booze again

doodah said:

"Carmen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

doodah said:

"Tom G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:N%qhg.251183$WI1.229896@pd7tw2no...
>
> "Laureen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
> > Ya think? Why do you even bother posting this [censored] anymore? I gave

you

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > the benefit of the doubt last post but it's plain and simple now...
> > there is a problem, you have a problem. ANy idea what it is????
> > Laureen
>
> What seems easy to some, may be difficult for others. Don't you

agree?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Laureen had to get her guts cut out to keep from shoveling so much grub

in,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

so she's not exactly the poster child for moderation.

Barbara why are you so [censored] to Laureen about her WLS decision? It
was her money and her decision. If you thought your happy ass was
anonymous behind that nym you were clearly mistaken my dear. Almost
nobody's life is capable of standing up to close scrutiny, and yours
isn't when it comes to being a "poster child for moderation" either.

Carmen <----- Look Barb, no nym!

Settle down Inspector Gadget.

You've been the one with the wild hair about Laureen lately, taking
potshots at her. I'm just letting you know you aren't taking them
anonymously. Carry on.

Carmen

Maybe because Laureen is being [censored] about someone else's decisions? It
occurred to me that there was some pot calling kettle black here but I bit
my tongue.

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| Barbara why are you so [censored] to Laureen about her WLS decision? It
| was her money and her decision. If you thought your happy ass was
| anonymous behind that nym you were clearly mistaken my dear. Almost
| nobody's life is capable of standing up to close scrutiny, and yours
| isn't when it comes to being a "poster child for moderation" either.
|
| Carmen <----- Look Barb, no nym!

FOB said:

Maybe because Laureen is being [censored] about someone else's decisions? It
occurred to me that there was some pot calling kettle black here but I bit
my tongue.

Background: The last time he posted this stuff she was very honest
about her own experiences vis-a-vis the food consumption issue that
lead to the WLS. She related that it took brutal honesty to get her on
the road to the relative bounding good health she has now, and that's
what she was giving him. Lots of other people also told him that the
alcohol was loaded with calories and he ought to ditch it. He said he
didn't think it was really a problem. Here he comes again, with
another post about a booze-filled month. Laureen's post was [censored],
but I don't see how it was the pot calling the kettle black. Alcohol
is *not* this guy's friend. He seems to have a problem, she was
pointing that out.
I don't know what the hell Barbara's problem is.

Carmen

Quoted message said:

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| Barbara why are you so [censored] to Laureen about her WLS decision? It
| was her money and her decision. If you thought your happy ass was
| anonymous behind that nym you were clearly mistaken my dear. Almost
| nobody's life is capable of standing up to close scrutiny, and yours
| isn't when it comes to being a "poster child for moderation" either.
|
| Carmen <----- Look Barb, no nym!

I see how his standard for tolerable body fat may differ from yours.

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| He's reached his goal weight, and his post broadly hints that he's
| done so using alcohol, and in the context of this discussion it would
| have to be somewhat liberally to be meaningful. Based on his being
| at goal weight, and the fact that the body must first attend to the
| disposition of alcohol before it can do anything else (like burn body
| fat) the ketones that he ran on (which eventually came from the
| alcohol after it was converted to acetate and some other stuff
| happened to it) provided fuel that his body fat could have been
| providing. Without being burned the body fat isn't going to go
| anywhere. It's going to constitute a disproportionately larger
| percentage of the smaller goal weight than if there had not been
| alcohol fuel to interfere in the process of weight loss.
| Now, with that all laid out do you see how his standards do not enter
| into the equation?
| A "healthy percentage of body fat" is determined by correlation with
| the incidence of diseases and disorders associated with it in a
| studied population. My quip about him possibly being "a freak" was
| just that, a quip, meant to denote the possibility that all the
| normal rules of metabolism do not apply to him. Normally I put a
| "NOTE TO THE HUMOR IMPAIRED" disclaimer on such things. I forgot
| this time. Please forgive me.
|
| Carmen

FOB said:

There's a difference between saying it isn't advantageous (which he has
heard here before) and telling him he has a problem.

