"Glycemic Load" study

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It
does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of
the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

Were they actually following Atkin's diet? Low carb in general keeps my
blood sugar low. I have no 3pm sleepies, no routine blood swings, none of
the stuff I had on low fat. I simply feel better.

--
Bob in CT

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All the
rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is much more
complex than looking at a single diet as the answer. Lots of things
work....if you count calories. dkw

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected.

It does not say what the carb counts were. I think a good design
for this study would be the same number of carb grams using
different sources to get different glycemic indexes.

Quoted message said:

It does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Since they do not specify the carb counts and do not mention
ketosis that's jumping to a conclusion. Consider the studies
that do mention ketosis that report 5% greater loss rates when
compared to low fatters.

Note well - I think Atkins metabolic advantage is proportional
to the amount of fat to use. Get down to 10 to go (or even 20
to go for men) and the advantage drops to zero. The advantage
can be dramatic for folks with 100+ to lose - Consider the
unreasonable loss rate that 2Phat reports and expects to repeat.

Quoted message said:

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

The metabolic advantage may sound really cool, and is real as
long as amount to lose is considered, but it is of secondary
importance to most folks. I think appetite reduction and lack of
carb cravings is far and away the biggest advantage of low
carbing. And in the case of Atkins removing food intolerance
addictive responses through the elimination aspect of the system.

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

Quoted message said:

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It
does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of
the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All the
rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is much more
complex than looking at a single diet as the answer. Lots of things
work....if you count calories. dkw

Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start losing
slowly, when I low carb.
You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb did not
chose this as their favorite way of eating.

~Melodie~

On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It
does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of
the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

Quoted message said:

To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All the
rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is much more
complex than looking at a single diet as the answer. Lots of things
work....if you count calories. dkw

Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start losing
slowly, when I low carb.
You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb did not
chose this as their favorite way of eating.

~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric requirements.
That's the point. People might argue about what mix for fat, protein
and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That was my point. Try a
little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw

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

Quoted message said:

On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate
> equal
> calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It
> does
> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Quoted message said:

> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior
> of
> the
> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Quoted message said:

> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

Quoted message said:

To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All the
rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is much more
complex than looking at a single diet as the answer. Lots of things
work....if you count calories. dkw

Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start losing
slowly, when I low carb.
You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb did
not
chose this as their favorite way of eating.

~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric requirements.
That's the point. People might argue about what mix for fat, protein
and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That was my point. Try a
little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw

I can eat VERY LITTLE, and starve, and gain weight if I don't carefully
choose what I am eating. Conversely, I know a gal, in her early 50's, who is
tall, extremely lean, and cannot get enough food down her gullet to satisfy
her extreme hunger, much less exceed her body's need for food. She stated
that she "eats like a pig". She also sleeps a lot, is a homebody and
doesn't do much exercize. Most people could eat me under the table, I mean I
like food a lot, but I really dislike being over full, and naturally just
STOP eating when I reach a certain saiety point. I would love a month of
just eating to satisfaction, without any moral values attached to it, even
in my own mind.

What my caloric requirements are seem to be even less then the nutrient
requirements to get enough vitamins/minerals to maintain health...oh yea,
did you know you can be fat AND malnourished at the same time? I gain
control, when I eliminate carbohydrates for the most part, especially
grains/flour, from the food I eat. I find it hard to overeat meat, and enjoy
a great salad. Would I love to eat a whole-wheat bagel with non-fat cream
cheese, followed by a half an orange, and have rice and chicken with
vegetables for lunch/dinner, and rice cakes with an apple? Oh, yeah, I
would...I am weird though, and:

1) Get carbohydrate triggered, and am left hungry and wanting more,
ESPECIALLY when eating grains

2) I would gain weight on this diet.

So what ever dude, believe what you want, that people just LOVE being fat,
and congratulations on the purposeful misunderstanding of my use of the word
"bully"...bully for you 🙂~

--
~Melodie~ Aka AnonomissX

email hidden said:

On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate

equal

Quoted message said:

> calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected.

It

Quoted message said:

> does
> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Quoted message said:

> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating

behavior of

Quoted message said:

> the
> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

Quoted message said:

> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in

dieting.

Quoted message said:

To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All the
rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is much more
complex than looking at a single diet as the answer. Lots of things
work....if you count calories. dkw

Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start
losing
slowly, when I low carb.
You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb did
not
chose this as their favorite way of eating.

