"Doug Lerner" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:
[email protected]...
> Tom, I certainly don't want to take away from your results. I was sure I
> replied to everybody who replied to my notes (at least to people who
> responded in a friendly way 
). If I accidentally overlooked your
> message I apologize.
Well, I'm sorry if I interpreted a non-response as an ignore. I was just
wondering why myself and others seem to have gotten an 'F' on their papers
and Travis got a resounding 'A'. You see, it seemed to many of us that your
questions were indeed genuine(all past posts too) and needed clarification
on what works and what doesn't. Speaking for myself, I thought I could
provide those answers.
Since I don't have any prepared texts that I cut and paste a response
and then fill in (your name here), I try to put in as much relevent info
pertaining to you as possible. Any lengthy post requires a little bit of
research as well to make sure a person is not spouting off untrue facts. Any
mistakes are quickly pointed out in a public forum like this one. A full
explanation of everything is difficult. There is so much to cover and
sometimes an important part can be accidently left out. We want to make sure
that what we tell you is the best that we can give. Of course, a YMMV clause
can help to say it is only a posters opinion and nothing else and can keep
me from being blasted by others that may not agree with anything I say. This
is why a lot of people may sound crabby if they say something like, "Buy a
book and read it, and then see if you have any questions".
Some questions that are asked are so obvious that a person hasn't read
any info about lo-carb at all. Reading a book or website that fully explains
the processes of eating that way helps a lot. It's so easy to ask a
question. It takes 10 times longer to answer properly, unless it is a one
liner joke or dig. So, asking for someones tips and daily menu with calorie
contents, fat/protein/carb % takes a while to compose. It would be far
easier to just lurk, read the posts and just shoot out a one line snipe once
in a while to be funny than to waste one's time on gathering data. I
answered to a post you made a few weeks ago. The funny thing is, I got a
"Nice Post Tom" from 2 people and 1 "I'm going to save this post so I can
read it on days that I feel like things are not going well with lo-carb." I
was happy that somebody could use the info. You were upset that the diet
wasn't working, so I can understand that you did not read the post. You did
not post for a couple of weeks. I even posted a "Ping Doug Lerner". I wanted
to know if you were still out there and possibly just lurking.
I only post replies to people that I think I can be of some help.
Sometimes my answer is not what you want to hear either, but what I think
you are doing wrong. As an example, if you post that you eat 2 or 3 Atkins
bars and 4 slices of lo-carb bread everyday, and then ask if there are
anymore products you can include in your daily menu, I'm going to give you a
talk about why I think you are going the wrong way on the diet. Did it
answer the original post? No, but I see a different problem than "what
products to buy". Some people believe that the diet is very hard to do
without these products. I think natural foods is the answer.
Most answers are not meant to be a flame, just an opinion. It's best to
just thank everyone for their response and make your own decision. If a
poster continues to do something that is felt not right, they will of course
get a blast for whining and a few "I told you so, but you wouldn't listen".
I'm not trying to get extra credit or anything like that. Many people
that answer will have good, but different opinions, and I don't claim to be
smarter than anyone else. I'm just kind of letting you know that people are
taking time out of there day to answer questions hoping they can help. They
wouldn't answer in any lengthy fashion if they didn't want to try and help.
I've spent a couple of hours here alone trying to word everything in a
manner that you won't find offensive.
>
> When I posted I was specifically looking for examples of people who
> started like me - extremely obese, over 100 lb overweight - and lost a
> tremendous amount of weight, getting to normal, or near normal weight.
Yes, you have. I may be out of line answering because I don't fit the
profile. I had difficulty losing weight before lo-carb. But I see what you
mean that you have a bigger headwall than me.
>
> What I found in response was a lot of people with my experience - in a
> matter of a few months it was easy to drop 30 lbs or so, representing
> 10% or a bit more of weight.
And that is why some of us may erroneously believe that we know what
you are going through. Maybe losing only 30 lbs is way easier than 130 lbs.