True. In addition to the alcohol not being advantageous to his dieting
effort, I also think he has a problem with alcohol. They are two
different issues.

Carmen

Quoted message said:

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated
| FOB wrote:
|| He lost 8 pounds in a month, doesn't look like a problem to me.
|
| Excessive alcohol intake in a low carb diet isn't advantageous to the
| dieter. This study gives a synopsis as to why:
| http://tinyurl.com/nyntz
| J Clin Invest. 1988 April; 81(4): 1137-1145.
|
| Ethanol causes acute inhibition of carbohydrate, fat, and protein
| oxidation and insulin resistance.
|
| J J Shelmet, G A Reichard, C L Skutches, R D Hoeldtke, O E Owen, and G
| Boden
| Department of Medicine, Temple University Hospital, Philadelphia,
| Pennsylvania 19140.
| To study the mechanism of the diabetogenic action of ethanol, ethanol
| (0.75 g/kg over 30 min) and then glucose (0.5 g/kg over 5 min) were
| infused intravenously into six normal males. During the 4-h study,
| 21.8 +/- 2.1 g of ethanol was metabolized and oxidized to CO2 and H2O.
| Ethanol decreased total body fat oxidation by 79% and protein
| oxidation by 39%, and almost completely abolished the 249% rise in
| carbohydrate (CHO) oxidation seen in controls after glucose infusion.
| Ethanol decreased the basal rate of glucose appearance (GRa) by 30%
| and the basal rate of glucose disappearance (GRd) by 38%, potentiated
| glucose-stimulated insulin release by 54%, and had no effect on
| glucose tolerance. In hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp studies,
| ethanol caused a 36% decrease in glucose disposal. We conclude that
| ethanol was a preferred fuel preventing fat, and to lesser degrees,
| CHO and protein, from being oxidized. It also caused acute insulin
| resistance which was compensated for by hypersecretion of insulin.
|
| In brief, your body has to drop pretty much everything else it's doing
| to deal with the alcohol. Your pancreas works overtime shoveling out
| insulin and you don't burn fat. At 7 calories per gram, alcohol
| qualifies as "empty calories", since it isn't in something that has
| vitamins and minerals and protein and healthy fats in any significant
| quantity accompanying it.
|
| Carmen

FOB said:

I see how his standard for tolerable body fat may differ from yours.

Of course. That would come under personal taste, and as such would be
purely subjective. "Healthy body weight" isn't subjective though.

Carmen

Quoted message said:

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| He's reached his goal weight, and his post broadly hints that he's
| done so using alcohol, and in the context of this discussion it would
| have to be somewhat liberally to be meaningful. Based on his being
| at goal weight, and the fact that the body must first attend to the
| disposition of alcohol before it can do anything else (like burn body
| fat) the ketones that he ran on (which eventually came from the
| alcohol after it was converted to acetate and some other stuff
| happened to it) provided fuel that his body fat could have been
| providing. Without being burned the body fat isn't going to go
| anywhere. It's going to constitute a disproportionately larger
| percentage of the smaller goal weight than if there had not been
| alcohol fuel to interfere in the process of weight loss.
| Now, with that all laid out do you see how his standards do not enter
| into the equation?
| A "healthy percentage of body fat" is determined by correlation with
| the incidence of diseases and disorders associated with it in a
| studied population. My quip about him possibly being "a freak" was
| just that, a quip, meant to denote the possibility that all the
| normal rules of metabolism do not apply to him. Normally I put a
| "NOTE TO THE HUMOR IMPAIRED" disclaimer on such things. I forgot
| this time. Please forgive me.
|
| Carmen

"Carmen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

FOB said:

Maybe because Laureen is being [censored] about someone else's decisions?