~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric requirements.
That's the point. People might argue about what mix for fat, protein
and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That was my point. Try a
little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw

Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat dieting, and my
blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't see how you can eat oats
for breakfast and not be hungry an hour later. It's simply not possible.

--
Bob in CT

I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which dense carbs
spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin dependent diabetic. Oats,
rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas, they all do
this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of it, I
was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat anything and
not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there really such an animal
out there? I just don't know anymore.........

Carol j

Bob in CT said:

email hidden said:

On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

> On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate
>> equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be
>> expected. It does
>> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

>> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
>> behavior of the
>> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
>> regulator.

>> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
>> dieting.

> To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
> glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
> 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
> well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
> grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All
> the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is
> much more complex than looking at a single diet as the answer.
> Lots of things work....if you count calories. dkw

Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start
losing
slowly, when I low carb.
You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb
did not
chose this as their favorite way of eating.

~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That
was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw

Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat dieting,
and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't see how you
can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour later. It's
simply not possible.

It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat whatever
they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.

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

Quoted message said:

I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which dense carbs
spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin dependent diabetic.
Oats,
rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas, they all
do
this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of it, I
was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat anything and
not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there really such an
animal
out there? I just don't know anymore.........

Carol j

Bob in CT said:

email hidden said:

On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>
wrote:
> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email hidden]...
>
>
>
>
>
>> On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate
>>> equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be
>>> expected. It does
>>> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.
>
>>> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
>>> behavior of the
>>> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
>>> regulator.
>
>>> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
>>> dieting.
>
>> To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
>> glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
>> 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
>> well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
>> grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All
>> the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is
>> much more complex than looking at a single diet as the answer.
>> Lots of things work....if you count calories. dkw
>
> Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start
> losing
> slowly, when I low carb.
> You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb
> did not
> chose this as their favorite way of eating.
>
> ~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That
was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw

Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat dieting,
and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't see how you
can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour later. It's
simply not possible.

There are definitely people who can do that, but I think that the
prevalence of those who cannot is vastly underrated.

Cubit said:

It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
whatever
they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.

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

Quoted message said:

I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which dense
carbs
spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin dependent diabetic.
Oats,
rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas, they all
do
this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of it,
I
was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat anything
and
not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there really such an
animal
out there? I just don't know anymore.........

Carol j

Bob in CT said:

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:40:33 -0400, [email hidden]
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>
> wrote:
>> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email hidden]...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate
>>>> equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be
>>>> expected. It does
>>>> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.
>>
>>>> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
>>>> behavior of the
>>>> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
>>>> regulator.
>>
>>>> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
>>>> dieting.
>>
>>> To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
>>> glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
>>> 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
>>> well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under 10
>>> grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day. All
>>> the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting is
>>> much more complex than looking at a single diet as the answer.
>>> Lots of things work....if you count calories. dkw
>>
>> Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start
>> losing
>> slowly, when I low carb.
>> You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb
>> did not
>> chose this as their favorite way of eating.
>>
>> ~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
> requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
> for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That
> was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw
>

Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat dieting,
and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't see how you
can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour later. It's
simply not possible.

--
Bob in CT

Nope, that not be the case with me. I've had gastric by pass, this started
around the holidays..........it's always normal fasting, always. It only
spikes/crashes depending on what I've eaten. They call that reactive
hyper/hypo glycemia or so my doc tells me.........

Carol J

Cubit said:

It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
whatever they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.

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

Quoted message said:

I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which dense
carbs spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin dependent
diabetic. Oats,
rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas, they
all do
this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of
it, I was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat
anything and not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there
really such an animal
out there? I just don't know anymore.........

Carol j

Bob in CT said:

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:40:33 -0400, [email hidden]
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~" <[email hidden]>
> wrote:
>> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>>
>> news:[email hidden]...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>>>> The key to the report on this recent study is that people who
>>>> ate equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is to
>>>> be expected. It does
>>>> run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.
>>
>>>> The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
>>>> behavior of the
>>>> dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
>>>> regulator.
>>
>>>> Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
>>>> dieting.
>>
>>> To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb, high
>>> glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133 lbs at
>>> 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up very
>>> well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat (under
>>> 10 grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams per day.
>>> All the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and fruit. Dieting
>>> is much more complex than looking at a single diet as the answer.
>>> Lots of things work....if you count calories. dkw
>>
>> Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining, start
>> losing
>> slowly, when I low carb.
>> You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low carb
>> did not
>> chose this as their favorite way of eating.
>>
>> ~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
> requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
> for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count. That
> was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables. LOL dkw
>

Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat dieting,
and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't see how you
can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour later. It's
simply not possible.

