Before it's too late. Because the idea wasn't to stay in Ketosis forever. Although that's what a lot of folks are going to have to do now, even though we do not know how safe that is long-term.

Are we using the state of Ketosis as it was originally intended, a tool to help us learn our own personal tolerance for carbohydrates, (whatever that level may be, and for some of us that can be quite high), or are we using the state of Ketosis as a crutch because we have convinced ourselves that the demon in our lives, the thing outside of ourselves that made us fat -- was carbohydrates?

Fructose-Induced Leptin Resistance Study

2010-03-18T11:39:00.000-06:00

Most low carbers are aware of the fact that high fructose corn syrup is associated with obesity. And that the problem is the fructose. But since fructose doesn't raise insulin levels, how does fructose do that?

I ran into an interesting study the other day while researching high fructose corn syrup. The running title is: Fructose and Leptin Resistance, and the hypotheses was 2-fold. 1) Chronic high fructose intake induces Leptin Resistance; and 2) Leptin Resistance leads to susceptibility to weight gain.

In the study, 23 male Sprague-Dawley rats, age 2-1/2 months, were first fed one of two diets: 1) 5.2% fat (lard), 60% corn starch, 18.3% protein (mostly casein), and 3.6 kcal/g; or 2) 5.2% fat (lard), 60.4% fructose, 18.8% protein (mainly casein), and 3.6 kcal/g. Since the hypotheses dealt with Leptin Resistance, all of the rats were tested with Leptin injections prior to putting them on the diets, and all of the rats responded to those injections by reducing their 24 hr food intake.

At 6 months, the rats were tested again. There was no noticeable difference between the fructose-fed rats and the control group in regards to food intake, (total food was left for them in the morning, and they were able to eat as much of it as they wanted, whenever they wanted), body weight, fat storage, blood leptin level, and metabolic syndrome markers except for raised Triglyceride levels in the blood of those rats on the high fructose diet.

All rats were again injected with leptin, but only the rats on the control group diet reduced their 24 hour food intake this time. The fructose-fed rats didn't respond to leptin at all. Plus other tests on the fructose-fed rats showed they all had Leptin signalling issues. So it wasn't just a matter of higher Triglycerides interfering with Leptin's ability to cross the Blood Brain Barrier. Though that was most likely a factor as well.

At this point, 1/2 of the fructose-fed rats and 1/2 of the control group rats were placed on a high-fat diet of 60% kcal/g from lard, to replace the fructose, 7% kcal/g from sucrose, and 5.24 kcal/g. They didn't say what the protein intake was, but I suppose it was the same.

At 2 weeks, the rats were tested again, but this time there were significant differences. Both the control group and fructose-fed rats now eating a high-fat diet increased their food intake and therefore incurred significant weight gain. But the rats previously fed a high-fructose diet demonstrated higher calorie intake, higher weight gain, and higher fat storage.

While glucose and insulin levels were not affected in any of the rats, in non-fasted blood samples, uric acid levels increased in all rats being fed the high-fat diet, but not in those on just high fructose. Triglycerides were elevated with the high fructose diet, but not in those on no-fructose high-fat. This showed that a high-fat diet didn't affect Triglycerides, while fructose feeding doubled Triglyceride levels. Plus, as body fat storage went up, so did Triglyceride levels.

The study is significant because it shows Leptin Resistance to be at the heart of the current Obesity Epidemic, possibly driven by a high fructose intake then coupled with an excess intake of calories/fat, and that Insulin Resistance does not cause obesity.

Now before you start screaming that this study is flawed and throw it out because you don't like the idea that a high-fat diet led to excess fat storage, and increased Triglycerides and uric acid, keep in mind that the diet also contained a 7% sugar intake. Plus it's extremely possible that the same results would have occurred with any kind of excess of calories.

Leptin Resistance plus a high-fat diet together may or may not be significant. It's still too early to know for sure.

10 Ideas For a No-Frills Low Carb Cuisine

2010-03-17T08:23:00.003-06:00

I came across a food article a couple of days ago on a website called Wallet Pop that dealt with how to feed a college kid for only $35 a week. That comes to about $5 a day. Among his tips on how to do it, he posted a sample week's menu which he clearly announced was a no-frills, survival menu only. He also placed a disclaimer right above the menu that said prices will vary depending upon where you live and shop.

But the whole thing really got the commenters into an uproar.

His menu was plain, and extremely repetitive, which it very much could be if you were a college boy with little money and didn't know how to cook. Plus it was greatly lacking in fruits and veggies. However, he did explain that those types of items could be easily replaced for some of the choices he had made in his fake shopping trip. But most of the things he said went totally over the readers' heads.

After reading through 16 pages of comments, I was left with a disheartened kind of feeling, because most of the comments were pretty much the same as when a low carber over at Low Carb Friends attempted to revamp the dad's menu into something that would work for a low carb diet. Most criticisms on the blog, as well as the Low Carb Friends' thread, were about the menus themselves, rather than the principles put forth in the article meant to help the reader to design their own no-frills menu.

In fact, there wasn't a single comment on any of those principles. Just comments showing that the reader wanted to be told exactly what to do. They wanted to know exactly what to eat. They didn't want to be taught how to fish, so to speak. "I can't do it here, for what you can do it there." "Tell me where you shop so I can go there too."

The vast majority of comments feverishly centered around the nutrition of the sample menu. How to do it better, or what was missing. But the advice was conflicting, depending on the nutritional dogma that each commenter was bringing to the table. Some wanted a menu with fewer processed, refined carbs. Some wanted a menu without meat. Some wanted to know where the fruits and veggies were. Others fought among each other as to whether or not fresh fruits and veggies were better nutritionally than frozen.

And most of them kept asking where you could buy a gallon of milk for $1.89 even though several previous commenters who supported the dad's prices, specifically told them where they live, and where they shop.

The commenters at Low Carb Friends weren't any better, criticizing the posters prices, and telling her she was crazy because "they" couldn't buy the foods she chose, for the prices the poster was able to buy them for.

I can't help but wonder what is WRONG with people? Why have we turned ourselves into such a dumbed-down species? Why couldn't even the low-carb group see and understand that the reason why the poster went to all of the trouble revamping the article into a low carb menu was to show low carb folks that healthier choices doesn't really cost more than cheap, highly refined carb living.

Geesh.

So I'm not going to come up with any kind of a false menu plan. Instead, I'm going to give you the 10 principles this particular dad laid out in the original article:

1. Discipline. Sometimes if you really don't have the money to spend, discipline might not be a problem. For example, right now, we have very little money coming in, so everything we do get goes straight to bills. We are pretty much living on whatever I have in the house. If your situation is a bit less extreme, it's going to take the right frame of mind, and the desire to save money to do this. That's because stores are designed to get us to spend our money. Their motive isn't to help us save anything.

2. Shop Cheap. The suggestion given was to do most of your shopping in a discount supermarket. The one in my own area is a Super Walmart, but prices aren't necessarily cheaper than the other 2 stores in my area. The other suggestion was to let go of name brands and buy generic and store brands. I do that when I can, but my gluten intolerance won't always allow me to do that, as I have to buy what's gluten free. Which is why these principles are meant to be guidelines only. Take what you can use, and toss the rest.

3. Shop for staples every couple of weeks. The less time you spend in the grocery store, and the fewer trips you make each month or week, the less chance there is for the store to rob you of your funds through impulse purchases.

4. A survival diet is a bare-bones, basic diet. While it should be as nutritious as one can make it, there are times when you aren't going to be able to eat what you know to be good nutrition. Not even good low carb nutrition. In my own current circumstances, for example, we are eating very few veggies and fruit and lots of starchy carbs right now because that's what I have in the house.

5. Cruise the aisles. Spend some time checking out all the stores in your own area. For me, that's a Super Walmart and a couple of independent grocery stores. Spend some time checking out what types of low carb foods are available, and what their prices for those foods are. See if you can come up with new and different alternatives to what you've been currently buying.

In our area whole chicken are high, $6 or $7 each which would give us 2 meals. A 10-lb bag of chicken leg quarters is the same price, but would feed us twice as many meals, plus soup.

Ground beef is pretty expensive here too. $2.50 to $3.00 a pound for the medium fat kind. But one of the independent grocery stores has a marked down meat section where I can get regular and medium fat ground beef for $1.29 when they have it. So I generally wait for them to mark it down, then buy everything they have at that reduced price.

If I can't get marked down ground beef, I substitute ground turkey which runs $1.89 here at full price, and around $1.49 when Walmart marks it down.

6. Go for weekly variety rather than daily. Let's face it. We're pretty spoiled. Most of us are used to eating whatever we want to eat, whenever we want to eat it. And that means daily variety. But when you're following a tight budget, that isn't always possible. If you buy a 10lb bag of chicken leg quarters, for example, you might have to eat chicken 3 or 4 times that week. Next week you might buy a large package of pork steaks and eat those instead of the chicken. If you can shop less often, like bi-weekly or even monthly, variety will be easier to come by.

7. Cook with leftovers in mind. In the sample menu offered, there was 3 main dishes planned that were alternated throughout the week. I tend to cook the same way. With only 2 of us to cook for most of the time, I still use a lot of main dishes meant to serve 4 or 6. Then we eat the leftovers scattered throughout the week.

8. Save what you have leftover each week to add to next weeks purchases so you can spend a bit more on something that is more special. You don't have to spend your full budgeted amount each week. If your budget is $35 and you only spend $32, then save the $3 to add to next week's purchases.