It

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

occurred to me that there was some pot calling kettle black here but I

bit

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

my tongue.

Background: The last time he posted this stuff she was very honest
about her own experiences vis-a-vis the food consumption issue that
lead to the WLS. She related that it took brutal honesty to get her on
the road to the relative bounding good health she has now, and that's
what she was giving him. Lots of other people also told him that the
alcohol was loaded with calories and he ought to ditch it. He said he
didn't think it was really a problem. Here he comes again, with
another post about a booze-filled month. Laureen's post was [censored],
but I don't see how it was the pot calling the kettle black. Alcohol
is *not* this guy's friend. He seems to have a problem, she was
pointing that out.
I don't know what the hell Barbara's problem is.

Carmen

Who is this Barbara person?

First off. You are so uninformed regarding what I did. While I owe you
no explanation I will say this:I did not have my guts cut out as you
have put it on multiple ocassions. I had things rearranged and bypassed
but nothing has been removed. NO I wasn't the poster child for anything
positive including moderation but I readily admitted it. I was dying a
slow painful death and getting nowhere quick. Those who have been
posting in here for the last.... lets see.. at least 6 years know my
plight and struggles. I dont expect or need you to understand though.
Laureen

doodah said:

"Tom G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:N%qhg.251183$WI1.229896@pd7tw2no...

Quoted message said:

"Laureen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ya think? Why do you even bother posting this [censored] anymore? I gave you
the benefit of the doubt last post but it's plain and simple now...
there is a problem, you have a problem. ANy idea what it is????
Laureen

What seems easy to some, may be difficult for others. Don't you agree?

Laureen had to get her guts cut out to keep from shoveling so much grub in,
so she's not exactly the poster child for moderation.

doodah said:

"Carmen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

FOB said:

Maybe because Laureen is being [censored] about someone else's decisions?

It

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

occurred to me that there was some pot calling kettle black here but I

bit

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

my tongue.

Background: The last time he posted this stuff she was very honest
about her own experiences vis-a-vis the food consumption issue that
lead to the WLS. She related that it took brutal honesty to get her on
the road to the relative bounding good health she has now, and that's
what she was giving him. Lots of other people also told him that the
alcohol was loaded with calories and he ought to ditch it. He said he
didn't think it was really a problem. Here he comes again, with
another post about a booze-filled month. Laureen's post was [censored],
but I don't see how it was the pot calling the kettle black. Alcohol
is *not* this guy's friend. He seems to have a problem, she was
pointing that out.
I don't know what the hell Barbara's problem is.

Carmen

Who is this Barbara person?

You already missed your chance to play dumb. For future reference,
that needed to be your first reaction - the one you wasted that one
calling me Inspector Gadget.

Carmen

I'm not being [censored]. I'm being honest and straight forth. I wish
someone had been that way with me long ago. I got patronized a lot. It
wasn't the best thing for me. Displayname readily admits he drinks a
lot of alcohol what he dessnt say is it might be a problem. Had I at
one point said " I sure eat a lot" Im sure someone in here would have
chimed in and " Maybe you have a problem" Thats may have made me
think... "Well maybe I do" I wasn't being vicious. I was trying to be
realistic.

I saw a post from this fellow a week ago and chimed in , I then
apologized if I offended him and left it at that. I jumped on this one
because he is once again touting his alcohol consumption as being good
for him.

I'm not judging him. I was simply stating an observation and replied to
his post. We are entitled to our opinion and just because we may say
something that upsets another person doesn't necessarily mean we cant
say it does it?? My feelings have never been spared in here. I have
had way worse happen to me.
I was simply being honest but dogged out for doing so.

Laureen

FOB said:

Maybe because Laureen is being [censored] about someone else's decisions? It
occurred to me that there was some pot calling kettle black here but I bit
my tongue.

