Re: well....[censored].

Net has worked for me for more than a year. If I count only carbs, I'm
taking in well over 100g/day. By going with net numbers, it's around
60g/day.

warren said:

Are net carbs real or fake... Your opinion???
Warren

-----
Bev

"Bev-Ann" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Net has worked for me for more than a year. If I count only carbs, I'm
taking in well over 100g/day. By going with net numbers, it's around
60g/day.

I didn't use "net" the first few weeks but am now...and still shrinking fast
🙂.
--
Sherry
360/?/195
low carb since 4/4/05
My LC Journey - www.livejournal.com/users/ShrinkingSherry
"Shrinkage" Photos: www.owly.net/Shrinking.html - - UPDATED 6/14!

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

Quoted message said:

1/ Does anyone have an idea how your blood sugar levels either contributes
or dont to LC weight loss....

2/ if your BS count is, let's say 175 (assuming you are non diabetic) will
that 175 slow or stop weight loss.....

If your blood sugar level is 175 then the assumption that you are not
diabetic is very questionable.

Rich

Quoting warren:

Quoted message said:

Are net carbs real or fake... Your opinion???

Some fiber is soluble, some is insoluble.

Given the natural human tendency to underestimate carbs and caories,
you're better off just to count count 'gross' carbs (and calories) and
leave it at that.

I'd recommend that you make it a practice to estimate downwards.

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

Quoted message said:

1/ Does anyone have an idea how your blood sugar levels either contributes
or dont to LC weight loss....

2/ if your BS count is, let's say 175 (assuming you are non diabetic) will
that 175 slow or stop weight loss.....

3/ On the opposite side, if you carry a 106 BS, would that help or
hinder......

Give us a little background. Where is this question coming from?
If you are concerned about your blood sugar and do not know what your
numbers are like - you should really see your doctor and be tested.

As others have already stated, 175 is very high blood sugar and only a
diabetic would have a number that high.
106 is also high blood sugar, especially if that is a fasting blood sugar.

Having blood sugar that is on the high side will likely mean that you have
to deal with more cravings and that your body produces too much insulin, so
you will have a more difficult time with weight loss. Too much insulin can
cause you to gain weight.

--
Spring
LC since 1/1/04
260/197/170

"Before" & "current" pics at link below:
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/sprgsnow/my_photos

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

Quoted message said:

Are net carbs real or fake... Your opinion???
Warren

My opinion is that net carbs are real and that is the number I use.
However, I believe that the net carb number is achieved by subtracting
fiber, and that's all. This means that packaged "low-carb" goodies stuffed
with a variety of sugar alcohols are now really low carb in my opinion.

--
Spring
LC since 1/1/04
260/197/170

"Before" & "current" pics at link below:
http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/sprgsnow/my_photos

Thanks.....
Good points. I thought 106 was good. My BS is usally araound 105-111
every day. But I will call my Dr.
The 175 was a spike because I was LC all day. BUT I you may very well be
right...

Thanks to all for the good advice....
Warren

Sprgtime said:

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

Quoted message said:

1/ Does anyone have an idea how your blood sugar levels either contributes
or dont to LC weight loss....

2/ if your BS count is, let's say 175 (assuming you are non diabetic) will
that 175 slow or stop weight loss.....

3/ On the opposite side, if you carry a 106 BS, would that help or
hinder......

Give us a little background. Where is this question coming from?
If you are concerned about your blood sugar and do not know what your
numbers are like - you should really see your doctor and be tested.

As others have already stated, 175 is very high blood sugar and only a
diabetic would have a number that high.
106 is also high blood sugar, especially if that is a fasting blood sugar.

Having blood sugar that is on the high side will likely mean that you have
to deal with more cravings and that your body produces too much insulin, so
you will have a more difficult time with weight loss. Too much insulin can
cause you to gain weight.

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

Quoted message said:

Thanks.....
Good points. I thought 106 was good. My BS is usally araound 105-111 every
day. But I will call my Dr.
The 175 was a spike because I was LC all day. BUT I you may very well be
right...