We really, really like salmon, which is sold in large 2lb packages here for about $7. That comes to $3.50 per meal which is higher than I normally spend on meat. Especially when I can pick up cheap rib steaks for $1.99 a pound. So it isn't something that we are able to buy every week. However, if I saved the little bit I didn't spend this week to go with next week's menu, I could put that $3 towards the purchase of salmon.

9. Make a list of everything you like to eat, and arrange it in order of cost. I did this when I was working at the Boys' Home. It was the only way to feed the 24 people I was feeding for $335 a week. I had to generally know what each main dish cost, so I could base most of my week's menu on the lower cost main dishes, plus juggle the go-withs to stay within a certain dollar amount per meal.

10. Think volume, rather than what you would like to eat. When money is tight, and you are cut to a bare-bones menu what fills your tummy and keeps you satisfied is going to count the most. Whipped cream topped sugar-free jello is nice, but doesn't go very far when you're hungry and need a real snack. Deviled eggs, tuna with mayo, celery with peanut butter is far more filling.

Well, that's the 10 principles I was able to find in the above referenced article. Did you find any others that I missed?

How to Handle Weight Loss Stalls

2010-03-14T12:05:00.000-06:00

If you spend any amount of time on the various low-carb boards and egroups, the one type of post that tends to come up over and over again, is in regards to the speed of weight loss. Generally these people are those who've lost a lot of weight on Induction, but are now in a weight loss pause, and the pause has scared them.

Typically, they're depressed, whiny, analytically frustrated because they are losing weight as quickly as they believe they should. Or as quickly as they did in the beginning. Or as quickly as someone else is losing.

Now there's a lot of information on the web about what might be causing the plateau or stall, and what one can do about it physically to try and change the situation. But let's be honest here. The answers conflict and results from trying all of those things vary so greatly from person to person, that in the meantime, it can flat out drive you crazy enough to just give up on the whole diet thing.

So what's a person to DO while they're experimenting with upping/lowering protein, upping/lowering carbs, upping/lowering calories, drinking more water, or trying out a new plan?

The first thing to do is to take a breath, step back just a pace, and accept the fact that most people who complain they are stalled, really aren't. Why? Because the body doesn't like shrinking fat cells, it doesn't like all of the yo-yo stuff we do to it, and it especially doesn't like the dehydration and water loss we've inflicted upon it by forcing it to call upon our liver glycogen reserves.

So it fills the fat cells with water to compensate. Not permanently, but sometimes for a long enough time to make us freak out a bit. Long enough to make us believe that we are never going to reach our weight loss goal. That we're never going to be able to become anything close to normal. Whatever we define that to be.

That makes the problem not really one of initiating fat loss as much as it makes the problem one of motivation, because most folks who are freaking out about their weight loss plateau are generally doing so after not having lost any weight for a mere 3 days, or perhaps a week. They think back to the amount of weight they lost during Induction, and want to know why that rate of loss isn't continuing. What's wrong with them...what's wrong with the diet...if it's not going to work, they might as well eat carbs.

Okay. I can understand where their head is at. I really can. As I've been at this diet thing for over 3 years now, and I'm still just a little more than halfway to goal. And while I can't relate to freaking out after 3 days or a week, I can relate to the notion that if this thing isn't going to work, I might as well eat carbs. Because the truth is, I've done that. I've actually tried that approach.

But you know what?

What stops me each and every time, after a few pounds gain, is the reality that I really, Really, REALLY do not want to go back to who and what I was before. I don't want to go back to weighing 256.5 lbs, and wearing size 3x's. I don't want to go back to the Neuropathy that was so bad I couldn't walk 2 steps without putting on my good, solid tennis. I don't want to live with the heart palpitations, the high blood pressure, and the irratic blood glucose levels the doctor keeps insisting is a fluke.

So I do a fast 180-degree turn, and come back.

I come back each and every time I stray because even though low-carb is no longer working for me, and raises my blood glucose levels to pre-diabetic levels, it helps me from undoing everything I've achieved so far. Real honest to goodness fat loss. It allows me to walk around my house in my stocking feet without having to wear shoes every waking minute of the day. And it helps me make more nutritious choices, like all of the veggies I otherwise wouldn't eat.

I suppose in the position I'm standing in right now, it would be easy to chuck it all for something else. But I can't help but ask myself what's the worse thing that could happen to me if I stayed at the weight I am right now? If all of my future twists and turns don't pan out, and don't get me moving downwards ever again, would that really be so bad?

Probably not--not when you consider what the alternative to that actually is. Is it better to live out the rest of my life on some type of doable low-carb maintenance plan as a size 14, or on a high carb plan that reaps me a size 26?

Okay. So I'll take the doable low-carb maintenance plan as a size 14.

But...I don't know that I've made myself a HAPPY lifestyle choice by doing that. Maybe because I haven't yet found that maintenance level of good health that will net me something more sustainable than pre-diabetic glucose levels. And maybe it's because I haven't yet thoroughly explored all of the possible alternatives. All of the maintenance possibilities that will grant health along with my current size.

I do plan to do that when my current situation betters a bit, like drastically lowering my omega 6 intake, (which I think is why I'm beginning to lose heart with the South Beach Diet), and become more dedicated to eliminating fructose from my diet, since I have to read each and every label anyways due to the gluten intolerance. Experiment with a few healthy carbs like brown rice and sweet potatoes, rather than high carb, high fat desserts.

However, I'm not so sure that focusing on food, even healthy food, is really the best choice when one has been stalled for a couple of years now.

I'm beginning to think that the answer, the real answer, centers around gratitude. Because I really am grateful to Dr. Atkins and Dr. Eades who have made possible what I've been able to accomplish so far. I really am grateful to Lyle McDonald for helping me understand thermodynamics and leptin and how all of that pertains and is applicable in the context of fat loss. I really am grateful to Dr. Agatson of South Beach, and the author's of the Sugar Busters diet (can't remember their names right now), for giving me a different way of approaching food and carbs without all of that counting that can get so obsessive.

And now I'm really grateful to Matt Stone of 180-Degree Health who's writings that I have read to date have given me a new sense of hope. While he tends to be quite controversial and totally anti-lowcarb, and maybe even a bit crazy in his beliefs, he does give one pause for thought on so many issues low carbers are generally not willing to even look at. Let alone experiment with. Like over-consumption of omega 6, high cortisol levels, and a depressed metabolism.

All things I'll be looking into in the near future.

But for now...I'd also like to say that I'm very grateful for all of the people on the various boards and egroups who have highly influenced me in my journey to date. My readers who ask me hard questions, and make me rethink my current positions. Because throughout all of this, I've come to understand that our journey to health isn't something we do by ourselves. Not really.

Even though we each have to take the actual steps, our journey to health is a collective, inter-mingling effort. And as such, it takes us all to make that happen.

Weigh-In Monday

2010-03-09T10:44:00.000-07:00

Well, I'm only one day late this week. Don't know why I can't get with it on Mondays, especially since I also weigh in over at the South Beach section of LowCarber board. But then, this week I forget to weigh in over there too.

Maybe it's because I didn't do so well this week. I weighed in at 178.6, so I'm up about a quarter of a pound this week. Nothing to get worried about, especially with the way the weather has been around here lately (we have another storm due in later on today), but it's still a bit depressing all the same.

Course with our financial struggles as of late, and family home for an extended stay, I haven't been able to follow my current plan of choice as closely as I would have liked. So I guess when I wiggle the truth out of myself, it's not really a bad weight, since my food choices were closer to maintenance, than what one should have eaten for fat loss.

Insulin Resistance in the Fat Cells

2010-03-06T15:14:00.000-07:00

The first step in Insulin Resistance is fatty deposits in the liver. At this stage, it's not too big of a problem, as there aren't that many symptoms. So we keep on eating the way we always have.

Next comes Insulin Resistance in the muscles. At this point, we begin to put on excess weight. We begin experiencing glycogen storage issues and symptoms, blood glucose problems, excess blood fats, and tiredness. We begin experiencing serious health issues from the Insulinemia.

Sometimes our ill health is enough to cause us to change our lifestyle. To go on a diet. To get up off of the sofa and exercise. But sometimes, it's not.

Sometimes we rationalize all of our health problems away in an attempt to justify our current, unhealthy lifestyle. We blame the excess weight on age. We blame our inability to stay on a diet on our food addictions and social behavoirs. We say we don't care that we've put on a few extra pounds. That it's normal in our current society. We don't want to look like Twiggy anyway.

If we keep on eating the way we always have, if we keep on embracing our sedentary ways, all of those excess calories have got to go someplace. And while we may, or may not be overeating in regards to volume of food, the liver and muscle glycogen dysfunction is serious enough to either make us obese, with all of those extra health issues, or turn us into what is known as Metabolic Syndrome.

Now we come to the end of the road, where even the fat cells begin to rebel. Because their job isn't to continuously fill themselves up with fats. Their function is to switch between fatty acid uptake, and release. Their function is to buffer the flux of fatty acids in the circulation in the face of dietary input of fatty acids. The role of the fat cells is to absorb fatty acids when there are too many around, then release them when they are scarse.

But if they're never scarse, if the buffering capacity gets overwhelmed by consistant intake of dietary fats over and above the rate of oxidation, all of those fats have got to go somewhere. And that somewhere is the liver, muscles, pancreas, and adipose tissues; thus eventually causing full body Insulin Resistance.

As fat cells fill up with Triglyceride, they become resistant to Insulin, causing even more Triglyceride to build up in the bloodstream and body organs. Hence the Metabolic Syndrome. Not a good thing as far as heart disease, stroke, and other fat-related diseases are concerned.