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| Barbara why are you so [censored] to Laureen about her WLS decision? It
| was her money and her decision. If you thought your happy ass was
| anonymous behind that nym you were clearly mistaken my dear. Almost
| nobody's life is capable of standing up to close scrutiny, and yours
| isn't when it comes to being a "poster child for moderation" either.
|
| Carmen <----- Look Barb, no nym!

One other thing. it is not like I called Displayname an alcoholic,
though a couple of you are acting like I said that by your tone in the
posts. That woud be nasty, vile, and totally uncalled for. I simply
asked a question.

Some of you know me well enough to know that the person who lives in a
glass house shouldnt throw stones, which is me.

I am also not against drinking in moderation. I have never been much of
a drinker but after hearing how a WLS patient gets drunk so fast, I had
to see for myself. I have found that there really is no drinking in
moderation for a WLS patient. One small half a glass of wine and I am
[censored] faced nowadays. I do on occasion indulge myself but only in the
company of someone who can look out for me for the brief time I am
smashed. GASP! Its really is no fun to drink now as one doesnt get the
warm fuzzies, they get stink ass drunk alomost immediately. There is no
happy medium with hard liquor at all. It takesexactly 3 minutes to get
drunk with a half shot of Tequila and 1/2 hour to sober up. One
metabolizes alcohol fast. Its a weird life now. One light beer over a
couple of hours appears social but keeps me sober I have found.
Laureen

DisplayName said:

I sure drink a lot.

On 7 Jun 2006 09:06:33 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:

|Laureen wrote:
|> We both know 8 pounds could have been gone the first week with eating
|> right. Pure meats and veggies and no booze. He admits he sure drinks a
|> lot. Excessive alcohol is counter productive. Weighing as much as he
|> does he should have and could have dumped way more if he hadnt imbibed
|> so much on the brew. His calories are coming from alcohol. I could eat
|> salad and drink wine and lose weight but how good would that be for me?
|
|So what if he likes to drink? So what if he could lose faster? If
|he's content with his loss and his diet, I don't see why you need to
|follow him around and [censored] about his drinking.

Wow! Why the anger?

The OP posted here asking for advice about his eating plan and Laureen
-- and others -- gave the logical (and appropriate) response. She
wasn't preaching about the moral evils of drinking, she was merely
stating the truth about drinking interfering with weight loss. Some
people hate it though when pesky facts get in the way of their
personal justifications.

On 7 Jun 2006 09:06:54 -0700, "Carmen" <[email hidden]> wrote:

|doodah wrote:
|> "Tom G" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|> news:N%qhg.251183$WI1.229896@pd7tw2no...
|> >
|> > "Laureen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
|> > news:[email hidden]...
|> > > Ya think? Why do you even bother posting this [censored] anymore? I gave you
|> > > the benefit of the doubt last post but it's plain and simple now...
|> > > there is a problem, you have a problem. ANy idea what it is????
|> > > Laureen
|> >
|> > What seems easy to some, may be difficult for others. Don't you agree?
|>
|> Laureen had to get her guts cut out to keep from shoveling so much grub in,
|> so she's not exactly the poster child for moderation.
|
|Barbara why are you so [censored] to Laureen about her WLS decision? It
|was her money and her decision. If you thought your happy ass was
|anonymous behind that nym you were clearly mistaken my dear. Almost
|nobody's life is capable of standing up to close scrutiny, and yours
|isn't when it comes to being a "poster child for moderation" either.
|
|Carmen <----- Look Barb, no nym!

Barbara is a sick troll; I've had her killfiled for about a month ever
since she posted what I imagine she thought was a cruel comment about
my being a gimp because I've had a stroke. (Also thinking that she
was being clever by "hiding" her real identity). In that same post
she again commented on Laureen's WLS.. Fortunately I only feel sorry
for people with such low self-esteem that they spend their time and
energy trying to bring others down to their level. How sad that she
apparently has no real life. I killfiled her because I don't want
to waste my time reading completely useless drivel.