Oh, you have your own meter for testing?
Make sure your doctor does an HbA1c test (although I'm sure he would if you
tell him what your numbers have been). That test will tell you what your
average blood sugar level has been for the past few months.

My husband's blood sugar is also high - he was diagnosed with Diabetes in
Feb this year, but who knows how long he's had it because he never used to
see doctors. It was very out of control when he did see a doctor. His
HbA1c level was a 12 (over 300 blood sugar level). He's on medication now
and doing low carb. We hope that in time he can get off the medication and
control it through diet alone, but so far even with the meds and the diet
combined his fasting blood sugar hasn't gotten below 135.

Good luck!

Would it hurt your pride if people did read your responses and find
you angry, Bob (hence your explanation of your post)?

You still sound angry.... your explanation didn't do it for me.

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

So angry... !

<LOL> What a swell diagnostician our own "dr_ernie the yahoo" turns out
to be. Can't seem to distinguish between the sort of sarcasm designed to
puncture his hot air balloon of self-satisfied smugness - and anger.

What mental acuity. What perfect seeing of truth. What unique ability to
penetrate the mysteries of life. What a [censored] artist.

Have a really wonderful day. I really mean that. I want you to
thoroughly enjoy the gifts that being alive bring. And savor the
richness around you. Yes, the bathroom is down the hall and to the left.

Pastorio

Quoted message said:

Bob (this one) said:

[email hidden] wrote:

> Um, no. I don't want to choke anyone. If that bothers people
>(apparently it bothers Bob), so be it.

WOW. I can't help but admire your purity of soul and spirit. I mean it's
singularly amazing how you've managed to contain the baser instincts. I
bet you've never felt fight-or-flight feelings, either. Or frustration.
Or satisfaction.

You're a perfect example of how we should all live. Well, except for the
stupid posts, I mean. I bet you're a Pee Wee Herman fan.

Have a wonderfully rewarding day, hear?

Pastorio

>FOB wrote:
>
>
>>Doesn't everyone want to choke someone at some time? Doesn't mean we will
>>act on our desire but even imagining it can be cathartic.
>>
>>In news:[email hidden],
>>[email hidden] <[email hidden]> stated
>>| It's probably not a good thing to want to choke people, but it is
>>| illuminating about you.
>>|
>>| I bet you're a Immanuel Kant fan.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bob (this one) said:

OmManiPadmeOmelet said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, Luna

Quoted message said:

In article
<[email hidden]>, Luna
<[email hidden]> wrote:

> In article <[email hidden]>, "Bob (this one)"
> <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>
>> FOB wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Doesn't everyone want to choke someone at some time? Doesn't
>>> mean we will act on our desire but even imagining it can be
>>> cathartic.
>>
>> Of course not. Lass Chance, Luna and dr_ernie are far above
>> that. Never sully their mental thresholds with such barbaric
>> thoughts. Not a glimmer of such uncivilized behavior. I hope
>> you've learned your lesson from this. There are people who
>> wouldn't *dream* of such stuff. We should all hang around with
>> them more so it wears off on us. Listen to their *deeeeeep*
>> thoughts.
>>
>> I'd vote for Sun Tsu.
>>
>> No, seriously...
>>
>> Pastorio
>>
>
> What huh? Why do you think I never want to hurt people? I work
> with kids, and sometimes I want to smack them. Or their parents.
> Or my coworkers. But I don't actually do it.
>
> Are you referring to my meditation mantra? Once again, no one
> got my joke. Go read it again. Out loud. Several times.

On second thought, so you don't have to find the post, here's the
mantra I recommended for JC.

Ohhhh-whaaa Taaaa-jerrrr Kie-yammmm

Now you won't be under any illusions that I'm deep or whatever.

Here is a better one for him:

I we todd did. I sofa king we todd did.

Yes, well it certainly belongs here. Continuing the *deeeeeep* thread
for "dr_ernie", Lass Chance and Luna.