This is the point where quite a few folks decide that they want to enter into the Low Carb Lifestyle. And as far as low carbing goes, total body Insulin Resistance is a good position to be in. Especially if you have only a moderate amount of weight to lose. Because at this point in the progression, the body is no longer in fat storage mode. So when you eliminate most of the carbs from your diet, irregardless of the level of insulin, the fat just falls off of you.

Atkins' Magic. Metabolic Advantage. Whatever you want to call it, the results seem to defy the laws of Thermodynamics. And if it's your first time of attempting a low carb diet, you can get very good results with any of the low-carb programs, provided you stick with it, change your lifestyle, and make it all the way to goal weight. Then follow the Maintenance Program for life.

Not everyone chooses to do that though. Some of us didn't understand the consequences for not turning low-carb into a lifestyle the first time that we tried it. Some of us left the movement for various reasons, good or bad, only to find that upon our return, our bodies didn't work quite the same way as they did before. Some still found magic, just a little bit slower. And some of us found absolutely no metabolic advantage at all.

So I want to apologize a bit here for being so cynical in regards to low carbing lately. I just really want to figure all of this out, what is actually happening to me, so that I can make the adjustments I need to make in order to finally reach a healthy weight.

All of the research I've done on Insulin Resistance lately points to the fact that the problem I'm having with a low-carb, high-fat diet not working for me, might not be because low-carb itself doesn't work. Maybe it has something to do with the fact that low-carb the first or second time around healed the adipose tissue insulin resistance, which then made it harder to lose the weight from thereon in. Low carb, or not.

Maybe the reason why I've had to lower my fat and calorie intake almost from the very start of my journey this time around, is because I'm battling liver and muscle insulin resistance, rather than total body insulin resistance. And as a result, dietary fat and overall calories matter more than they otherwise would.

I don't know. What do YOU think....

Insulin Resistance in the Muscle

2010-03-05T11:25:00.001-07:00

Those who have Insulin Resistance generally have a higher baseline insulin level, because the body is always fighting to overcome the resistance. But it isn't the insulin that is causing the problem. When you reach the point of muscle Insulin Resistance, it's excess Triglycerides.

Now, the adipose tissue at this point is still highly sensitive to insulin, so after food intake, blood flow is increased. But that exposes the muscle fibers to excess fatty acids being made by the liver, as well as dietary fats. Excess being the key word here. And when that happens, just like in the liver, fat tends to be laid down in the muscle, which then causes the muscles to become resistant to insulin.

This increased fatty acid availability decreases glucose utilization in the muscle, since fats compete with the available glucose. If the fatty acid wins, the muscles are unable to store glycogen very well, and the excess glucose provides the stimulus for Insulinemia.

With the muscles' diminished capacity to store glycogen, everything not immediately used for fuel either backs up in the bloodstream, or is stored in the liver, muscles, and fat cells. But fatty acids can't be converted into fuel fast enough to supply the body with immediate energy, and since the build up of fats in the muscles can also cause a defect in muscle fat oxidation, the result is increased Insulin Resistance, nausea, tiredness, brain fog, disorientation, and just flat-out feeling like crap.

What athletes call "hitting the wall."

Now this caught my attention, because it was a perfect description of what happens to me when I go too low in carbs for any length of time. I start out feeling pretty good for a couple of days, but around the time that liver glycogen gets depleted, I feel tired and nauseated. I'm more prone to vertigo attacks. And yep, just as the description says, I flat-out feel like crap. Which only gets worse as the dieting at that carb level continues.

What I didn't know was that glycogen stores are supposed to refill, even on a low-carb diet. And that the body will do whatever it has to do, to make that happen. However, since the liver is resistant to insulin, and in constant glucose production, and since the muscles are not able to store the glucose being made by the liver, (and probably the liver either, for that matter, which might be why I tend to need more carbs than others), it's no wonder that one can suffer from runaway glucose production, even on a zero carb diet. As well as fat gain.

At this point, the muscle is unable to protect other tissues from a daily influx of dietary fatty acids. The result is more and more build up of fat deposits in muscle, liver, fat cells, and now the beta cells of the Pancreas. In the case of the B-cells, fat deposits can cause impairment of insulin release in response to glucose. Creating a situation which is sometimes called Diabetes 1.5.

In some of my own, personal dietary experiments, I've often wondered about that. Am I Insulinemic, or do I not put out enough insulin? Because sometimes it seems like I don't make enough insulin to handle what is going on. However, resistance itself can cause the same symptoms. So without proper testing, one cannot know for sure.

The thing to remember, is that glucose issues don't fit into a single mold. It isn't always about an insulin spike in regards to eating too many carbs. Sometimes it's a matter of not putting out enough insulin. Sometimes it's a matter of being Insulin Sensitive, rather than Insulin Resistant. And that means the very plan that one looks to for salvation could be actually fighting against you.

And then again...it could just be that we are now standing in a place of partial healing, and more aware of the symptoms we didn't notice when we first went through the progression of Insulin Resistance.

Insulin Resistance in the Liver

2010-03-04T17:02:00.000-07:00

Insulin Resistance is believed by some to progress in a particular order. But I couldn't find anything to actually back that up. However, since insulin resistance in the liver is characterized by insulin's inability to turn off glucose production (Gluconeogensis), it does make sense that Insulin Resistance would begin with the liver.

Since glucose production no longer shuts off, both obese and Lypodystrophic patients (those with no adipose tissue for storage purposes) with Insulin Resistance have an increased amount of fat hidden in the liver. Liver cells, as well as the spaces in the liver fill with fat, so the liver becomes enlarged and heavier. Plus you may also have gallstones composed of cholesterol and bile salts.

When the liver is full of fat, it can't filter and cleanse the blood as efficiently, so the bloodstream becomes clogged with toxins and excess fatty acids (Triglycerides). The liver will also overproduce most of the known cardiovascular risk factors such as VLDL, glucose, CRP (C-reactive Protein), PAI-1 (Plasminogen Activator Inhibitor-1), fibrinogen, and coagulation factors. Poor liver function can also lead to autoimmune issues and Diabetes.

Fatty liver is the most common cause of increased liver enzymes, a sign of inflammation and liver damage. And among the obese, fatty liver is seen in 90% of adults and 53% of children. However, while 90% shows the magnitude of the problem of Insulin Resistance, at least at beginning levels of the syndrome, it also shows that for 10% of the obese population there is no fatty liver, and therefore no Insulin Resistance. Those 10%, even though obese, are actually Insulin Sensitive.

Development of fatty liver comes from an imbalance between the influx and production of fatty acids, and the use of those fatty acids for oxidation or the secretion as VLDL Triglycerides. There is a strong relationship between increased liver fat and the overproduction of large VLDL particles, since insulin is unable to regulate their production. So while large, fluffy VLDL particles are a good thing as far as not being able to slip underneath blood vessel linings, a large amount of them circulating in the bloodstream is a sign of fatty liver disease.

Excess glucose produced in the liver is not the only source of excess Triglyceride. Alcohol, sugar/fructose, high-fat foods (especially red meat and dairy), all play a role. So do birth control pills, steroids, and diuretics, as well as medical conditions like hypothyroidism and kidney disease.

Even the fat that is stored in your adipose tissue is Triglycerides, so the more body fat you have, the higher your overall Triglyceride levels will be. Plus, they also tend to increase the older you get.

And let's not forget heredity.

The good thing is that in addition to weight-bearing exercise and aerobic activity, a low carb diet is set up in such a way as to help you burn a lot of those excess, damaging Triglycerides. So blood Triglyceride numbers tend to improve greatly once you enter into a low carb diet, without having to do anything else.

The bad news is it's extremely hard to burn liver fat. Making complete liver Insulin Resistance reversal hard, but not impossible if you take your total body fat stores down low enough. Plus, when the body is burning viseral fat, it doesn't always show up on the scale, or in inches, so there's the temptation to abandon the diet, even though it's actually working.

Not everyone is willing to do what it takes to reverse Insulin Resistance. But for those of us who are, it's very important to work on making our current dietary lifestyle a way of life, rather than something we plan on doing just for the short term. Because if we return to our old ways and habits, the Insulin Resistance will also return.

What Causes Insulin Resistance?

2010-03-03T17:24:00.001-07:00

I was reading over at Lyle McDonald's "nice" forum the other day, and came across a thread on Insulin Sensitivity and Resistance. His view peaked my interest, because it was so different from the typical low carb viewpoint. So I went out into the Blogosphere to see if I could find the studies he was discussing that would back up his opinion.

Now, the typical low carb view of how the body works is that when you eat carbs, especially high-glycemic ones, blood glucose rises which triggers insulin release. The majority of low carbers believe this is not a healthy response to carbs, and that over time, cells will become less sensitive to the effects of all of that insulin. As a result, blood glucose levels will creep up, basal insulin levels will rise, and the result will be disease and bad health.

The standard low carb belief is that cutting out most carbs from the diet will reverse the cycle. That as a result of eating a low carb diet, insulin levels will remain low, even after eating, blood glucose levels will be controlled, and all disease and ill health issues that came attached to the high insulin and elevated blood glucose levels will magically disappear.

What isn't presented in this view, is why high levels of insulin cause Insulin Resistance.

When I went into the scientific literature the other day, I couldn't find a single study that supported the general low carb view that Insulin Resistance causes obesity. What I found was that obesity causes Insulin Resistance, because high fat stores and high circulating Triglycerides down-regulate insulin receptors, causing resistance to the circulating insulin, irregardless of the level.

Now, in a normal functioning body, glucose levels in the blood rise when you eat. This triggers a rise in insulin. The rise causes insulin-sensitive tissues to take the glucose out of the blood and into their cell Mitochondria to be processed. This rise in blood sugar and insulin isn't a bad thing. It's how the body was designed to work.

