2000 Gals 2500 Guys

[TammyCat]

Originally Posted by woodym

First, for the sake of accuracy, let's toss out this notion that 65% of Americans are obese. The most recent data I've seen says 63% of Americans are overweight, as defined by a BMI greater than 25 (like mine). The number drops to 31% over a BMI of 30, their cutoff for the category obese. reference Yup, the guy in my "after" picture in my signature below would have to lose 12 more pounds to not be considered part of that 63% "overweight Americans."

Volumes have been written on the subject of American weight. You have approached a self-selected group who have found the food management strategies suggested by Dr. Robert Atkins have worked for them. Many of us have very strong feelings about this, that he has vastly improved or even saved our lives. If you really want a thorough explanation of what Dr. Atkins thinks about the reasons for the epidemic of overweight, you will find no better source than his book Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution. His statements will undoubtedly be much clearer than whatever a smattering of part-time forum posters can cobble together a few minutes at a time.

I can restate his thesis in my words, and we could kick that around a little. But please don't make me fully restate the contents of a book that we normally assume is familiar territory to members of our community.

Here's my brief paraphrase of Atkins' thesis: Atkins believes that large numbers of us (Americans) who have grown up in the age of plenty, especially in the "low fat health craze" era, have over a lifetime consumed far more refined carbohydrate and sugar than at any other time in human history. This has caused our pancreas over its lifetime, to compensate by producing ever larger doses of insulin to cope with this new type of food intake. At some point, the cell receptor points for the insulin/sugar groups become overloaded and resistant. The cells already have more fuel than they ever wanted, and they resist. The pancreas secretes overlarge amounts of insulin and this will not change once we lose weight. The resulting rapid drop in blood sugar makes us hungry, and this is part of why you can't just say "don't eat, you've had your 2000 calories, so sorry," ... this ebb and flow of blood sugars wreaks havoc with the appetite. By managing our carbohydrate intake, we can manage this hyperinsulism. And yes, I think a large part of American obesity is due to exactly this hyperinsulinism.

Again, let me stress that you are asking a broad question to people who have had (or hope to have) life changing experiences regarding weight loss. We've seen this approach work where others have failed. That may or may not be your experience, or anyone else's.

As for the Chinese, for how long have they had an economy of plenty to match with the last 40 years of the US economy? One can wave the hand grandly and say these people eat rice and are slim, but a lot of detail gets washed away in that. Brown Rice or Frosted Flakes? Natural rice in its bran casing, or white stuff with the fiber milled off of it? And how much? Have there been limitless piles of rice available for all these years? And by the way, as times-of-plenty come to China, they are in fact getting fatter:

reference

China has been very good at feeding her people. Chinese have low BMIs and very high IQs. They are very healthy compared to Americans. They have low rates of cancer, kidney disease and diabetes. They get most of their calories from carbs.

As to low carb: It has been around since the 70's. If it were easy and effective then we would not have an obesity rate of 65%. We would not have a death rate of 400,000 per year from obesity related causes. Mississippi and the South in general have the highest obesity rates. They eat lots of high fat meat. Eastern NC the pork barbecue capital of the south has the highest incidences of heart disease.

If high fat high protein diets worked as well as Atkins claimed they would have caught on 30 years ago. Millions of people have tried Atkins but millions have not lost weight. Instead millions have gained weight. Whether Atkins is safe and effective is not the point. The point is, it has been around for over 35 years. It is easy to follow. The question is has the diet failed or have the dieters failed? This brings us back to the original question of why people won't eat the proper ammount of calories ie 2000 for women and 2500 for men?

[not2late]

Originally Posted by TammyCat

Hypothyroidism does slow BMR but only slightly. Hypothyroidism is also easily diagnosed and cured so it is a non issue.

As to diabetes, there needs to be a differentiation. Type 1 is not self induced. Type 2 is. The treatment for type one is insulin. The cure for type two is weight loss. One does not have to eat saturated fats for 14 weeks to obtain that weight loss. Humans are designed by nature to eat mostly starches. If were were carnivores as the late Dr Atkins suggested then we would have teeth like a carnivore and a digestive system that would function properly on a diet high in meat.

Even Americans not on Atkins get too much protien. We need .5 grams per pound of body weight. Anymore just puts strain of the kidneys.

Hypothyroidism is NOT "easily" diagnosed. Ask your physician brother about the soft symptoms. Many people are not treated until their levels are below the alleged normal values, because that is when these people finally go to see their doctors, in spite of having symptoms for months, perhaps years.

Type 1 diabetes is due to an ineffective pancreas. So dietary sugar is not able to be used by the body. Type 2 diabetes is due insulin resistance, and the body cannot, therefore, use dietary sugars efficiently either. The "cure" for diabetics is to control their blood sugar levels in order for their bodies to function adjunctly with medications. And as a historical note, prior to the discovery of insulin, the "cure" for diabetes was a ketogenic diet, AKA, low carb.

