Re: FATSO (was Re: when will Orion produce an ED100 apo?)

From: Ryan Walters (weightlosssquared_at_nodiet.net)
Date: 07/25/04 

Date: Sun, 25 Jul 2004 04:21:41 GMT

Thanks for your comments, Guy. I guess I did get a bit perturbed when that
first fellow wanted to make fun of my line and being just plain rude.
Perhaps I over reacted a bit too.

However, we are in a health crisis. I see so many of our youth overweight
and downing full sugared sodas and candy bars like there was no tomorrow.
It's unfortunate that they're burning out their pancreases as they eat. I
was a victim too, but fortunately caught the addiction to excess carbs
before it was too late.

Folks certainly do knock Atkins and he's no longer with us to defend
himself. I saw a nutritionist on a well know tv program a few weeks ago
telling everyone how harmful Atkins was. She was saying things like ":no
carbs are bad" and that sort of thing. She apparently read about only the
"induction" stage, which doesn't even eliminate carbs but greatly restricts
them as you know, and replaced "low" with "no". How convenient for her.

And I agree with you on the med industry. It's a huge scam with a few at
the top raking in all the dough. I'm amazed more people don't see that! If
everyone were to suddenly get healthy, it would put them out of business.
They don't want that. The days of house visits and $5 doctor bills are long
since past I'm afraid.

-Ryan Walters
(subject line removed for now)