To me it seems the same, just more. A larger weight seems to allow some
people to lose at a faster rate than thinner ones in the beginning. For
others, the shear amount to be lost may seem unachievable(to them) and their
heart may not be in it.
>
> After than, I also found that other people - except those who admitted
> to restricted calories - ran into the same problem I did: they stalled
> and didn't lose more.
And that's why we try to help by suggesting stuff like, no artificial
sweetners, no frankenfoods, more water. It's possible that your weight gain
was more because your diet was more refined than mine. My diet changes were
a little dramatic, but yours may have been even more so, and therefore to
cut out everything seems like a disaster. I only counted calories in the
first week or so, just out of curiosity. I was averaging around 1500. The
way I started was to eat the same amount of meat as I normally would, but
load up the rest of the plate with salad veggies. Sometimes I had to snack
on nuts, cheese, or my homemade beef jerky to get by between meals. After I
started to lose quite a few pounds, I ate more, but it was still the same
foods. Just more of them. I upped my hamburger at meal time to the
occasional 2 patties instead of 1 if I was really hungry. When ever I felt
the need to snack, I would ask myself, "Am I really hungry? Or just want
something to do?" If it was boredom, I would make myself some green tea, or
sip on Superstore's bubbly spring water( not soda water. Somebody pointed
out here that I shouldn't be drinking high sodium soda water. Haha.)
>
> That's why I currently believe that all low-carb does is help you
> control your appetite so you can then apply a low-calorie diet - but
> that a low-calorie diet is necessary to getting down to a normal weight.
Not really. I still am quite strict on the carbs. I feel just fine, with
no bad side affects on health. That was some of the other posts that some of
us tried to help you with. I thought that we had all done a good job trying
to explain why lo-carb is the best way to eat to lose weight. I am
maitaining my weight quite easily on lo-carb. I don't think it is neccessary
to go lo-cal until you are within a few pounds of goal, then admitedly, it
does seem to be harder to get lower for some people unless they do restrict
calories. But you can worry about that after the first 100 lbs. I also think
that many people try to increase their carbs too much while on "ongoing
weightloss phase" and possibly trying to incorporate too many lo-carb
products way to early. People try to justify that it is ok because they saw
it mentioned once in the Atkins' book. They fail to realize that meat and
veggies is mentioned many more times, than lo-carb bars in the book as well,
but somehow the former sticks out way more than the latter.
I don't know what you normally eat, but I do remember some. I'll bet that
you don't eat as lo-carb as I do even now. My daily carbs average around 50
to 70gr/day. Still no potatoes, rice, pasta, white bread, and no sugar or
sweetners. I have eaten an occasional multi-grain bread, (one piece only)
with a wack of Adam's peanut butter. An occasional bowl of oatmeal with a
few raisins and peacans. I have just recently added beans(in chili, homemade
and mostly meat). We used to also make homemade green splitpea soup a lot,
and I'm going to make a pot possibly next week. My serving will have a nice
big piece of ham, and the whole onion that stews all day in the soup and
maybe about a cup of the soup. To tell you the truth, I have no idea what
the carb count will be. I don't think it will be a lot, but if it ends up
being to much, I will adjust my serving size, or eliminate it if I find it
is way to high. I don't intend to eat high carb again, but I am
experimenting a little. Hey, I've been doing this for a year(in January),
and have maintained my current weight for 9 months. I don't know everything,
and I still learn new things all the time.
Mostly, I'm trying to appease my Dad and some co-workers that feel I'm a
little to militant with the carbs. So if I have a slice of bread that they
offer me, it's still by my rules, not there's. I, in turn try to encourage
them to eat less refined stuff, and especially not to eat high fat with high
carbs like french fries, and doughnuts. I have noticed that no one eats
white bread anymore at work, and most are quite eager to tell me that they
have cut out drinking pop. We did an experiment after finding that one can
of coke has 7 level tablespoons of sugar. We were all suprized by the
amount, and a taste test revealed a similar taste to flat pop. It's a start,
but still not enough in my opinion.