Humans are omnivores: we are designed to eat both plant and animal foods. If we were solely designed to eat starches, we would have multiple stomachs like cows. As to Dr. Atkins claiming that we are carnivores, you are sorely mistaken. If you had read his books, you would not have made that comment. In fact, the only people to make that assertion are members of PETA or other extremist vegan groups. Dr. Atkins believed we are omnivores and if followed properly, Atkins dieters will eat more servings of vegetables daily than what the USDA recommends.

As for the RDA of protein, I suggest you look up Chittendon's experiment on the minimal amount of protein humans require. It was done in the early 20th century and remains the basis for the 1 gram protein per kilogram body weight. Once you have read the study, you will see that the conclusions were mis-applied.

China has been very good at feeding her people. Chinese have low BMIs and very high IQs. They are very healthy compared to Americans. They have low rates of cancer, kidney disease and diabetes. They get most of their calories from carbs.

As to low carb: It has been around since the 70's. If it were easy and effective then we would not have an obesity rate of 65%. We would not have a death rate of 400,000 per year from obesity related causes. Mississippi and the South in general have the highest obesity rates. They eat lots of high fat meat. Eastern NC the pork barbecue capital of the south has the highest incidences of heart disease.

If high fat high protein diets worked as well as Atkins claimed they would have caught on 30 years ago. Millions of people have tried Atkins but millions have not lost weight. Instead millions have gained weight. Whether Atkins is safe and effective is not the point. The point is, it has been around for over 35 years. It is easy to follow. The question is has the diet failed or have the dieters failed? This brings us back to the original question of why people won't eat the proper ammount of calories ie 2000 for women and 2500 for men?

Again, I ask you to read that link about China and its diet. You will find it interesting, believe me.

As for low carb only being around for the last 30 years, I recommend that you read the book, Good Calories, Bad Calories, by Gary Taubes.

Also, low carb, specifically Atkins, never caught on because major medical organizations discredited and discouraged the diet. So the epidemic of obesity lies, not with Atkins, but with the American Medical Association, the American Heart Association, the USDA, etc. etc. etc.

You seem to be interested in nutrition. If you truly are, then you will read the articles and books I have recommended to you. Reading is knowledge and a true scholar reads material from all points of view before making a conclusion.

[woodym]

This brings us back to the original question of why people won't eat the proper ammount of calories ie 2000 for women and 2500 for men?

It is because the high carb diet you advocate, based on unnaturally refined starch and sugar, causes blood sugar swings that cause us to always be famished. Love it or leave it. Whether you think man is a vegetarian, fruitarian, or carnivore, or whatever combinion suits your fancy, the current stock of refined grain and sugar foods are something new and are having their predictable effect on weight and appetite. I don't know the solution to feeding a healthy world, and neither do you.

Your argument that Atkins has been anything resembling mainstream approach during the past 35 years of national weight gain is particularly laughable.

And we come full circle. It's pretty clear you came to our forum with an agenda and Grant's initial suspicion that you are trolling is validated. For some people, it is lots of fun and attention-getting to come into a forum that is self-selected for certain ideas and opinions and tell them they're all wrong. This is popularly called trolling. In any case, it's clear you came here with no intention of discussing anything, you are merely rehashing the same old tired lines we've been hearing for the past 40 years.

I'm done with you. If I want to find read-only articles bashing Atkins, I can go to a million government and mainstream media sites, I don't need to hear the same tired arguments from your megaphone too.

[TammyCat]

Originally Posted by SandyL2002

I think American's are overweight because our foods are so processed with JUNK in them.. I know for a fact we are way too busy and do a lot of eating on the run. Now about the Metabolism..I don't know if I agree.. There is NO WAY I have the same Metabolism as my 15 year old daughter...she eats WAY more food then me and doesn't gain an ounce.


Moderators....I sure hope you don't let someone stay here too long that is so negative

Judging by your size your metabolic rate is about twice as high ase your daughter's.

Here is the metabolic rate of a 250 pound 40 yearold sedentary female BMR is 2394 calories per day. 1197 calories per day are burned through activity. Total = 3592 per day.

Here are the numbers for a moderately active 20 yearold female:

BMR =1175 calories per day
Activity = 601 calories per day
Total = 1777 per day

You have a much higher metabolic rate than your daughter. If you weighed as much as she does and you are as active as she is these would be your numbers.
BMR = 1140 calories per day
Activity = 583 calories per day
Total burned 1723 per day

Of individuals of the same age weight and gender the amount of variance is about 40 calories a day.

[TammyCat]

Originally Posted by SandyL2002

I think American's are overweight because our foods are so processed with JUNK in them.. I know for a fact we are way too busy and do a lot of eating on the run. Now about the Metabolism..I don't know if I agree.. There is NO WAY I have the same Metabolism as my 15 year old daughter...she eats WAY more food then me and doesn't gain an ounce.


Moderators....I sure hope you don't let someone stay here too long that is so negative

Judging by your size your metabolic rate is about twice as high ase your daughter's.