Carol J wrote:
:: Nope, that not be the case with me. I've had gastric by pass, this
:: started around the holidays..........it's always normal fasting,
:: always. It only spikes/crashes depending on what I've eaten. They
:: call that reactive hyper/hypo glycemia or so my doc tells me.........
::

That gets you out of the "normal" catagory and into a group with a
compromised, but perhaps not diabetic, glucose processing system. For
health young people who are most normal, they will be rock steady. But
since there are degrees of impaired glucose metabolism, it becomes a matter
of who far (and precisely how) away from normal you are before you start
getting the various other "unkind" (from an insurance standpoint, i mean)
labels applied to you.

:: Carol J
::
::
::
:: Cubit wrote:
::: It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
::: whatever they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.
:::
:::
::: "Carol J" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
::: news:[email hidden]...
::::
:::: I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which
:::: dense carbs spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin
:::: dependent diabetic. Oats,
:::: rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas,
:::: they all do
:::: this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of
:::: it, I was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat
:::: anything and not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there
:::: really such an animal
:::: out there? I just don't know anymore.........
::::
:::: Carol j
::::
::::
:::: Bob in CT wrote:
::::: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:40:33 -0400, [email hidden]
::::: <[email hidden]> wrote:
:::::
:::::: On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~"
:::::: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::::::: <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:::::::
::::::: news:[email hidden]...
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::: On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::::::::: The key to the report on this recent study is that people who
::::::::: ate equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is
::::::::: to be expected. It does
::::::::: run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.
:::::::
::::::::: The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
::::::::: behavior of the
::::::::: dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
::::::::: regulator.
:::::::
::::::::: Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
::::::::: dieting.
:::::::
:::::::: To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb,
:::::::: high glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133
:::::::: lbs at 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up
:::::::: very well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat
:::::::: (under 10 grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams
:::::::: per day. All the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and
:::::::: fruit. Dieting is much more complex than looking at a single
:::::::: diet as the answer. Lots of things work....if you count
:::::::: calories. dkw
:::::::
::::::: Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining,
::::::: start losing
::::::: slowly, when I low carb.
::::::: You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low
::::::: carb did not
::::::: chose this as their favorite way of eating.
:::::::
::::::: ~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -
:::::::
::::::: - Show quoted text -
::::::
:::::: You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
:::::: requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
:::::: for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count.
:::::: That was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables.
:::::: LOL dkw
::::::
:::::
::::: Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat
::::: dieting, and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't
::::: see how you can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour
::::: later. It's simply not possible.

Well, I'm told that it will probably resolve itself in time.............it's
a frequent side effect of the RNY surgery. But I don't mind really, it
makes me stay on a proper diet. Even with how much I've lost, even knowing
what I know? In today's world when you work full time and have an active
social life.........it's hard to eat no processed carbs. It's a major
effort for me every day.

Carol J

"Roger Zoul" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
Carol J wrote:
:: Nope, that not be the case with me. I've had gastric by pass, this
:: started around the holidays..........it's always normal fasting,
:: always. It only spikes/crashes depending on what I've eaten. They
:: call that reactive hyper/hypo glycemia or so my doc tells me.........
::

That gets you out of the "normal" catagory and into a group with a
compromised, but perhaps not diabetic, glucose processing system. For
health young people who are most normal, they will be rock steady. But
since there are degrees of impaired glucose metabolism, it becomes a matter
of who far (and precisely how) away from normal you are before you start
getting the various other "unkind" (from an insurance standpoint, i mean)
labels applied to you.