On 7 Jun 2006 14:12:14 -0700, [email hidden] wrote:

|Carmen wrote:
|> Background: The last time he posted this stuff she was very honest
|> about her own experiences vis-a-vis the food consumption issue that
|> lead to the WLS. She related that it took brutal honesty to get her on
|> the road to the relative bounding good health she has now, and that's
|> what she was giving him. Lots of other people also told him that the
|> alcohol was loaded with calories and he ought to ditch it. He said he
|> didn't think it was really a problem.
|
|Well, he's not posting to an alcoholic newsgroup, but a low-carb
|newsgroup.
|
All the more reason that it should be honestly pointed out that the
body burns alcohol before it will burn stored fat and will
consequently inhibit weight loss.

Sheesh! You ranted like you just smoked some of that crack!!! My
thought: if you post something you have to expect to get some sort of
reply. It's kind of like if you dish it out ya gotta take it. But if it
gets too hot in the ol kitchen, GTF out!!!!!

FOB said:

Applause!!!

In news:[email hidden],
[email hidden] <[email hidden]> stated

| So what if he likes to drink? So what if he could lose faster? If
| he's content with his loss and his diet, I don't see why you need to
| follow him around and [censored] about his drinking.
|
| I'm from a family of alcoholics and drug addicts. The only time
| anyone in my family has ever been skinny is when they were on crack.
| I have major *issues* around alcohol and drug use and generally don't
| hang out with people who use much. That's my choice.
|
| That being said, I don't see why when he posts about his weight loss
| on a low-carb newsgroup, we should give him [censored]. It's his life and
| his choice. Lots of folks drink and not all of them have a "problem"
| with it. And even if he has a "problem," so what? His choice.
|
| I just don't see why he's got to put up with you giving him [censored] every
| time he posts, just cause you don't agree with how he's doing it. I
| don't agree with how you did it, but I've never felt the need to
| follow-up all your posts telling you so. You're happy with your
| choices, so who I am to [censored] at you for them being different than my
| choices?
|
| Jeez... give the guy a break, he's not saying *you* should drink.

SO..... if I came in here and said: "Im going to try low carb but I'm
not giving up sugar free candy." I then come back and start another
thread and say "Boy I sure ate a [censored] of candy... BUT.....I lost 8
pounds this month eating that sugar free candy and salad."You mean to
tell me I wouldnt get a butt load of [censored] from all of you!! I THINK
SO!!!!!!!! Even if the candy is sugar free it isnt good for you to eat
it in large quantities. He drinks admittedly in LARGE quantiities and
often. Its all the same.
Laureen

Quoted message said:

Laureen said:

We both know 8 pounds could have been gone the first week with eating
right. Pure meats and veggies and no booze. He admits he sure drinks a
lot. Excessive alcohol is counter productive. Weighing as much as he
does he should have and could have dumped way more if he hadnt imbibed
so much on the brew. His calories are coming from alcohol. I could eat
salad and drink wine and lose weight but how good would that be for me?

So what if he likes to drink? So what if he could lose faster? If
he's content with his loss and his diet, I don't see why you need to
follow him around and [censored] about his drinking.

I'm from a family of alcoholics and drug addicts. The only time anyone
in my family has ever been skinny is when they were on crack. I have
major *issues* around alcohol and drug use and generally don't hang out
with people who use much. That's my choice.

That being said, I don't see why when he posts about his weight loss on
a low-carb newsgroup, we should give him [censored]. It's his life and his
choice. Lots of folks drink and not all of them have a "problem" with
it. And even if he has a "problem," so what? His choice.

I just don't see why he's got to put up with you giving him [censored] every
time he posts, just cause you don't agree with how he's doing it. I
don't agree with how you did it, but I've never felt the need to
follow-up all your posts telling you so. You're happy with your
choices, so who I am to [censored] at you for them being different than my
choices?

Jeez... give the guy a break, he's not saying *you* should drink.