What isn't immediately needed for fuel is sent to the liver to be converted to glycogen. This causes blood glucose levels to fall, and beta cells in the Pancreas to reduce their output of insulin. None of this is bad either. It's what keeps our blood glucose levels steady, with a normal glucose level of about 80 to 90 mg/dl.

Glycogen is stored in the liver and muscles for future use. Not a bad thing either. In fact, if we don't replace our glycogen stores, the liver will make the glycogen it needs for that purpose out of protein, and sometimes fats. Glycogen stores is how and why we are able to do sprints and other fast energy movements.

But when glycogen stores are full, and this is the real key to obesity, any excess glycogen is converted into Triglycerides and stored in our fat cells.

So, if you're eating exactly what the body needs to provide itself with fuel and glycogen storage, with no excess glucose and therefore no excess glycogen, the carbs in your diet will not make you fat. It is only the excess carbs over and above what you need to keep your glycogen stores replenished that cause the problem. And even then, only if our calories exceed our energy output. Since our fat stores are used during times of fasting, like when we're sleeping.

Therefore, Insulin Sensitivity is about how well the body responds to insulin. And is often associated with body fat level.

Under normal conditions, it doesn't take much insulin to get blood glucose into cells. However, the amount of insulin that is released at any given meal is somewhat individual. It isn't always in direct relationship to the amount of glucose in the blood.

While carbs tend to have the greatest impact on insulin secretion, dietary wise, that doesn't mean they cause Insulin Resistance. Because Insulin Resistance isn't about the amount of insulin secreted. It's about the failure of the body to get the glucose in the blood into the cells and Mitochondria where it can be burned. It's about eating more than the body needs for fuel.

Therefore Insulin Resistance isn't a carb problem. It isn't an insulin secretion problem. It's an insulin receptor problem. With higher circulating insulin levels being a symptom. Not the problem itself. Though insulin does cause havoc in the body, that's a totally different issue.

Weigh-In Monday

2010-03-03T07:37:00.000-07:00

Okay. I just realized that I forgot to weigh in this week...again. So yeah, it's Wednesday morning. And Monday marked my two-week initiation type period on South Beach.

As far as weight and fat loss is concerned, I didn't do too badly. I started South Beach at 179.8, and Monday morning I weighed in at 178.4 -- that's a loss of 1.4 lbs for Phase 1. Nothing even close to what others claimed to have experienced, but then I wasn't coming to the table all carbed up. I wasn't coming to the table from any kind of S.A.D. type diet with uncontrollable cravings. I was coming to the table from Atkins.

It wasn't until I'd completely finished Phase 1 that I ran into a post on one of the major South Beach Forums I read (can't remember which one it was, but it was on a strictly South Beach forum) that asked about transitioning from Atkins to South Beach. Apparently, someone over there was in direct contact with Dr. Agatston (probably one of his patients) and posted his reply to that question.

It wasn't what I'd expected. He said that the purpose of Phase I was to get rid of cravings, and since those coming to the diet from Atkins should already be cravings free, they should start in Phase 2, not Phase 1.

Geese. It's no wonder I had such a HARD time remaining true to the book. Honestly, I flat-out couldn't do it. With my Olive Oil sensitivity it was next to impossible to cut out so much saturated fat and still have your food taste good. Canola oil is so bland, and not something I should be using very much anyways with all of my systemic inflammation.

Plus I'm not all that crazy about some types of low-fat dairy. The original book claimed that low-fat dairy was an exception to the fact that low-fat products contained more starch and sugar than their original version. I found that not always to be true. For example, the second ingredient in fat-free half and half is corn syrup. Plus it was absolutely disgusting, tasted like skim milk, and had less than 2% heavy cream in it.

So in week 2, once I'd finished the container, I went back to using regular heavy cream in my hot cocoa. But I did start measuring it out at 2 tbsp per serving, and counted it as 2 tsp of my daily 7 tsp of added fat that is recommended daily.

I also went back to using real butter. The Smart Balance margarine was just not going to work. Irregardless of its supposedly trans-fat free nature, it didn't taste good, contained a bit of olive oil, and was making me hungry and nauseated like all types of margarine have always done.

Then, about mid-week of the second week of Phase 2, I started to feel particularly bad. I mean really, really bad. Almost like death. Way, way worse than I've ever felt on Atkins' Induction.

I tried to up my electrolytes as the ANA recommends, paying particular attention to magnesium, potassium, sodium, and the amount of water I was drinking. In fact, I drank so much water (what the Atkins folks on the various forums usually recommend for my size), that I caused myself to go into a Vertigo attack. But none of that worked. Not like it did on Atkins' Induction. So something else was going on.

At which point, I was left with 2 choices. I could drop South Beach completely, and try to figure out what I was going to do next, (construct my own plan), or I could move onto Phase 2.

I chose to move onto Phase 2, using the justification that the reason WHY I'd attempted South Beach in the first place was because I knew that I needed to add more carbs to my diet. And wanted something that was more flexible, and easier than the Atkins' carb ladder. I liked the South Beach idea of adding back in "servings" of fruits, starches, and extras, rather than having to count carbs. Measuring out my veggies by the cupfuls.

It seemed like that will make my life more normal.

So I added in 1/2 cup of brown rice. My blood glucose levels stayed normal, they were still normal the next morning, and my weight remained stable. Plus the sick feeling went away. So it was a good choice, even though it wasn't the fruit serving that most of the Vets on the various South Beach forums recommend. Fruit has always made me feel hungry, plus with no income right now, I'm not in a financial position that would allow me to do that.

As always, for winter, we're pretty much living off the stores I have in the house.

However, I didn't want to add carbs back in too quickly. I wanted to give my body time to upregulate the enzymes necessary to process carbs again, without gaining back the small amount of weight I'd lost on Phase 1 to date. So I decided that for the next week I wouldn't add back in a starch serving every day. I would just allow my menus to be a bit more normal than forcing brown rice into the menu every day.

Now, from previous experience on Atkins and Maintenance, I knew that corn is not a problem for me. It doesn't cause me gain weight, it doesn't mess with my glucose control, so I'm not really sure why most diet plans shun it. Other than, perhaps because it's actually a grain, and not a vegetable.

So the next day, instead of having another serving of brown rice, I added back in a locally grown ear of corn I had frozen over the summer. My glucose control remained stable, but my weight went up a bit, about 1/4 of a pound. Not enough to worry about. Especially since it's normal to replace a bit of glycogen when you return starchy carbs to your diet. Plus the weather has been bad here lately, and I always gain a bit of water weight whenever the humidity goes up.

It did make me want to take things a bit more slowly than recommended, and even slower than the South Beach Vet's recommend, so I'm only going to do a starch/grain serving 3 times this coming week, rather than every day. And see how that goes.

Overall, my first two weeks ended on a good note. I lost a bit of weight, which I hadn't been able to do since I'd moved off of Atkins' Induction, this last go-round. In fact, I gained 2 lbs moving into OWL. But I came to understand myself just a little bit more. There are things I really LIKE about Atkins. And MISS about Atkins. There are things I really LIKE about South Beach.

But neither plan, by itself, seems to be a good fit for me.

So it looks like I'm just going to have to allow what I'm currently doing to evolve into my own plan. And while you can't call what I'm doing Atkins or South Beach, the bottom line is that I'm taking what I'm learning about both plans, and myself, and constructing something that is finally starting to work for me. And that's the real point to all of this, I guess. Finding what works.

Do You Need A Little Inspiration?

2010-03-01T19:54:00.000-07:00

If you're struggling with your diet today, and need a little bit of inspiration, check out the "Before and After" thread over at Low Carb Friends. They got some great pictures. The dramatic effects of following a low carb diet.

What's Up With Saturated Fats?

2010-02-28T13:29:00.001-07:00

One of the biggest problems I've had lately with the South Beach Diet book is Dr. Agatston's stance on saturated fats. It's as extreme as the American Heart Association's recommendation that one shouldn't consume more saturated fat than 7% of one's total calories.

However, I've been trying to keep an open mind about the whole issue. Especially since not all Cardiologists agree with this view. But that isn't exactly easy when research is limited, and studies to date are contradictory.

If there's no conclusive studies, why does the American Heart Association demonize saturated fats? Why as a nation, are we taught to literally fear them?

It's my current understanding, backed up by an article at Diabetes Life I was reading this morning, that research-to-date has shown a correlation between saturated fat intake and LDL cholesterol, as well as Total cholesterol. However, there is lots of individual variation within these studies, plus other factors that need to be taken into consideration when making future health risk assessments. Things like HDL cholesterol, blood level of Triglycerides, and the size of our LDL particles.

In Richard Feinman's article, entitled "What if Saturated Fat Is Not the Problem?", he makes the point that the real problem with lowering saturated fats isn't about the fats themselves, since data is too contradictory and there's not enough scientific evidence to make any recommendations yet. But the real problem is what nutritionsts are likely to tell us to replace those fats with.

Instead of telling us to use more monosaturated fats, fish oils and such, generally speaking, the recommendation is to replace the saturated fat with more carbs. But that might make our individual situation worse, depending upon how many carbs we are already eating.

So where does that leave us? What is the BEST diet in regards to heart and artery health?

According to Richard Feinman, professor of biochemistry and medical researcher at State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn:

"We don't know the ideal diet composition. We do know that saturated fat, unlike trans-fat, is a normal part of body chemistry and extreme avoidance is not justified by current scientific data. Removing some saturated fat to reduce calories is good, but adding back carbs appears to be deleterious. It appears that healthy, carbohydrate restriction will trump the effects of any kind of fat."

