May 31, 2009

Cephalic Phase Insulin Response

Cephalic Phase Insulin Response is about how a food's attributes, how it's color, appearance, flavor, aroma, and texture can influence our gastrointestinal physiology by affecting our early metabolic responses. The latest article published by the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition looks into several studies regarding such an insulin response, and what it might mean to us, as far as real life in concerned.

Lots of folks reject the notion as theory, claiming there's no proof for it's reality, but the article above cites many, many studies (some animal, some human) that do prove an immediate insulin response in most individuals, whenever the senses are engaged pertaining to food/drink. The real question is not whether Cephalic response exists, but just how much influence that insulin elevation will have on our fat loss efforts and health.

Part of the controversy is based on the way these studies are conducted. There's no uniformity. Some studies present folks with pictures, others have them actually taste the food. And still others (animal studies only) use non-caloric sweet-tasting sugar-subs in an attempt to isolate the taste sense from the insulin secreted due to actual digestion of the food or drink. This tends to skew the results some, at least as far as being able to come to honest conclusions. Plus we also have the problem of not everything being true for humans that is true for animals.

In human studies, some normal weight folks have no response to such stimuli. Others have various responses of 10% above their insulin baseline to as much as 75% within one minute of ingestion. With insulin levels peaking within 5 minutes, then falling back to normal within 10 minutes. It occurs whether or not you have a hyperglycemic response to what you've ingested, since blood sugar levels during the observation period didn't change much. But it was also noted that the degree of insulin elevation was clearly associated with the amount of food ingested.

On obese individuals, the studies have shown a much stronger response than those of normal weight, but some have shown comparable results. Whether that high response has something to do with the fact that obese individuals already have elevated base insulin levels, and the tests are just a reflection of that higher elevation or not, it still comes back around to individuality. And more likely the degree of metabolic damage an individual has.

The most interesting part of the article was the animal studies they did using non-nutritive substances. Because the saccarine-water solution (comparable to a diet soda, sugar-free jello, etc.) caused the animal's insulin levels to soar 200% above their normal baseline. Higher than carbohydrates!

What is therefore clear is that responses, irregardless of weight, are associated with a food/drink's palatability and acceptability. So if you don't particularly like a certain food or drink, or maybe have a take-it-or-leave-it-attitude, it probably won't be inclined to elevate your insulin levels. But if you really love something...if you're clearly engaging your senses by partaking in such food and drink...if you're addicted to the taste of sweet...well...that's clearly a whole other matter.

And may be something you just might want to revisit and reconsider.

May 30, 2009

Searching For Our Own Pot o' Gold

When I was growing up, it was common knowledge that carbs were fattening. Even simple, plain-wrap low-calorie diets limited carbs. If you wanted to lose weight, you cut out the breads, the potatoes, the pasta, and dessert. It was a No-Brainer. Worked pretty well too. No counting, just intuitive eating without sugars and starches. Lost something like 40 lbs when I spent the summer with my Aunt, without even trying to diet at all.

Even years later, in my young adult years, when the fat-free craze was trying to get a foot-hold on folks, and diets like Weight Watcher's were using a moderate approach with diabetic-like exchanges that mirrored closely the 4 basic food groups recommendations, minus "some" of the sugars and starches, the hottest diet of the day for women was a meat, dairy, veggie, and fruit diet. No sugars, no starches allowed.

I can still remember the day I went to the library and brought home a cookbook by Jane Brody. It was called the "Good Food Book", and I was totally STUNNED at what she was preaching in it. Now this was long after my introduction to Dr. Atkins...but still...1/2 pound of meat spread across 4 servings? That's 2oz apiece, isn't it? Even Weight Watchers was allowing way more protein in the diet than that!

It was about that time that my sister waltzed in with this new diet she had read about. You could eat whatever you wanted, but you had to limit your fat. I can't remember how many fat grams a day you were allowed, but I remember how hard it was to get adequate protein and stay within whatever the limit was. Since I love my starches and sugars, I willingly gave it a whirl, (afterall, Weight Watcher's had worked up to a point, until I reached a point where hunger could no longer be endured), and ended up about 15 pounds heavier that month. Oh well.

On to the next hype. Let's see, there was Ayds Candy who said if you ate 2 pieces about 30 minutes before dinner, you'd lose a lot of your hunger. And you'd lose weight easily. Hmmm. Didn't happen that way. I ate the candy, and my full dinner too!