>
> It just seems to me there are lots of people like me who start out
> weighing a lot (in my case 288 lb), lose to about the 250 level by just
> counting carbs and then get stuck.
I am not in your shoes, so I don't qualify as you have stated. I really
don't know it feels like to be your size. But sometimes I wonder if people
are thwarting their success by twisting around what they have read to suit
there needs or desires. You yourself have tried a few lo-carb products, and
have asked for places that it could be found in Japan. I have never tried
any of them. So, unless you have tried to eat the way I do you can't be sure
if those foods don't work for you. If no products can be found, then that's
great. Stick to the original eating plan as described in any lo-carb book,
but without the certainly(in my opinion) questionable "lo-carb refined in a
different way **** for food" My experience says, you can't replace bread or
pasta, so don't try. Eat meat and veggies instead. The lo-carb products
themselves seem to play with the carb totals leading you to believe you are
eating less carbs, when in fact you are eating way more. I also don't know
what your own carb levels are. You maybe eating moderate carb instead of low
carb. Some peoples carb level for losing can be around 50gr. others could be
as high as 100 or more gr/day. Moderate carb may not be low enough, you may
have to do actual lo-carb to be able to get the benifits of appetite
supression. I know in the past that you have battled with lo-carb verses
lo-cal, and may not be doing either properly if you are trying to do both.
Some people can't seem to believe that getting energy from fat is the way to
do it. They are still stuck in "fat is bad mode".
>
> So I was looking for counter examples.
>
> Travis is the *only* person here so far who seems to be what I would
> call a true success story for LOW CARB ONLY. Unless Travis also counts
> calories, which he did not mention.
True, he fits the description of who you wanted to hear from. I didn't
know it was such an important factor. His story was good.
>
> If I am wrong then I would not only gladly admit it I would be HAPPY to
> be wrong. Because I wish low-carb did work! If I am wrong - please point
> me to other success stories. I haven't heard of any!
Unfortunately, there may not be many of those stories. I have read a
few, but I don't archive them, and I can't even remember any names off hand.
Hopefully some others can step up and remind us. Usually there is a posting
of "I just reached 50lbs" or "I made 100lbs loss". But I can't really
remember who. I don't even know how many people I have ****** off on this
board. I could very well have answered another's post the next week, not
realizing they may be hurting from the last one I replied to. It really
doesn't mean much to me if we argue. I usually don't believe most people are
out to hurt feelings anyway, they just want to be able to express their
viewpoint. Only the regular posters tend to stick in my mind.
>
> I think your weight loss is great, Tom. But you started out by being
> just 30 lb from your goal weight. So you are in "a different weight
> class" from people with my problem. I started out need to lose 30 lb
> PLUS 100 pounds. It is a whole different kind of problem, I think.
That is very possible Doug. Because I suffered no serious medical
ailments, may be a big difference as well. But the underlying principles for
achieving weightloss would be the same. Your climb is definitely higher than
mine, but you can still take it 30lbs at a time.
Please understand that we really are trying to steer you in the right
direction. We have all been heavier at one time. Hopefully you will find the
answers and then you can be the one giving the suggestions. I've written a
book here and it's definitely time to go. Do me a favor will you? Don't give
up, ok? lo-carb is the way to go for weightloss.
Tom
210/180/180
My weightloss pics
http://ca.geocities.com/kazzy_ca/photopagetomgallant.html
>
> doug
>
>
>
>
> Tom wrote:
>
> >
> > Yeah. I've spent a little time answering to Doug's posts. Most did
not
> > get a response back. I guess my story wasn't good enough because I
didn't
> > lose a *real* amount of weight. I remember a few others doing the same
> > thing. I wish Doug would have told me earlier that I was wasting my
time.
> > Travis, like Roger said, this is not to belittle your accomplishment or
the
> > time spent writing your story. It is very good and inspirational and I
hope
> > other newcomers can benefit. It's always great to hear somebody's
success
> > story.
> > Tom
> > 210/180/180
> >