So while the stance of Dr. Agatston is on the side of extreme caution, the general stance of the low carb community (where saturated fat is a free-for-all) might be just as premature. Because we don't really know the long term effects of going with either extreme. Plus there's the problem of over-consumption of calories. We know saturated fat need not be feared, but we don't actually know just how much of it is healthy to consume on a daily basis.

Richard Feinman (who's also co-Editor-in-Chief of the online medical journal, "Nutrition and Metabolism") does admit that lowering saturated fat in order to reduce calories is not detrimental to one's health. It's good even. But replacing those saturated fats with carbs is not.

So while the controversy doesn't look like it's going to be solved anytime soon, it does look like that for some of us, circling back around to the old cliche of a moderation in all things, might not be such a bad idea. And while eating a diet loaded with saturated fats might be working well for some, with no adverse effects, let's not forget that not everyone can lose weight on a low carb diet without limiting their calories.

Yeah it's kind of a knee jerk reaction to see the ANA recommend lean meats in their Atkins primer series at the official Atkins website, but it isn't as out of touch with regards to current biochemistry as a lot of high-fatters would like to make us believe.

Should I Go Back On Induction?

2010-02-27T10:36:00.003-07:00

After indulging in a higher carb meal, a higher carb day, or even an entire weekend or vacation, one of the first things those following the Atkins' diet tend to ask themselves is:

"Should I go back on Induction?"

We know it's the lowest level of carbs that Atkins currently recommends, and because we're stuck in this mindset of lower-is-better, it sounds reasonable. But how effective or detrimental is it?

There is a lot of misunderstanding regarding Induction (now referred to on the Atkins' official website as Phase 1), even though Dr. Atkins was pretty blunt in his books as to just what it is, and what it's to be used for.

First, there is nothing magical about Induction/Phase 1. There really isn't. It is arbitrarily set at 20 net or total carbs (depending upon which plan you're following), because Dr. Atkins wanted to make sure that almost everyone who decided to try out the diet would be able to enter into Ketosis and experience the metabolic effects of being in that state.

Now if you've ever read the Letter on Corpulence, you know that lots of folks are able to experience the metabolic effects of being in Ketosis at a much higher number. When I first came back to low-carb at the end of December, 2006, I was eating 60 total carbs a day, and had no problem entering into Ketosis at that level. It took me the same 3 days to rid myself of my appetite and begin spilling ketones into my urine, as it generally takes on a 20 carb Induction. There was absolutely no difference for me.

So the controlled-carb level needed to experience the metabolic effects of Ketosis is very individual.

Another reason for Induction/Phase 1 is to kick-start one's weight loss. It's to help you see, and understand, that low carb does in fact work. Since someone recovering from a higher carb episode doesn't need to learn that low carb works, this reason for returning back to Induction doesn't apply.

The best reason to return to Induction levels, and the only reason that Atkins actually gives for doing so, is if one's cravings are out of control. Even then, he does not recommended staying there for any longer than a few days. Just long enough to get one's hunger under control and drop the excess water one has accumulated from glycogen storage.

Granted, 20 net carbs is going to use up liver glycogen faster than 60 total carbs would, and granted some folks need to go pretty low in carb in order to keep their appetite and cravings under control.

But the truth is, Ketosis itself is entered into fairly quickly. Generally less than 24 hours, because the body has a limited amount of glycogen stores even when full. Ketosis is a matter of ketones being produced and circulated in the bloodstream. It has nothing to do with whether or not the body is spilling some of those ketones into the urine.

So if you're eating less than 100 carbs a day, you are probably in Ketosis, and are reaping the metabolic benefit of predominantly burning fats.

One of the concerns with someone who is constantly yo-yo-ing between overindulgence and Induction is that it can easily become a pattern for rationalization. A pattern for abuse. A pattern that keeps us from actually implementing healthy habits into our life.

But for me, as a lot of us have discovered, the main problem with yo-yo dieting is that each time we go off of our low-carb plan, gain our weight back (or not as in my case), then return to what we know worked before -- we find the plan to be less effective with each attempt.

It's like the body becomes more and more resistant each time. More and more adaptive to what we are doing. More and more effective at burning those ketones for fuel. So what we could get away with before, we can't get away with today.

But that also means that what we can get away with today, we won't be able to get away with tomorrow.

Downright scary, if you ask me.

Because it appears to be the state that I'm finding myself in today. The point where, after all these years of trying to achieve a normal weight, general low-carb is no longer enough to rid my body of it's remaining fat stores. No longer enough to get me to a normal weight.

The key word here being ENOUGH.

With 50 lbs still to go, the future doesn't look good. Been trying to get to 125 lbs for over 3 years now. But I'm hoping that with the help of the structure pattern of South Beach, that I can fine-tune my current low carb ways to once again find the sweet spot (without a whole heck of a lot of hunger) that will enable me to continue my low carb journey to the finish line.

But at this point...I don't know.

So far, my success with that has been minimal. Partly because my body seems to be extremely resistant to fat loss these days, and partly because I just can't endure how I feel when I go too low in carbs. Plus I get all of those elevated glucose levels and all.

Since I was unable to handle the amount of dairy recommended on Phase 1 of South Beach last week, I was trying to do Phase 1 this week without the dairy carbs. But with no income, and my husband in between jobs himself, buying extra veggies to do that was not an option.

So yesterday, I moved to Phase 2. Early, and not by the book, but I figure that's a heck of a lot better than crashing and burning...yet again.

If there's one thing I've learned over the years, (and I've been doing low carb off and on now since the 70s), it's that when we return to our old ways, our old habits of eating and relating to food, we only worsen the problem.

We don't really solve it.

How Much Does Protein Foods Raise Insulin?

2010-02-25T10:26:00.003-07:00

I was watching a short piece of a U-Tube video in the Main Lobby of Low Carb Friends this morning, which disturbed me a little bit. The title of the thread was "Don't you Just Love Gary Taubes." And since I got interrupted while reading his book last year, I thought it would be informative to see what he had to say.

The video clip dealt with the inaccuracies of the science behind what does, or does not constitute a healthy diet. At least, in Gary Taubes' opinion. And he was putting forth the typical, general low-carb stance that "saturated fats are probably harmless."

Now those were his exact words, by the way, with the word PROBABLY emphasized -- twice.

The person interviewing him was countering that stance with a statement the studio had personally received from the American Heart Association saying that saturated fats should be kept to a minimum, and that trans-fats should be eliminated all together. Upon trying to explain his hypothesis regarding that view, the interviewer interrupted Taubes, and asked about all of the foods that were laid out on the table.

Gary Taubes pointed to a bowl of oatmeal with strawberries. What he said was that this type of breakfast was recommended by the American Heart Association, along with low-fat or non-fat milk added to round out the meal. Now, according to Taubes, this is the type of meal that raises insulin levels which will cause the body to store those carbs as fat, rather than burn them for energy.

He then pointed to the next breakfast. A somewhat typical low-carb breakfast. I say somewhat, because the media had placed a small glass of orange juice next to the salad-sized plate of bacon and eggs. Gary Taubes picked up the glass of juice and placed it next to the oatmeal, and said it would be a better fit to put the juice with the oatmeal.

Perplexed, the interviewer next looked at what appeared to be a lunch plate. A bacon cheeseburger, and said something to the effect that he couldn't be seriously recommending a bacon cheeseburger. At which point Taubes appealed to the late Dr. Atkins, saying that Atkins recommended a bacon cheeseburger because Atkins said it doesn't raise insulin levels.

Now...the disturbing aspect of all of this...is that initial insulin-raising studies performed and published about 10 years ago by the same folks who initially did the glycemic index testing, doesn't back any of this up.

NONE OF IT.

A bacon cheeseburger DOES raise insulin levels, and not just slightly as so many low-carb advocates proclaim. The study showed that it raises insulin levels higher than oatmeal does. Higher than pasta. With beef's insulin demand being equal to brown rice, and fish's insulin demand being equal to whole grain bread.

So why a researcher who claims to have looked at tons of research studies and data, and yet chose to omit that important detail that disproves his hypothesis is beyond me. In fact, it makes me a bit sick to my stomach, because that's exactly what some of those who oppose Gary Taubes' work are saying. That he selectively omitted any studies that didn't fit with his personal conclusions.

The truth that has been demonstrated so far, is that carbs are not the ONLY stimulus for insulin secretion. Plus our ideas about blood glucose levels and even carb counts themselves are also coming into question.

For instance, when you add protein to a carb-rich meal, insulin secretion rises moderately without further increasing blood glucose. But when one adds a large amount of fat to a carb-rich meal, insulin increases even though the glucose level goes down. So a lower glucose level doesn't mean our insulin levels are also low. And a total meal carb count doesn't necessarily predict what our insulin levels are going to do.

On the average, carb-laden foods did mimic their glucose levels close enough, but the surprising aspect of the study was that protein-rich foods such as beef, fish, eggs, and cheese stimulated a larger amount of insulin compared to their glycemic response. So while the blood sugar didn't raise very much from eating protein foods, the insulin level rose 3 to 6-fold!

For a low-carber trying to lower their insulin levels, that is NOT very good news.

The other interesting surprise in the study was that white and brown rice were essentially equal in insulin-raising capability. The same as white vs brown pasta, and white vs brown bread. Probably because everything is highly processed these days, whole grain or not. Which means adding whole grains to your diet isn't necessarily going to solve the problem -- if you're still consuming any type of processed flours.