There was an all veggie diet that left me tired as all heck, because no matter how much I ate all day, I was only managing to eat about 600 calories.

There was over the counter amphetamines, Dexatrim I think they were called back then, which left me wide awake and raren to go for 5 days straight. Didn't sleep a wink.

And all of this was supposed to be good....but low carb bad. Uhhh, okay. Whatever.

The said thing is, people really believe this low-calorie, low-fat garbage. I know, I did. I got sucked into the idea despite my success with Atkins '72 in the later part of that decade. Maybe if Weight Watcher's hadn't worked at all for me, like how the plain-wrap low-fat diet hadn't, I would have awoken a bit sooner to the truth. But like so many others, I fell victim to whatever the current medical association and/or society was preaching at the time.

So whatever happened to what we thought we knew before everyone started believing that saturated fat was responsible for heart disease? That fat makes you fat. And low-calorie diets are the only "safe" way to diet.

Why did we, the gullible public, swallow whatever our authorities told us, despite the lack of scientific evidence? We believed we were gluttons, because we were told that we were. We believed that we had no willpower. That we were lazy. That we were spoiled because we lived in America, and had more than enough food to waste. More than enough "fatty" food to waste.

So in steps the food industry to the rescue. Our modern-day Savoir. With all of the non-fat substitutes we could ever want. We even got to trade in our 2 to 4 daily servings of starches for a whopping 6 to 11. Did all of this turn Fat American into a Thin America?


The sad thing about all of this, is that following the advice of authorities can cause waaaay more problems than just obesity. It can cause serious disease and illness. It can permanently damage us in sooo many ways.

I can remember when my dad's insurance changed once, and his new doctor wanted to start running tests all over from scratch. The results were pretty bad. And they asked my dad if he was a vegetarian. No my dad wasn't a vegetarian, but his last doctor had insisted that he limit consumption of red meat. He was eating only chicken and fish. The result? The new doc said he had the type of organ damage that is often seen in vegetarians.

But I'm sure that anecdote isn't going to make it into any scientific journal, or recorded anywhere that someone will see it. And get some use out of it. Because everyone knows we need to limit our consumption of red meat due to the excessive fat it brings to our diet. But at what expense? The expense of damaging our organs?

Geesh. you can see, I sincerely related to the prologue of Good Calories, Bad Calories, because I've personally been through so much of it myself.

May 24, 2009

The Truths About Insulin

There are a lot of myths circulating around low carb boards regarding insulin. The chief one being that if our blood sugar is well controlled within acceptable levels, then our insulin level is fine too.

But that's NOT TRUE.

Insulin is a peptide hormone with extensive effects on the metabolism. It's produced in the beta cells of the Islets of Langerhans in the pancreas. The inactive form shown on the right is produced and stored in the body as a hexamer, a unit of six insulin molecules which is stable enough for very long storage. While the active form on the left is a monomer.

As most low carbers know, when insulin levels are low, glucose is not taken up by body cells, as the body uses fatty acids as its major energy source. But when insulin rises, fat mobilization is shut down, leaving stored fat trapped in the fat tissues until insulin levels come down.

Insulin releases in 2 phases. One phase occurs in response to increased blood glucose levels. That is the phase that is talked about within the low-carb community. But that isn't the only time insulin is released. Insulin is also triggered and released independently of blood sugar.

There are lots of things that trigger insulin: circulating adrenaline (stress), which we might or might not be able to do anything about, the thought and anticipation of eating, the smell and sight of food, (which means even low-carb foods can raise havoc with fat loss), plus the taste of anything sweet. What you eat doesn't have to contain real, honest-to-goodness sugar. All it has to have is a sweet taste to initiate insulin release. Plus you don't even have to eat the food. You just have to be able to see it, smell it, or long for it. This is called the Cephalic Reflex.

Now, when insulin gets released, the bloodstream is cleared of all glucose, nutrients, and fatty acids in anticipation of more coming in. What's just been cleared is stored for later release. So when insulin is circulating in the bloodstream, fatty acids are not. Because they're trapped in our fat tissue. Which is the total opposite of what we low carbers are supposed to be striving for.