"Guy Jordan" <gjordan@mn.rr.com> wrote in message
news:bcGMc.54346$vN3.21462@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Don't quit the group Ryan. I "did Atkins" for 6 months and lost a lot of
> weight but got self conscious, fell off the wagon (so to speak), and
> gained most of it back. This is a personal failure, Atkins worked just
> fine. Your tag line and comments are encouraging. You won't change
> peoples minds any more easily than Dr. Atkins did but you do make a
> difference.
>
> For the rest of you, the medical industry is for profit, all their lobby
> groups are for profit and the same goes for the food industry. Most of
> the anti-Atkins rhetoric is funded by those groups. Follow the money and
> you will find that there is little profit in curing chronic illness but
> a lot of profit in its management.
> -Guy
>
> Ryan Walters wrote:
>
> > "Stephen Paul" <spaul219@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:HOudnaFhyoMue5zcRVn-uw@net1plus.com...
> >
> >>"Ryan Walters" <weightlosssquared@nodiet.net> wrote in message
> >>news:PX%Lc.8585$iK.2056@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net...
> >>
> >>> A low carb diet IS
> >>>the way to eliminating the type II diabetes epidemic.
> >>
> >>Since this is a "science" group, a little research is on order before
> >>rushing to judgement. A simple search on Type II Diabetes turned up this
> >>quote from the ADA:
> >>
> >>"Meal planning includes choosing healthy foods, eating the right amount
of
> >>food, and eating meals at the right time. The American Diabetes
> >
> > Association
> >
> >>(ADA) currently recommends that 50% to 60% of a person's diet should
come
> >>from carbohydrates, 10% to 20% from lean sources of protein, and less
than
> >>30% from fats.
> >
> >
> > This was obviously designed for a NORMAL person with a NORMAL
metabolism.
> > The idea of the "food pyramid" is definitely false for many individuals
and
> > I am proof. Read on....
> >
> >
> >>The exact breakdown of these percentages is different for each
individual.
> >>The ADA no longer recommends a diet of 1,800 to 2,000 calories a day for
> >
> > all
> >
> >>patients.
> >
> >
> > That's a little better. My current diet consists of about 1200 cal/ day
to
> > maintain my 200 lb weight. Quite different from the "recommendations"
of
> > 2,000 cal huh?
> >
> > A registered dietitian can be helpful in determining an
> >
> >>individual's specific dietary needs." [end quote]
> >
> >
> > Well, if you want to truly spend the money, yes. Many of us don't have
the
> > funding.
> >
> >
> >>Reference: http://health.yahoo.com/health/centers/diabetes/000313
> >>
> >>My own research and experience in weight loss indicate that monitoring
> >
> > your
> >
> >>existing food intake for one week is the way to measure the level of
> >
> > calorie
> >
> >>consumption necessary to maintain your existing body weight. Once this
is
> >
> > a
> >
> >>known quantity, to "lose weight" you simply cut back on calorie intake.
> >
> > This
> >
> >>doesn't have to be some high number. It just needs to be less. The lower
> >
> > the
> >
> >>calorie intake below your maintenance level, the higher the fat burning
> >>rate. It's just that simple.
> >
> >
> > Again, this may or may not be for a "normal" person. The idea of
including
> > refined starches/ sugars (and therefore high carbs), like we find in
bread,
> > many fruits, and especially candy bars and soda, is what's causing the
type
> > II diabetic problems we have now. The human body is accustomed to
eating
> > what it ate 1,000 years ago and before. There is a direct correlation
> > between our fat problems and the onset of "junk" and "processed" foods.
> >
> > Want to burn excess fat? Eat less calories.
> >
> >>Want to burn it faster? Exercise. HOWEVER, please follow the
> >
> > recommendations
> >
> >>of the ADA so that you do not cause yourself, or others, any long term
> >>health problems. in my case, I was able to go by "feel" because I am
> >>genetically suited to this kind of experimentation (I have no family
> >
> > history
> >
> >>of diabetes or high cholesterol). When I wasn't feeling well, I would
> >
> > adjust
> >
> >>the balance of protiens, fats and carbs. As it turns out, my
> >
> > experimentation
> >
> >>satisfies the ADA's recommendation perfectly, but I'm obviously the
norm.
> >>Not everyone is.
> >
> >
> > No, you're NOT the norm so keep that in mind before you bash.
Traditional
> > diets simply DID NOT work for me, I tried for many, many years. The
trouble
> > with keeping carbs higher in diets is that you NEVER get rid of sugar
spikes
> > in your system. Once the insulin clears these spikes, you end up hungry
an
> > hour after you eat and therefore eat again. Eating potatoes at dinner,
or
> > high carb veggies like corn can easily cause these spikes. The key is
to
> > reduce the carb intake. Atkins isn't about total elimination of carbs,
nor
> > taking on an excess of fatty foods. There are four phases to the
program
> > and most people look at the first phase and judge his entire system
based on
> > that. Once you reach the final phase, you are allowed limited carbs
> > throughout your lifetime, but they are ingested in controlled,
> > non-overloading amounts. It is in this way that weight is permanently
contr
> > olled because you no longer experience huger between meals. It has been
the
> > ONLY diet that has ever allowed me to keep my weight off, and that's
with no
> > exercise. Eating less and using the food pyramid didn't cut it because
I
> > still experienced hunger spikes.
> >
> > People always ask about cholesterol. Yes, it's true, during part or
most of
> > the first two phases, it rises. This is due to increased weight loss.
The
> > "fat" you're loosing does end up going through the bloodstream, but this
is
> > only temporary. Once you start reaching your goal weight and your
keytones
> > become less, cholesterol drops to usually much lower levels than before
you
> > started the diet. Now if you continue to eat low carb peanut butter,
for
> > example, that is processed with hydrogenated goodies, this will cause
> > cholesterol to rise. I've even been caught off guard a few times with
> > "hydrogenated", low carb candy. So, as the good doc himself says, avoid
> > anything hydrogenated, low carb or not.
> >
> >
> >>So, in conclusion, the scariest thing about your sig, is that it isn't
> >
> > true
> >
> >>for everyone, but it doesn't read that way. I sure hope you don't
prevent
> >>some person with diabetes from first seeking personal guidance from a
> >
> > health
> >
> >>professional.
> >
> >
> > If a person ALREADY HAS type II diabetes, it is impossible to start the
> > Atkins program from stage I. However, for pre-diabetics, and I don't
think
> > my quote is THAT hard to understand, the program is a strong
possibility.
> > And anyone who even thinks of starting the program almost HAS to either
> > visit a doctor or read his book first to fully understand the program.
His
> > books clearly say to see a physician before beginning the program.
> >
> > When you make absolute claims, you almost always cause harm to
> >
> >>the weak minded and/or weak willed. In this case, you are possibly
> >
> > screwing
> >
> >>with another's health. Shame on you.
> >
> >
> > Well, I see a LOT of quotes I see people using that I don't agree with
> > either. Freedom of speech is what it's all about. With a simple click
of
> > the mouse, a person can easily turn someone off they don't agree with or
end
> > up in another part of cyberspace. I highly suggest that's what you do
if
> > you can't stand to read an "absolute claim", as you put it. However,
with
> > more and more people ending up with diabetes due to poor nutrition, I
would
> > think that you would want to help prevent future cases instead of
promoting
> > them. The government isn't always right you know. They've been pushing
> > that food pyramid at us for years, only to find out now that it doesn't
work
> > for everybody and certainly hasn't for me. And then there is the
cellphone/
> > cancer relationship, but will save that for another time.
> >
> > In conclusion, I think it's time to leave this group, especially if
people
> > are going to knitpick everything I say. I am really surprised since
this
> > group is supposed to support astro discussion. However, unmoderated
doesn't
> > surprise me as I see anything going.
> >
> > So, I bid you all farewell.......
> >
> > -Ryan Walters
> >
> > (silent quote)
> >
> >
> >
> >>Stephen Paul
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>

Quantcast