:: Carol J
::
::
::
:: Cubit wrote:
::: It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
::: whatever they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.
:::
:::
::: "Carol J" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
::: news:[email hidden]...
::::
:::: I have the same issue post gastric bypass, Bob. Besides which
:::: dense carbs spike/crash my blood sugar worse than an insulin
:::: dependent diabetic. Oats,
:::: rice, wheat of any kind, sweet potatoes even........corn, peas,
:::: they all do
:::: this now. Maybe they did prior to surgery and I wasn't as aware of
:::: it, I was insulin resistant for alot of years. People that can eat
:::: anything and not have flutuations in their blood sugars, are there
:::: really such an animal
:::: out there? I just don't know anymore.........
::::
:::: Carol j
::::
::::
:::: Bob in CT wrote:
::::: On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 23:40:33 -0400, [email hidden]
::::: <[email hidden]> wrote:
:::::
:::::: On Apr 20, 5:22 pm, "AnonomissX aka ~Melodie~"
:::::: <[email hidden]> wrote:
::::::: <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:::::::
::::::: news:[email hidden]...
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::
:::::::: On Apr 20, 11:55 am, "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote:
::::::::: The key to the report on this recent study is that people who
::::::::: ate equal calories had the same weightloss results. This is
::::::::: to be expected. It does
::::::::: run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.
:::::::
::::::::: The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating
::::::::: behavior of the
::::::::: dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie
::::::::: regulator.
:::::::
::::::::: Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in
::::::::: dieting.
:::::::
:::::::: To me it is not an advantage at all. I eat a very high carb,
:::::::: high glycemic diet or 1800 calories per day and I weight 133
:::::::: lbs at 5'8" (male), so I am quite thin. The carbs fill me up
:::::::: very well...namely farina, oatmeal, grits. I eat almost no fat
:::::::: (under 10 grams per day) and adequate protein, about 60 grams
:::::::: per day. All the rest is carbs from cereal, vegetables and
:::::::: fruit. Dieting is much more complex than looking at a single
:::::::: diet as the answer. Lots of things work....if you count
:::::::: calories. dkw
:::::::
::::::: Well, bully for you. I gain weight that way. I stop gaining,
::::::: start losing
::::::: slowly, when I low carb.
::::::: You CANNOT blanket everybody, and those of us who have to low
::::::: carb did not
::::::: chose this as their favorite way of eating.
:::::::
::::::: ~Melodie~- Hide quoted text -
:::::::
::::::: - Show quoted text -
::::::
:::::: You don't gain weight if you don't eat over your caloric
:::::: requirements. That's the point. People might argue about what mix
:::::: for fat, protein and carbs is healthy, but calories DO count.
:::::: That was my point. Try a little less bully and more vegetables.
:::::: LOL dkw
::::::
:::::
::::: Ah, not all (or many) of us are like you. I tried low fat
::::: dieting, and my blood sugar went through the roof. Plus, I can't
::::: see how you can eat oats for breakfast and not be hungry an hour
::::: later. It's simply not possible.

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

Quoted message said:

It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
whatever they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.

Not true, or the Glycemic index would be meaningless. If a person with
normal glucose metabolism eats something the blood sugar rises. The
level of glucose drives other functions like the release of insulin or
the making of glycogen etc.

del

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Imagine that.

Quoted message said:

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

So the apestat doesn't work?

Quoted message said:

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

If the apestat works, why should it? I mean, that little d00d counts
cals, right? with is little. micro-bomb-calorimeter, right?
--
http://www.steppenwolf.com/lyr/mnnster.html

Del Cecchi wrote:
:: "Cubit" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
:: news:[email hidden]...
::: It is my understanding that a "normal" non-diabetic person can eat
::: whatever they want and maintain a steady BG of 80, or so.
:::
:::
:: Not true, or the Glycemic index would be meaningless. If a person
:: with normal glucose metabolism eats something the blood sugar rises.
:: The level of glucose drives other functions like the release of
:: insulin or the making of glycogen etc.
::
:: del

Oh boy....some bodies can detect glucose increase so quickly that insulin
dumps before glucose can significantly change. That's what a normal body
does. A diabetic body doesn't response as it should either with insulin or
doesn't react once it is there. Either way, the glucose levels remain high.

Hey Mu,

We have here the theory of the appestat, which I modify, and also, my ideas
that some specific factors of the modern diet imbalance the appestat. So,
modern obesity is from an induced malfunction of the appestat.

I think the calorie designations for most foods, which may have come from
the bomb calorimeter are correct.

Your calling [sarcastically?] the appestat a micro-bomb-calorimeter is
interesting. The biological mechanism is undoubtedly quite complex.

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

Quoted message said:

Cubit said:

The key to the report on this recent study is that people who ate equal
calories had the same weightloss results. This is to be expected. It
does
run contrary to Atkins' metabolic advantage theory, however.

Imagine that.

Quoted message said:

The advantage of a low glycemic load manifests in the eating behavior of
the
dieter, as guided by the "appestat," the internal calorie regulator.

So the apestat doesn't work?

Quoted message said:

Reducing hunger through low carb is an important advantage in dieting.

If the apestat works, why should it? I mean, that little d00d counts
cals, right? with is little. micro-bomb-calorimeter, right?
--
http://www.steppenwolf.com/lyr/mnnster.html