When the bloodstream clears and nothing comes in, such as what happens when we see or smell food and don't eat it, we get hungry. We get cravings. And we run the serious risk of caving into those cravings and hunger. Which is why placing ourselves in those types of situations make insulin control difficult, if not impossible. At least, until the desire for those types of foods goes away.

Hyperinsulinemia, is more than just high insulin levels after eating. It's when your insulin levels elevate between meals, or you shoot off random secretions in the middle of the night when you're supposed to be living on, and running off of your fat stores. Sometimes this situation causes the liver to refuse to give up its glycogen stores, even when needed, which then causes the blood sugar to dip down below normal. Hunger and cravings result. Particularly hunger and cravings for something sweet.

But the kick when you're body has degenerated to this level is that even if you eat protein and fat during those times when hunger and cravings are trying to get the best of you, is that your body will still store it all, rather than use it for fuel, due to the high levels of circulating insulin.

Which is why some folks initially gain weight when they up their protein and fat, and lower their current level of carbs. Because their insulin levels stay elevated for hours on end. And until insulin levels fall, fat remains trapped in the fat tissue. Wish I would have known that back when I tried to do my own zero-carb experiment last year. Because the situation is only temporary. Once insulin corrects itself, at least part of the time, fat loss resumes.

So the key to overcoming hyperinsulinemia is to give your body TIME to reap the lower overall insulin levels you need. Because it takes about a year or more for hyperinsulinemia to totally correct itself. You gotta make sure though that the carb level you're eating at is low enough to not cause excess insulin secretion. So you pretty much have to let your hunger and cravings be your guide. Which is why it's to your advantage in the weight loss process to pay attention to yourself.

Learn to listen to your body.

Be aware of what you're eating, yes, but also be aware of what you're doing. And why. Because a desire for sweets, and attempting to imitate our old lifestyles through low-carb products and home-made goodies, (what I've been plenty guilty of myself over the past year), continuously hanging around or going to functions where we know they are going to be serving foods we haven't lost our desire for yet -- can seriously derail our efforts.

So while making a serious commitment to live a low-carb lifestyle is indeed important, it is just as important to be willing to do whatever is necessary to make goal-weight happen.

May 23, 2009

Hard Core Atkins

There's a thread over in the main lobby of Low Carb Friends that was started by someone who claims they've been reading another forum who are doing something called Hard Core Atkins. And that they're claiming that they are the only ones who are truly following the Atkins Diet. No sugar substitues, no low-carb products. And reading about doing without these artificial substances was totally freaking the poster out.

What they wanted to know was if this was really Dr. Atkins Plan, to not eat any of these things.

Now I couldn't figure out if "hard core" was what the people on this other forum are calling themselves, or if they were describing themselves as such, or if it was a derogatory title the original poster (and others on that thread) was giving them -- because the thread quickly degenerated into an attack against those of us who are doing Very Low Carb and/or Zero Carb.

When one's sugar/sugar-sub addictions are scratched, the knee-jerk reaction such as resulted over there isn't really all that surprising. As folks who feel they NEED this stuff do go to great lengths to defend and justify their food/non-food choices. But the thing that bothered me the most about this post is the way the original poster totally ignored the several requests to furnish the name and/or link to that other forum. Which then led some of the responders to talk about, and lash out at, those of us who are members of the Very Low Carb thread in the Other Diets' section I recently talked about.

What's astounding to me, is not just the viciousness that seems to disrupt each time the subject matter of lowering one's carbs and removing low-carb products standing in one's way is brought up, but the fact that we seem to have traveled quite a distance away from the very foundation of low-carb living.

We are no longer focusing on INSULIN, and what insulin elevation does to us. We are no longer concerned with eating in such a way that our overall insulin levels fall to the point where we no longer experiencing excessive hunger and cravings. We are now focusing on being comfortable, and finding ways to "imitate" our old lifestyle.

The funny thing is, most of those who proclaim that very low carb and zero carb diets are unhealthy and dangerous are those who've been involved in the low-carb lifestyle for YEARS, and are "still" not at goal. Not even close. In fact, most of them are still fat. Still obese. Yet they think they know what a healthy low carb lifestyle is. And proudly proclaim that knowledge to the rest of us.

Hardly. Trying to brainwash us into believing and/or accepting what they believe about necessary carb levels, so-called veggies, and helpful low-carb products, is more likely.