Here is the metabolic rate of a 250 pound 40 yearold sedentary female BMR is 2394 calories per day. 1197 calories per day are burned through activity. Total = 3592 per day.

Here are the numbers for a moderately active 20 yearold female:

BMR =1175 calories per day
Activity = 601 calories per day
Total = 1777 per day

You have a much higher metabolic rate than your daughter. If you weighed as much as she does and you are as active as she is these would be your numbers.
BMR = 1140 calories per day
Activity = 583 calories per day
Total burned 1723 per day

Of individuals of the same age weight and gender the amount of variance is about 40 calories a day.

[woodym]

China has been very good at feeding her people. Chinese have low BMIs and very high IQs. They are very healthy compared to Americans. They have low rates of cancer, kidney disease and diabetes. They get most of their calories from carbs.

I've been been reading Megs' reference http://www.westonaprice.org/traditio..._in_china.html ... very interesting stuff. Snippets:

The overall rate of cancer in China is twice that of the United States. The Chinese have less cancer of the colon, lung and breast, but far greater levels esophageal, stomach and liver cancer. Heart disease mortality is greater in the US but the Chinese have more stroke—in some districts the rate of death by stroke for those under 65 is as high as 8 percent.

and

Of particular concern is the high rate of mental retardation—over ten million cases in China, including hundreds of thousands with overt cretinism, especially in the central regions.

[TammyCat]

Originally Posted by SandyL2002

I think American's are overweight because our foods are so processed with JUNK in them.. I know for a fact we are way too busy and do a lot of eating on the run. Now about the Metabolism..I don't know if I agree.. There is NO WAY I have the same Metabolism as my 15 year old daughter...she eats WAY more food then me and doesn't gain an ounce.


Moderators....I sure hope you don't let someone stay here too long that is so negative

Judging by your size your metabolic rate is about twice as high ase your daughter's.

Here is the metabolic rate of a 250 pound 40 yearold sedentary female BMR is 2394 calories per day. 1197 calories per day are burned through activity. Total = 3592 per day.

Here are the numbers for a moderately active 20 yearold female:

BMR =1175 calories per day
Activity = 601 calories per day
Total = 1777 per day

You have a much higher metabolic rate than your daughter. If you weighed as much as she does and you are as active as she is these would be your numbers.
BMR = 1140 calories per day
Activity = 583 calories per day
Total burned 1723 per day

Of individuals of the same age weight and gender the amount of variance is about 40 calories a day.

[Hoping]

Though you've posted you're question several times, you still haven't firmly stated what you believe in and the main point of you posting on this board. It's all in one sentence: You should eat 2000-2500 calories, depending on your gender, and leave the low carb baloney behind. Am I right?
If you're going to say something, come out and say it.
You're also continously saying you're right, that you know you're right, that you have the right answer. Then, what answer are you exactly seeking? We don't believe in following a low cal, low fat eating plan.
I didn't think type two diabetes could be cured, but that it could be managed/controlled through diet and exercise.

And another thing, I'm going to be really honest. Your tone is getting on my nerves and you think you're high and mighty because you're brother's a doctor. And I have to say, it's great hat you're proud of your brother. Congrats to him, but that's him not you. However, just because we don't have medical degrees doesn't make us any lesser. So please drop that high and mighty or taunting tone.
We're open to discussion, but we certainly do not like people talking down to us.

Is this plan of eating easy to follow? It can be, but for people who are trying to break from bad eating habits it can take a while to get accustomed to it. There's sugar everywhere, startches, etc. It takes hard work and determination. It takes getting our butts to the gym four to five times a week. Toning our bodies, doing cardio, and getting plenty of water. We also eat lots and lots of veggies. By the way this isn't a high protein diet, don't get it mixed up.

I doubt that people in developing nations get all 2000 calories daily. Rice is used as a filler because meat, poultry, and fish are more costly. Veggies and fruit are also more readily accessible (cost wise).They also exercise more, without hitting a gym. They walk places because it's possible. Here in the state's it's a little difficult. At least, where I live there isn't public transportation to drop me off a few blocks from where I'm going. It's just not possible.

You seem to have a misconception of overweight people. You feel bad for anorexic people, right? They have an eating disorder. Most of us do as well. The difference is we overate. Some of us are here because medications we took made us gain weight. Some of us are emotional eaters...isn't that why many people become anorexic or bulemic?
So why are you judging us, the overweight, and not the underweight? You would have never ever posted the same "2000-2500 calories" question in a forum for anorexics or bulemics.
Although, I have to wonder why you're so disgusted by our former eating habits.Is it because you fear being fat? I think Freud was on to something there.
Or perhaps you're not American and you're ethnocentric and we overweight Americans simply digust you. *sigh* Who knows.

[TammyCat]

I've read the China Study and it only confirmed what was already known. Diets high in straches and low in animal products result in lower rates of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, kidney disease, MS, arthritis, ADHD, clolitis, stroke, hyper tension... the list goes on. Let it suffice to say that people who eat less meat and healthier.

[Hoping]

But they're not getting the proper nutrients...how could that be good?