The conclusion of the study was that the macronutrient composition of foods has relatively limited power for predicting the extent of postprandial insulinemia. And other studies done on milk and yogurt, or white bread with yogurt and pickled cucumbers, also point to the same thing. That our biological reactions to protein foods are not what we have always been told they were.

Making the control of insulin, and ultimately fat loss, more complex than just counting carbs.

Weigh-In Monday

2010-02-23T19:52:00.003-07:00

Okay. I know it's Tuesday, but my in-laws came home yesterday, unexpectedly, and I didn't get a chance to get on the computer.

Although I'm down .8 of a pound this week, overall, the week didn't go well. I suffered with lots of inflammation, which I think was either from the amount of dairy suggested for Phase I, or because I don't tolerate milk itself very well.

I also had lots of issues with nausea and just overall not feeling well. My suspect is the trans-fat free margarine. It's always made me sick before, so I don't know why I thought a new diet would change that prior experience.

I next went face down into a can of mixed nuts over the weekend. Nuts are recommended for snacks due to their good fats. And I can't believe I was crazy enough to buy them in the first place, thinking I'd be able to control myself this time.

Plus I think I got glutened again when I went to my friend's house for dinner on Sunday.

Now all of this made me sit back and think things through a bit. Reflect on, and question the whole South Beach thing. Is what Dr. Agatston recommends really so absolute in order to call what I'm doing South Beach, or could I just use the meal plans and list of acceptable foods as a template for something that works better?

During this reflection, I spent a bit of time over at the low carber forum, and discovered that the Vets and Maintainers over there are doing South Beach in a very different fashion from the Vets and Maintainers at Low Carb Friends. With differing opinions and experiences. But each doing and recommending what worked for them.

That's when I realized that menu plans are just ideas. They aren't something that one has to follow religiously. They are just options that can be implemented in several different ways. It's the principles of how to combine lower fat with higher carbs safely that attracted me to South Beach in the first place, so that I could gain better control over my glucose levels. And it's going to be those principles that I use in the days ahead as I begin to mold South Beach into a diet that works for me.

The same as I did when I first stalled out on Atkins.

So I'll be changing things up a bit this coming week, even though I'm only halfway through Phase I. First, I'm going to lower my dairy intake -- a lot. On South Beach, cheese is listed under it's own heading and all the various types are considered unlimited protein. On top of that, you're also allowed to have 2 milk/yogurt servings daily. For me, I think this is waaaay too much dairy. Especially since I haven't been able to get my gluten exposure completely under control still.

Next, I'm dropping the margarine and the non-fat half & half in my hot cocoa. Both are absolutely nasty, and I'm not convinced they are better choices than real butter and cream.

I'm also going to ax the mixed nuts. I just can't have those darned things in the house. Peanut butter, yes, but mixed nuts and/or cashews -- no.

I don't see the week as a total failure, however, even though things didn't go well. I see it as an experiment in trying what Dr. Agatston's recommended. South Beach by the book. Maybe if I was coming to the table carbed up, it would have worked as written. But I wasn't. I was coming to the table from a much lower carb intake, and a more limited amount of dairy.

So I'm basically going to start all over this week, and take things a little bit slower.

The Danger of Keeping Your Carbs Too Low

2010-02-21T17:43:00.002-07:00

One of the dangerously false assumptions within the low-carb community is that if low carb is good, then very low carb, or even zero carb is better. But that isn't necessarily true.

The body needs to maintain a proper pH environment in order to remain healthy. It does this by keeping adequate alkaline reserves in order to meet the daily demands of neutralizing acidic metabolic waste products produced from the normal function of cellular metabolism. When the acidity level of the blood rises, due to either diet or stress, the body uses these reserves as a sort of buffer, so that the excess acid can be safely eliminated from the body.

Like all other body reserves, however, these buffers need to be replaced or the body in its efforts to maintain proper pH, will borrow the minerals it needs from our vital organs and bones. If such borrowing continues for any length of time, due to chronic acidosis, the result can raise all sorts of havoc within the body like osteoporosis, weak brittle bones, frequent hip fractures, and bone spurs.

The buffers needed to neutralize the metabolic residues are any of the electrolytes (calcium, magnesium, sodium, or potassium), which is why some low carb folks suffer from leg cramps during Induction. With the minimal plant intake, and the higher protein intake, acid levels rise and the body uses up it's buffer reserves trying to keep everything neutralized, causing an imbalance in electrolytes.

If the moderate protein, low vegetable intake continues for any length of time, without taking corrective measures, electrolyte reserves will be depleted and the body will begin taking the buffers from elsewhere.

So what foods result in acidic residues and which foods are alkaline?

I tried to find a reliable chart on the web, but there's a lot of contradiction in regards to exactly which foods provide acidic metabolic ash, and which foods are alkaline. Maybe because its the mineral content in any particular food that determines its potential acidity or alkalinity. Which means it becomes a matter of which plant food was grown where?

However, the general consenses between all of the websites I visited was that meat, eggs, dairy, grains, sugars, salt, and saturated fats are acidic, while most fresh fruits and veggies, and monosaturated fats are alkaline.

Now, there are simple changes one can make to their diet to protect themselves, even on very low carbs: Lots of dark green leafy veggies, lemon juice and/or slices in your water and salad dressings, apple cider vinegar, green and herbal teas, garlic, kelp, flaxseed, fish oil, olive oil, and the avoidance of aspartame. Plus calcium, magnesium, and potassium supplements.

But I don't know how you would protect yourself from the body's higher acidity and therefore bone-robbing tendency if you're strictly following a zero carb diet.

The kicker is that acidity itself can cause havoc with our health.

Of particular interest to the low carber: elevated acidity interferes with the response of the insulin receptor cells, which results in higher and higher insulin resistance. Correcting that body acidity is supposed to reverse insulin resistance, and aid the inflammation that's contributing to the problem. Also, when acid levels are elevated, the body has a tendency to hold onto fat, blood sugar balance is impaired, and you can have a lot of serious food cravings.

So maybe it isn't such a good idea, with all of the meat, eggs, dairy, and saturated fats we eat to charge too quickly into the whole grains, until we've learned how to balance out our food intake with lots of veggies, low-glycemic fruits, and other corrective measures mentioned above.

Cuz over acidity can be a very dangerous situation.

Zero Carb - Buyer Beware!

2010-02-20T10:33:00.005-07:00

I've been spending quite a bit of my time this past week over at Mariasol's blog, reading the latest posts about the ZIOH website. (The links to those posts are found on the right hand side of her blog, for anyone who's interested.) While the four posts themselves are small, the comments made to those posts were quite extensive. It has taken me literally days to weed through all the legitimate arguments, the concerns, information, and links, the Mickey Mouse forms of science, the irrelevant arguments, demands, and trolls.

And I'll be blogging about some of that stuff.

But first, I want to talk about how interesting it was to watch how far folks were willing to go to rationalize their current eating habits and lifestyle. The blindness they have voluntarily taken upon themselves while chasing after some magic bullet of health and/or fat loss. Because it can be equally true of ourselves.

Let's face it. How many of us demand scientific studies and what we believe to be true evidence before we are willing to entertain something new? Something that could demolish and erase what we currently want to believe in? How many of us go so far as to deny within our own minds the rationality of researching, pondering, and accepting anothers' experience for what it is. Something more than the derogatory title of being an n=1?

It doesn't take a very smart cookie to "see" all of the symptoms of ill health going on over at ZIOH. The health complaints and disturbing symptoms of malnutrition and high body acidity were going on even back when I was there. The cult-like mindset, the abusive treatment, the control issues....none of that is new to me.

So why did I keep reading? And why did I keep going back to the comments that had in the process, taken upon themselves, a life of their own?

Maybe for the same reasons that folks caught in the mud of a ZIOH-type diet keep clinging to their current assumptions that their prophet knows what he is talking about. It's addictive. And more than that, it's just plain easier to sit back and follow the prophet.

If he says no supplements are needed, then no supplements are needed. If he says give up salt and other seasonings, diet soda and sugar substitutes, all low-carb products, all plant matter, and eat just beef and water, then that's what you do. If he says your health concerns are a matter of the body detoxing, and ridding itself of the carb poisons, because you haven't yet adapted to a zero carb diet, then by golly, the reasons why you're getting diarrhea, leg cramps, headaches, weakness, elevated blood sugars, reactivation of peripheral neuropathy, heart palpitations, and belly fat is because you haven't yet adapted to the diet. You gotta give it a minimum of 6 months before we can even begin to examine what is going on.

WHY????

Because we've bought into the ideas, opinions, and preconceived ideas of someone else. And that's just as true for the low carb community, as it is for the zero carb one.

How many times have you heard someone say, Dr. Atkins said this or that. Dr. Eades says this or that. Dr. Bernstein says this or that. Dr. Atgatston says this or that. And how many times have you heard someone say, I did some research and this is what I found. This is what I discovered. Let me bounce some of these studies and n=1 experiences off of you, and see what you think.

Not very often.

Because we really don't want the responsibility and power that comes from thinking for ourselves. We'd much rather buy into the ideas and beliefs of others, rather than actually taking a little bit of time and doing some real, solid, research for ourselves.

We'd rather sit back and hear from C.W. that he doesn't suffer from any nutritional deficiencies whatsoever, even though he's never produced any blood work to document that claim, and believe that because he believes that's true for himself, and others, that means it would also hold truth for us. Irregardless of the fact that we all come to the table with differing levels of physical damage. Different levels of ability to absorb the nutrients from the food we eat.

I personally haven't done a whole lot of research, yet, but you know what? The more I read, and the more I ponder all of this, the more I'm coming to the conclusion that in general, zero carb is probably not a very healthy lifestyle. It's extremely deficient, and most folks would probably not be willing to do what is actually necessary to make it work.