Like many of us, these prominent outspoken representatives of the low-carb world (some in the spotlight, and some just ordinary posters on various forums) did have initial dieting success with one of the various low carb plans, but then stalled part-way to their goal weight. But unlike many of us, they have chosen to accept that partial success as being the very best they can do.


Why have they "sold us out" to something less than what we wanted when we began this journey? And why have we allowed them to do that to us?

Has the recent Kimkins Tragedy left us with so large of a scar, and such a sour taste in our mouths, that we can't even DISCUSS the healthy results many experience from removing "any" food or artificial substance we might personally be allergic and/or sensitive to? Are our blinders we have placed upon ourselves so thick that we can no longer entertain the idea that ANYTHING that elevates our own, personal insulin levels, (healthy carbs or not), needs to go?

I'm just amazed at the amount of insulin-resistant folks who are in denial these days. Who'd rather turn their backs on the opportunity to embrace where science is heading with all of this, and actually finish their journey. It just totally blows my mind.

So with a dusty paper-back copy of "Good Calories, Bad Calories" by Gary Taubes sitting on an end table in the living room, I'm finally going to dig in and read it. And share what I learn from that experience here.

Because you know what?
Something amid the low-carb community just isn't kosher anymore.

May 21, 2009

100-Day, Very Low Carb Challenge

I signed up the other day to take a 100-day, very low carb challenge over at Low Carb Friends. As far as the challenge is concerned, one can follow any very low carb plan they want to, but it was generally defined by the challenge's originator (Cleochatra) as 10 carbs a day, or less. About the level of Atkins '72 Induction.

Weigh-in will be on Mondays, to keep us accountable throughout the weekend. Most of the others have decided to weigh in on Mondays too. So that's what I'll be doing here. I'll keep a list of my Monday weights throughout the challenge, and update you weekly on how it's going.

So far...things are zooming along just fine.

May 18, 2009

What's Up With All of the Zero Carb Fuss?

I've been noticing lately that there's been quite a fuss going on in regards to a zero-carb diet. Lots of emotional opinions being thrown out there as truth, lots of mis- and disinformation, and lots of low-carb myths and people making stuff up then tooting or parroting that made-up stuff to be "The Way."

Quite frankly, I don't understand what all of the anger, hostility, and mud-slinging is all about. Especially from those who proclaim to be supporters of Dr. Atkins.

Now you're certainly free to tell me I'm all wet, but the original Atkins diet was not what it has evolved into today. The original Atkins diet wasn't about selling low-carb products. And it wasn't about badgering folks into eating their vegetables. In fact, the only vegetable matter allowed on Induction was 2 cups of "loosely measured" lettuce, and a bit of cucumber, radish, and celery. That's it!

So we have these current Atkins folks, or Eades folks, or do-it-yourself low-carb folks (or whomever they are) screaming at those who are doing zero carbs...that it isn't healthy, and that they're going to kill themselves.


If that's true...then why in tarnation was it OKAY for folks to do Atkins that way back in the 70s? Why wasn't there a big press hoopla when Dr. Atkins' patients began dieing from the diet he was putting them on? Why did Dr. Atkins himself call his diet an Anti-Carbohydrate Diet? A ZERO CARB diet?

Yes, he went on to clarify that it was "biologically" zero due to the lettuce and cheese and eggs and few teaspoons of heavy cream allowed daily, but he still called it: ZERO CARB!

So you need to wake up people. Cuz what a lot of folks are doing is just getting back to basics. Getting back to the very foundation of what low carbing was in the first place. Controling insulin. Controling hunger. And controling cravings.

What Dr. Atkins professed in the first chapter of his original book was first cutting the carbs completely out, and then keeping them way down permanently. Because carb intolerance and high insulin levels are at the very heart of a lot of modern day diseases. He talked about cavemen and how we humans evolved mainly on a diet of all meat. He talked about how that was the diet our bodies were designed to handle. MEAT. Because folks back then only had to deal with a very small amount of unrefined carb matter, and only when it was available, as their diet was basically meat. Not meat and veggies.

It's only been over the past century really, that there's been a drastic change in the way we humans eat. The advent of the food processing businesses, has changed our diet from predominantly meat-based to predominantly carbohydrate-based. With the price for that switch-up being cardiovascular disease, a bunch of degenerative diseases, auto-immune problems, sugar and sweet-taste addictions, food sensivities, and a host of other stuff.