Marengo said:

Wow! Why the anger?

I dunno, I wasn't aware of being angry.

Quoted message said:

The OP posted here asking for advice about his eating plan and Laureen
-- and others -- gave the logical (and appropriate) response. She
wasn't preaching about the moral evils of drinking, she was merely
stating the truth about drinking interfering with weight loss. Some
people hate it though when pesky facts get in the way of their
personal justifications.

First time around, sure. This time, he was posting his *results.* And
he got results in spite of drinking. I agree he drinks a lot, as his
table showed. But... so what?

I personally think what Laureen did was way the hell more unhealthy
than drinking, even heavy drinking. But again... so what? Her body,
her life, her choice.

Laureen gets [censored] from a few [censored] on here every time she posts
about her own results. Seems to me she'd "get" why it's inappropriate
as hell to flame someone for getting the results they wanted.

Laureen said:

Sheesh! You ranted like you just smoked some of that crack!!! My
thought: if you post something you have to expect to get some sort of
reply. It's kind of like if you dish it out ya gotta take it. But if it
gets too hot in the ol kitchen, GTF out!!!!!

You can take your own advice, babe.

I caught the grin, thanks <G>

I've actually always been quite the ectomorph, actually, and in
terms of my booze intake, I'll be honest, I drink typically 2 beers per
evening on average, sometimes more. Been doing that since I started
low-carbing, started at around 260 pounds, now hovering at around 200.
Things I've already mentioned still hold - I run 20-30 miles per week,
don't count carbs or calories, and eat copious salad, berries, eggs,
bacon, steak, nuts, cheese, and the like.

Maybe I am a freak. But I am what I consider a "heavy" drinker, and
although I'm probably on at least the borderline of what most might
consider healthy drinking (excepting Australians perhaps), it hasn't
seemed to hinder my weight loss any.

Am I skinny fat? I dunno. I seem skinnier. I have veins on my arms
and torso now, hadn't seen those since high school.

Carmen said:

FOB said:

Or he could have different standards than you.

In news:[email hidden],
Carmen <[email hidden]> stated

| You could be a skinny fat person, meaning you have the appearance of a
| person of normal weight, but have a higher than healthy percentage of
| body fat. Or you could be a freak. <G>

He's reached his goal weight, and his post broadly hints that he's done
so using alcohol, and in the context of this discussion it would have
to be somewhat liberally to be meaningful. Based on his being at goal
weight, and the fact that the body must first attend to the disposition
of alcohol before it can do anything else (like burn body fat) the
ketones that he ran on (which eventually came from the alcohol after it
was converted to acetate and some other stuff happened to it) provided
fuel that his body fat could have been providing. Without being burned
the body fat isn't going to go anywhere. It's going to constitute a
disproportionately larger percentage of the smaller goal weight than if
there had not been alcohol fuel to interfere in the process of weight
loss.
Now, with that all laid out do you see how his standards do not enter
into the equation?
A "healthy percentage of body fat" is determined by correlation with
the incidence of diseases and disorders associated with it in a studied
population. My quip about him possibly being "a freak" was just that,
a quip, meant to denote the possibility that all the normal rules of
metabolism do not apply to him. Normally I put a "NOTE TO THE HUMOR
IMPAIRED" disclaimer on such things. I forgot this time. Please
forgive me.

Carmen

Carmen said:

FOB said:

I see how his standard for tolerable body fat may differ from yours.

Of course. That would come under personal taste, and as such would be
purely subjective. "Healthy body weight" isn't subjective though.

Carmen

<snip>

I consider being substantially within the "normal" range of the BMI
as a reasonable, albeit highly imprecise objective indicator of
"healthy body weight."

I personally think fat-to-muscle ratio and body shape (for example,
absence of significant abdominal adiposity) to be far more important
indicators of healtth than simply the linear combination of one's
weight and height. And I have far more important things to do than dunk
myself in a water tank or get pinched with calipers.