But that's just my opinion. The opinion of a n=1.
So buyer, beware!

The South Beach Diet

2010-02-17T11:47:00.003-07:00

After my last post, I started thinking about what I was going to do in regards to diet and fat loss, and began looking at the various options:

Should I modify Atkins to fit the fat and protein parameters I used before? Should I do Protein Power at Level II? Should I construct my own diet from all that I've learned and embraced so far? Or should I look around at the various other diets available, and try something completely different?

I was actually leaning towards constructing my own diet, but decided to go into the South Beach Diet subgroup over at Low Carb Friends first. I was curious in regards to how that higher-carb diet handles the problem of fats.

I knew from watching a lot of people climb the Atkins' Carb Ladder, and fail, that very few of them knew, or were willing to, cut back on fats in order to make the higher carb level work for them. Most wanted to take their current luxurious lifestyle with them, while dining on higher carb items they'd been denying themselves for months.

Which really isn't possible without getting yourself into trouble. Because when you add carbs, fats have to come down to compensate. Otherwise you'll end up stalling at best, or you'll begin repacking on the pounds.

Now the South Beach Diet Group posters seem to be a friendly, helpful bunch. They've got wonderful testimonials to this way of eating, and many of them have achieved and are maintaining their goal weight. Have been for quite some time now. They're more than willing to explain what has worked for them, how they've personally tweaked the diet for themselves, how they've rectified the conflict of the principles of the diet with the changes and recommendations that don't always fit into those guidelines.

What I've observed there, is that many pre-Atkinites who only reached part of their goal with the Atkins' diet and then stalled for months, have made the switch from high-fat Atkins to lower-fat South Beach, and have gone on to complete their journey. Probably because it teaches them what the Atkins Carb Ladder failed to do.

In fact, results in lowering their fat intake was so dramatic for most of them, that even those who were coming to the table from a stalled low-carb plan were making claims of losing anywhere between 5 and 14 pounds after following South Beach's Phase I diet for 2 weeks.

Needless to say I was intrigued...not because of the dramatic weight losses, but because I couldn't figure out why folks were reacting to Phase I as if they were totally carbed up. Yes I had read all of the food lists posted to that sight, and yes I had read countless posts describing what they were doing and why. But it still didn't make sense to me.

So I went to our local library and checked out the original version of the plan.

I knew from my food lists that it wasn't low-fat as I had initially supposed. That it was higher in fat than the old Weight Watcher exchange program was, even though it was quite a bit lower in fat than typical Atkins. What I wasn't prepared for was Dr. Agatston's attitude and beliefs regarding saturated fats. The black and white thinking that they are completely bad.

I had assumed that the lower fat dairy products and other recommendations was in regards to one's total fat intake. Not their saturated fat intake. However, I happen to be an open-minded soul, and began to realize that my beliefs regarding saturated fats don't come from personal study, but from what others have told me. What others' believe.

So I made a note to change that. Especially since I have read a couple of studies over the years I've been on Atkins, posted now and then on low carb sites, where the research showed a strong connection to saturated fat intake and insulin resistance. Leaving the low-carb community, and especially the poster of the study, completely baffled. It didn't fit into their current paradigm.

Now I'm not saying saturated fats are bad. I'm saying that at the current time, I don't know if an "unlimited" and "over-abundance" of them is good. Because even though the testing I had done on my arteries awhile ago said my arteries and heart were in excellent condition -- thanks to low carb -- I was also eating lower-fat and very low saturated fat for months prior to that testing.

I do understand that polyunsaturated fats have a tendency to become rancid and cause havoc on our bodies. And that saturated fats are less likely to become denatured, thus creating less free radicals. But, from what I read so far, the saturated fat that protects our cells is created by the liver. Not from the foods we eat. So for me, the jury is still out on that.

Now granted, there are those who have tried to take their higher fat content with them into this plan, and stalled. And there are those who have made the transition from Atkins to South Beach who want to skip Phase I, thinking it isn't a necessary part of the plan. Mostly because they just want to add carbs back into their diet, and don't want to wait any longer to do that. But those types of individual folks can be found within any plan.

So far, the results of this plan look promising. So I have decided to give Phase I a whirl.

I actually started the plan a couple of days ago, Monday morning, but didn't get the opportunity to post about it until today, because I accidentally glutened myself with some unsweetened coconut I ate over the weekend. I had forgotten that we had bought it out of a bulk bin at the health food store, and it turned out to be contaminated.

My initial weigh-in for this trial period is 179.8 lbs. I will be weighing in again come next Monday. The half-way point.

Chicken Alfredo Bake

2010-02-10T10:30:00.009-07:00

Since I can't have Dreamsfield pasta anymore, I was wondering a couple of weeks ago if there wasn't something else I could do with Alfredo Sauce. We really, really like alfredo sauce. And since I didn't want to wait until I could have quinoa pasta again, I decided to do something I'd heard about back in the 90s.

Now, I don't know why I never tried doing this back then. Especially since Dreamsfield wasn't available, low-carb pastas were horrible, and I enjoyed the typical Chicken Alfredo my son had made around that time with a package of McCormick Alfredo Sauce mix. But I didn't.

As I sat there eating this chicken bake the other night, I suddenly realized that the Alfredo Sauce itself is much more versatile than I ever imagined. If you just left out the parmesan, it could be the base for all sorts of sauces, like cream of mushroom and/or celery soup, plain white sauce, sausage and/or ham gravy, chicken and/or country-type gravy, a basic cheese sauce, etc. So it will probably be popping up in my cooking a lot more often in the near future.

This makes just enough sauce to cover everything. So if fat is not an issue for you, you might want to double the sauce.

Chicken Alfredo Bake
2 cups of frozen broccoli, or California veggie mix
2 boneless, skinless chicken breasts
2 tbsp butter
2 oz cream cheese
1/4 cup heavy cream
1/4 cup Parmesan cheese

Place frozen veggies in the bottom of a greased baking dish. Top with chicken breasts. In a saucepan or small skillet, melt butter. Add cream cheese, and stir a bit until it begins to melt. Add heavy cream, and stir until nice and smooth. Add Parmesan, and simmer for a couple of minutes. Pour sauce over the chicken and veggies. Cover and bake 350 for 40 minutes.

I also tried this the other night with a couple of skinless leg quarters, separated, and 3 cups of California veggie mix. Baked it for 1 hour. It came out beautiful as well.

I'm not sure what would happen if you left the skin on there though. It might come out too greasy, or cause the cream to separate. I don't know.

My husband doesn't eat chicken skin, and since I'm trying to cut down a bit on my fat, and there was already plenty of that in the Alfredo sauce, I took the skin off of my chicken as well. My husband also doesn't like veggies very much. However, he loved the way the alfredo sauce made the broccoli taste. So he went back for the second helping of the California mix.

A Matter of Perspective

2010-02-07T15:50:00.002-07:00

In the war against obesity, there seems to be 2 camps of thought these days. Two warring camps, with diametrically opposed positions. Somehow, whether we want to or not, if we've undertaken the project of being on a diet, we find ourselves firmly planted within one of these two perspectives:

Low-Carb, High-Fat
OR
High-Carb, Low-Fat

The dieting mind-set of Atkins' versus Weight Watchers, satiety versus hunger. Or so we've been told. Nothing in between. You're either sitting on one side of the fence, or the other. And the war can get downright nasty at times.

Despite South Beach's attempt to find a path that runs somewhere down the middle of these two feuding camps, I suppose the question in my own mind is whatever happened to the principle of moderation in all things? Whatever happened to the idea that dieting itself is a process of discovering one's own personal tolerance for carbs and fat?

Does it really have to be one way or the other?

Personally, I don't think so. At least, my own experience has not bore that out. I don't think we have to be on opposing sides of the weight-loss issue. Because it isn't about Atkins' versus Weight Watcher's. Nor is it about trying to manipulate others into doing what has worked for ourselves.

It's about standing up and embracing who we really are. Accepting our limitations and peculiarities. It's about taking personal responsibility for our own individuality, our own health, irregardless of what anyone else thinks or says. Which means we return to the very heart of what a low-carb diet was originally intended to be: a personal, individual blueprint for success.

For me, that means giving up the generic, by-the-book form of Atkins', with all of it's high-fat, no calorie-counting, carb-ladder ideology, and returning to the type of low-carb diet that has helped me shed the greater majority of my fat accumulation so far. A moderate-protein, lower-fat, calorie-deficit version of the Atkins' diet, with my carb intake specifically tailored to give me good glucose control.

Now granted, that isn't what most would choose to do. That isn't what most would need to do to realize their fat-loss goals. But for me it is. Why? Because I'm gluten intolerant, and as a result I do not metabolize fat very well. A high-fat, low-carb diet stalls my weight loss efforts pretty quickly, and drives my glucose into pre-diabetic levels.

I was so hoping that would not be the case this time. That taking a long diet break and allowing my body time to heal from my gluten intolerance would help the weight loss efforts, and make it possible for me to enjoy a typical, basic low-carb diet with all of it's luxurious benefits.

But removing gluten from my life has been a lot harder than I anticipated. In fact, I had to give my one-week notice that I was quitting my job this past week, because I was beginning to get glutened on a daily basis. Irregardless of the fact that I wasn't eating anything at work, nor personally touching and/or cooking anything that contained gluten. We are up to 22 boys right now, with 2 more on the horizon. More boys means more staff, and more staff means more gluten contamination, since they have a habit of bringing their own food.