Now WHY did Dr. Atkins believe in restricting carbs to what the majority of folks today call excessively low levels? Because it takes away HUNGER. It takes away CRAVINGS. And because it keeps insulin levels low.

"Now you may be thinking, "But surely my body needs some carbohydrates?" This is another of those preconceptions so deeply embedded in our thinking (and I'm talking about doctor's minds here as well as patients') that it seems incredible that it isn't true." pg 6

"And this idea about the NEED for carbohydrates is one of those old assumptions that just doesn't hold anymore, one of that legion of yesterday's "truths" that have become today's fictions." pg 6

Dr. Atkins calls the arguments being presented today against the zero-carb movement to be FICTION. Even going so far as to quote Philip K. Bondy, chairman of the Dept of Internal Medicine at Yale University Medical School saying exactly the same thing. That "NO carbohydrate is required in the diet."

So honesty...what is the fuss all about????

Why are we, as a community casting out those who are trying to live up to Dr. Atkins' ideals?

Why are we trying to force our personal, made-up beliefs, insecurities, and business ventures down the throats of others? Others that we claim we care so much about?

This is especially disheartening if you go to the heart of the science of the low-carb lifestyle where we're clearly taught that carbohydrates in excess of our own personal tolerance level fatten us up by preventing us from burning our stored body fat. Fatten us up by stimulating our bodies to make more fat. And even being "used" to make that fat.

"Protein and fat combinations ALONE do not do this." pg 7

"So this diet is an Anti-Carbohydrate Diet." pg 7


This was what Dr. Atkins preached. Yet for some odd reason, we as a community feel THREATENED by the movement of "some" back to those roots. Back to the very basics of the low-carb lifestyle itself. Back to the ideals that Dr. Atkins himself stood for. The ideal that said the intent behind publishing the Atkins' diet in the first place was to steer the reader into an eating pattern best suited for them. Their particular metabolism, tastes, habits, customs, likes, and dislikes.

Dr. Atkins was big on individuality. He didn't treat all of his patients the same. He treated their own individual health issues and sensitivities, their own levels of insulin resistance. He didn't put all of them on the same diet. What he published, and republished as the years went by, was what worked for most of his patients. MOST, but not all.

Because the honest truth of the matter is, if you have a weight problem, or have ever had a weight problem, then you have a problem for life. Those turning to zero carb, and very low carb diets clearly understand this and are not willing to settle for anything less than goal weight. They are not willing to settle for anything less than complete and total health.

The irony of the current movement "against" zero carb and very low carb diets is that most, if not all, of it's most strongest proponents have indeed chosen to settle for less.

How sad.....

May 08, 2009

Food Sensitivities, Inflammation, and Insulin

I ran into an interesting article the other day at Medical News Today. It was about how hidden allergies and food sensitivities can affect our weight. It was a review of an original journal article published in the Middle Eastern Journal of Family Medicine last month. And what caught my attention was the focus on inflammation.

Obesity is associated with low-grade inflammation of white adipose tissue, which current thought is attributing to the activation of the immune system. The OVER-activation, actually. With the theory being that the inflammation is triggered by food sensitivities and/or intolerances. And that an elimination diet could go a long ways towards helping folks correct their overweight problems.

This particular study used something called an ALCAT test to measure the sensitivities of 27 patients, 14 males and 13 females. The ALCAT test measures white blood cell reactivity to each agent being analyzed.

Now, this isn't new. I can remember reading a book about this kind of testing many years ago, (though I can't remember what it was called now), where the author had performed the test on himself, removed all offending foods and drinks from his diet, and was able to regain his health.

So that's basically what this study did.

They tested these folks, removed the offending food and drink, and then sat back for 12 weeks and watched what happened. In 12 weeks, the average weight loss was a whopping 37lbs! The average drop in BMI was 6 points. And the average decrease in fat percentage was 30%!

The article quotes Dr. Pescatore, former Medical Director of the Atkins Center, regarding his opinion about the study. And his response was to back up ALCAT testing itself: "I've used the ALCAT test with my difficult patients time and time again, and it always works."

Now as far as low carb is concerned, the scientific theory the article puts forth comes from a book by Roger Deutsch entitled "Your Hidden Food Allergies are Making You Fat." He believes that inflammation created when you eat foods you're sensitive or intolerant too activates the immune system, which then produces chemicals that block insulin receptors. The consequence of which is stored fat.

So maybe...just maybe...carbs themselves are not necessarily the bad guy on the block!

May 03, 2009

Before and Current Pictures

I wanted to post a picture of myself before I started low carbing in January of 2007, but up till now, haven't been able to, since we don't have a scanner. There were several of those types of pictures from Christmas of 2006 on my brother-in-law's computer, and I'd been asking him for awhile to email them to me, but he kept saying that he didn't know how.

Well one day he got mad at his computer and took it out on his computer screen. Needless to say he not only broke the screen, but damaged it enough that it will no longer boot up. He had to buy a new computer, since he uses it for work, but that means all of those before pictures are no longer available. At least, until he finds someone who can dump his hard drive for him.

I think I've already mentioned that my husband ran into a before picture among his things that we weren't expecting to find, and that he placed it on top of my computer screen a while ago, so that everytime I got disheartened in my current weight loss efforts I could see just how far I've come over the past 2 years.

Plus I also ran into a before picture on my computer awhile back that was very close to the weight I was before the day I started Atkins. But not quite. I think I was about 10 pounds lighter then, but didn't want to post it until I had a current picture to go with it.

Well, when we were in Michigan recently, my brother-in-law took a picture of what I currently look like, so that he could email it to me, (I guess he's learned how now), then my husband's niece printed it out on a Cannon picture printer, (I don't remember what they actually call those), so I could have a hard copy of what I currently look like to go with my before picture, as well.

So now I have a before picture and a current picture sitting on top of my computer.

On the way home from Michigan, my husband was soooooo impressed with the quality of the pictures his niece gave us that he decided he really, really NEEDED to buy a digital camera for himself.

Awhile back, when we were trying to make it through the winter, and thinking we were going to have to go solo if the contractor he was currently working for wasn't able to catch any bids soon, someone asked my husband if he had any pictures of his work. Up to that point, we really hadn't seen a justifiable need to buy a digital camera. Not really. Though he's looked at them at Walmart from time to time. And I've wanted one for awhile now, so I could put up some real food pictures on my blogs. As well as other stuff.

So we stopped into a Walmart on our way home, just for the heck of it, to see what they might cost in another state. Not really expecting to buy one. But we ran into a deal that we couldn't pass up. A 10.2 pixel for less than $90. My husband's brother and sister-in-law had told us that an 8 pixel was good enough for our needs, but that if we found a 10 for say $20 or so more than an 8, that we should grab it itstead, because they usually cost a heck of a lot more than that.

Well, we found a 10.2 for the same price as an 8, so we took their advice and bought it.

The consequence of that impulse buy is that I won't be able to return to low carb dieting just yet, I'll have to stay on maintenance for a couple more weeks, but at least I now have some honest-to-goodness before and current pictures of myself that I can post for you all.

This first one was somewhere around 250 lbs or so. Not my heaviest, as I was 257 1/2 when I started Atkins, but it's close enough to be able to SEE the difference that low carb has made in my life.

And here is what I look like today, at 180lbs.

When I moved to maintenance awhile back, I weighed around 172, so I've put on about 8 lbs, or so. Most of which is glycogen and water I know. Plus I'm still pretty bloated in the tummy from having to eat at restaurants all the way home from Michigan. Boye was it ever hard trying to stay both gluten and casein free! I failed at that miserably.

So I came home bound and determined to return to Atkins, and clean myself out of all of the gluten/casein/carb garbage I'd had to eat the past week -- but that hasn't worked so well for me. With no gall bladder now, and my problem with absorbing/digesting fats still intact, I've spent a great deal of my time not feeling well, or running for the bathroom. Plus I put on about 5 lbs real quick like. So I had to move back to maintenance in order to get that to stop, and reverse itself.


Now...I'm not saying that low carb is not the way to go, it is. It's quite frankly the healthiest way to eat. What I'm saying is that for me, I'm going to have to continue to adapt it to my own body. I'm going to have to return to my own, personal, lower-fat way of doing it. At least for right now. Cuz not only is gluten-intolerance an auto-immune issue, but it's also a malabsorption issue. Which means what I've suspected all along, ever since the Kimkins fiasco, is right on target.

I don't digest fats properly.
I don't digest dairy products properly.

And until that changes, (IF it ever does), I'm going to have to do low-carb "my way."