So after turning the page on last year's diet efforts, I'm finding myself standing in front of a completely new, blank future with no idea where I'm going to go from here. Other than to take what I have learned about myself over the past 3 years of low-carbing, and putting that knowledge into practice.

Past Year Reflections

2010-01-10T13:19:00.003-07:00

As many of you know, I've been out of action for awhile now. Haven't been posting, or even reading, anywhere on the web for the past 6 months or so. That's because I fell into the ditch of a few low carb myths and assumptions, and got myself into some serious health troubles as a result. Which I'm only now beginning to pull myself back up out of.

So with a new year already nudging at me to turn the page, I thought I'd take a few moments and do a bit of reflection in regards to this past year first.

Weight loss can be such a fickle thing. You know? Especially if you don't have the strength and endurance and much needed support to go all the way to goal the very first time you try low carb.

The body fights you.
Your psycho-somatic illnesses fight you.
And even the low-carb community fights you.

Partly because of ignorance. Partly because our carnal nature and vanities wants us to be right. And partly because we tend to feel better about ourselves when others believe and/or are doing exactly what we, ourselves, are doing.

The problem is...as individuals, that type of thinking and behavoir isn't always in our own best interest. In fact, there are times when listening to, and obeying what someone else tells us to do, rather than listening to our hearts, and doing what we believe is best for us to do, can be downright deadly. Especially when it isn't backed up with any solid, biological science.

Which is basically the ditch I fell into this past year. My weight loss had stalled out, so general low carb was no longer working for me. I was having lots of trouble with allergies, reacting to things I'd never reacted to before. I was trying to get a handle on my gluten intolerance, with it's very deep learning curve, which meant I was on the verge of also going dairy free for awhile.

And I just sort of fell into the assumption that if low carb was good, nutritionally speaking, that even lower carb (as in almost zero) would be better.

But it wasn't.

The first couple of weeks I felt really good though. I had lots more energy. My arthritis-like problems with my hands improved greatly. The pain I was beginning to have in my gums and teeth cleared up. And even though I was having a lot of trouble digesting the amount of fat required to keep my calories up, I kept plugging along because the advice being given among zero-carb circles at that time was to eat protein and fat to appetite for a good, solid 6 months before evaluating.

Now, at the time, I could partly understand that viewpoint, since I knew from Celiac circles that one can't judge "continuing" symptoms, issues, and even new allergies to mean that a gluten-free diet isn't working. That it isn't healing. But when my Neuropathy resurrected itself, my heart palpitations returned, I was pretty sure that the diet was throwing my blood sugar levels out of whack again. Because that's what I had experienced the last time I'd had troubles with my blood sugar levels.

What disturbed me at the time, wasn't necessarily a community's disregard for biology and science, since a lot of folks in the low-carb community do that too. Disregard scientific knowledge and/or literature when it doesn't fit into their preconceived ideas and beliefs. Most low carbers WANT to believe the low carb myths and inaccuracies they were brought up on.

But what disturbed me the most was the dramatization being played out as a community at large, this psycho-somatic NEED to be right -- at the expense of someone else's physical ailments and health. There appeared to be a type of apathy when one was physically being pushed towards diabetes and real physical body damage by following their advice.

Which to me was a little bit scary since I was coming to the table with a lot of malnutrition and malabsorption issues that I, let alone them, didn't understand.

At first, I rode out the storm, hoping that what they were telling me was true. Because I believed (and still do believe) that a zero carb diet is a necessary option for some. But as the days turned into weeks, and my physical reaction to the diet continued to worsen, my blood sugars pushing their way up into the pre-diabetic level, I started to doubt that zero carb was the answer that I was seeking.

So I started doing my own investigation of the issues. Rather than sitting back and listening to everybody else tell me what to do or believe. And what I found out didn't match up very well with what the zero carb community (or the low carb one either, for that matter) were preaching.

For instance, in one of the articles in the Diabetic series on Barry Groves website, I read where "excess" protein can cause insulin levels to literally TRIPLE. Now that's a lot. Especially when the whole idea behind restricting carbs, and turning to meat and fat as the mainstay of our diet is to lower insulin levels, not raise them.

So next I took a look at what I was eating. And how much protein I was actually getting. Six to eight ounces of beef per meal. Hmmm. Pretty typical protein intake for a low carber. Not anything near what I would call excessive. Plus most low carbers also snack on even more protein between meals. Like hard boiled eggs, cheese, chicken legs, etc.

I noticed during this time that low carb products are loaded with protein (from wheat gluten) as well. Take the low carb bread Jimmy Moore was eating back then. When I looked it up, it dialed in at 12 to 17 grams of protein PER SLICE. And he never eats just one. So it's no wonder that many low carbers find themselves in a good stall, if all of that protein is raising their insulin levels the way Barry Groves claimed.

However, at 1 to 1-1/4 lbs of meat per day, I was getting waaaay less protein than the average low carber was getting. And yet my body was converting the protein I was eating into glucose. Or, at least that's what it appeared to be doing. Running on protein for energy and depositing the fat into my fat cells. Which means my weight and fat storage was going UP, and not down. Even though by this time I wasn't eating any carbs.

It was an eye opener for me, that cutting down so drastically on carbs could not only birth a dangerous situation, Diabetes and nerve damage, but it could also result in the opposite of what I was trying to do. Heal my physical health issues and reap fat loss at the same time.

By this time, my sugars were just crossing over into diabetic levels. Not over 200, but they were quite often in the 160s to 180s for hours after eating. High enough to cause lots of nerve damage and heart palpitations. Plus never returning back to normal levels...ever. My Neuropathy was soooo bad I was on Ibuprofen and Pamprin every day for the pain. Just so I could walk. And the numbness was SPREADING up my legs.

Needless to say, I was afraid that if I kept on following the zero-carb community's advice to keep doing what I was doing for at least 6 months before evaluating, that I'd do serious, irreparable damage to myself. So even though I'd only been doing zero carb for a couple of months, I went back to Induction, lowered my protein intake to 84, and held my breath -- hoping things would return to normal.

But they didn't.

I continued to have erratic blood sugars. Continued to suffer with Neuropathy. Continued to put on weight.

So I had to go back to the drawing board. Had to rethink things out. In a despite hope that I'd be able to fix what had gone soooo wrong for me, before the damage became permanent.

At which time I reasoned...

that if the body was confused into using protein for energy, rather than fat, that maybe I needed to eat fat for breakfast in an attempt to correct the situation. Maybe I needed to stop eating protein for breakfast in an attempt to force my body to use something else for energy.

Which is when I started drinking homemade hot cocoa, heavy on the cream for breakfast. And eating nothing else until 2 or 3 pm, after getting home from work. Kind of like Intermittent Fasting, I guess you'd say. Which helped to drive my blood sugars back down into pre-diabetic range. And stopped the weight gain. But it did nothing to correct anything. While it did stop the progression of what was happening to me.

Good...but not good enough.

At which time, I went off low-carb completely, and tightened up the gluten contamination in my life. I stopped cooking and baking with flour at work. I stopped cooking pasta. And I taught the kids how to cover their Top Ramen that they were cooking in the evening in the Microwave. How to keep the contamination in the kitchen waaaay, waaaay down.

Today, I weighed in at 185 lbs. My blood sugar was 79 at 1pm, after a breakfast of Polish Sausage and fried eggs, at 9:30am, and a snack of 1oz of Cheetos at noon. I still suffer with the resurrected Neuropathy though, and I've gained about 7 lbs since the middle of December. Partly because of the higher carb intake, and partly because my intestines are finally healing.

So even though my weight loss journey was basically a bust for 2009, I have made some real progress in learning about myself.

That my vertigo is either tied to, or severely agitated by, gluten ingestion. That I have problems absorbing/digesting fat (which I already knew), and protein. That I "used" to have problems absorbing/digesting carbs, which is why I was able to eat more carbs than the average low-carber, on maintenance. Which is now changing. That I need extra Folic Acid (which is extremely low in meat, by the way), Vitamin D3, and Calcium. In addition to a "good" multivitamin, and fish oil.

I have also learned that I react to gluten, even in minuscule amounts. That I don't have to eat it to have an adverse reaction to it. Which I'm seeing as a GOOD thing -- because I'm NEVER tempted to cheat. NEVER tempted to rationalize. NEVER tempted to give up my gluten-free diet. While that also means I have yet to be able to go out to eat without getting extremely sick afterwards, intestinal inflammation, pain, and even hives, the benefits I have experienced by going gluten free this past year have tremendously changed by life for the better.

The inflammation and pain I used to experience daily in my upper intestines is gone. My energy is higher, and I have more endurance. So I'm pretty confident that when I'm ready to return to my low carb diet in a couple of months, the rest of my health issues will clear up as well.

Now in all fairness to a zero carb diet...

I am NOT saying that a zero carb diet is dangerous for "most" individuals who choose, or want to choose to live that lifestyle. So I don't want anyone to walk away from this post with the wrong message. I'm sure that for some, there is no other way to achieve their weight loss goals. Plus at this point in time I have no way of knowing if gluten contamination was part, or even all of the problem, since gluten does tend to mess with my blood sugars as well.

What I AM saying -- is that it might be dangerous to ignore physical symptoms that are trying to warn us that something is seriously wrong. It might be dangerous to entertain the idea that one should eat nothing but beef and water for 6 months (with NO nutritional supplementation), BEFORE EVALUATING. Because in my case, if I'd waited that long, I "might" have done irreparable damage to myself.

As it was, it has taken me nearly 6 months to correct and fix what went so wrong for me. So gluten being the issue, or not, I have NO INTEREST in trying again. That isn't to say that a zero carb diet might be the best choice for someone else.