Pastorio

Stop putting me in there! I'm not "deep." I've already been labeled in
here as "silly" "crazy" and a "drama queen." I can't handle being
called "deep" too. I just can't live up to it.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bob (this one) said:

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote:

>FOB wrote:
>
>
>>Doesn't everyone want to choke someone at some time? Doesn't mean we will
>>act on our desire but even imagining it can be cathartic.
>
>Of course not. Lass Chance, Luna and dr_ernie are far above that. Never
>sully their mental thresholds with such barbaric thoughts. Not a glimmer
>of such uncivilized behavior. I hope you've learned your lesson from
>this. There are people who wouldn't *dream* of such stuff. We should all
>hang around with them more so it wears off on us. Listen to their
>*deeeeeep* thoughts.
>
>I'd vote for Sun Tsu.
>
>No, seriously...
>
>Pastorio
>

What huh? Why do you think I never want to hurt people? I work with
kids, and sometimes I want to smack them. Or their parents. Or my
coworkers. But I don't actually do it.

It was sarcasm.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Are you referring to my meditation mantra? Once again, no one got my
joke. Go read it again. Out loud. Several times.

Oh, please. Everybody got it but didn't want to embarrass you by noting it.

But it's so funny! Why would I be embarrassed?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On second thought, so you don't have to find the post, here's the mantra
I recommended for JC.

Ohhhh-whaaa
Taaaa-jerrrr
Kie-yammmm

Right. 10-year-old summer camp stuff.

Which is about my level of humor. One of the best things about working
at a summer camp with 6-12 year olds is that I can tell them all the
jokes I first heard at that age, and most of them have never heard them
before!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now you won't be under any illusions that I'm deep or whatever.

I wouldn't worry on that account if I were you.

Then stop calling me deep! You lumped me in with ernie and Lass Chance,
when my contributions to this thread have been way different from theirs
in both tone and content.

Quoted message said:

Pastorio

<Bob wrote> "Remember that I wrote this to you a couple notes
ago...?"

I do remember you said that. It sort of keeps with the theme of this
thread - the things you write seem curiously more applicable to the
author than the subject.

BTW, on that note, do you really thing that people believe you're
laughing when you write "LOL" in your posts? It doesn't seem to fit
with how angry you seem to be.

You shouldn't take this thread seriously Bob. I'm not.

Bob (this one) said:

Quoted message said:

You really need to take all of this less seriously, Bob.

ernie, ernie, ernie. How many times do I have to tell you. Do some
thinking on your own. People will notice the change. Seriously. Remember
that I wrote this to you a couple notes ago...?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>> Have a perfectly splendid day. And do laugh a bit instead of
>> taking yourself *sooooo* seriously..

See where the idea came from that you posted above? I mean, I'm happy to
do it for you, but it's really about time you had an original thought. I
can tell by the strained look on your face you aren't used to it, but
keep trying. Oh, I'm sorry. I misunderstood. Yes, the bathroom is down
the hall and to your left.

Pastorio

Quoted message said:

Bob (this one) said:

[email hidden] wrote:

> Oh, I never claimed to be normal.

Good on yer, mate. Keeping your claims in line with the evidence. When
you get a minute, do look up netiquette about top-posting.

Good lad. Now off with you to play with the other kids.

Pastorio

>FOB wrote:
>
>
>>Well, then, my professional opinion is that you are not normal..
>>
>>In news:[email hidden],
>>[email hidden] <[email hidden]> stated
>>| Um, no. I don't want to choke anyone. If that bothers people
>>| (apparently it bothers Bob), so be it.
>>|
>>| FOB wrote:
>>|| Doesn't everyone want to choke someone at some time? Doesn't mean
>>|| we will act on our desire but even imagining it can be cathartic.
>>||
>>|| In news:[email hidden],
>>|| [email hidden] <[email hidden]> stated
>>||| It's probably not a good thing to want to choke people, but it is
>>||| illuminating about you.
>>|||
>>||| I bet you're a Immanuel Kant fan.
>
>

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Bob (this one) said:

Luna said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
Luna <[email hidden]> wrote:

>In article <[email hidden]>,
> "Bob (this one)" <[email hidden]> wrote:
>
>
>>FOB wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Doesn't everyone want to choke someone at some time? Doesn't mean we will
>>>act on our desire but even imagining it can be cathartic.
>>
>>Of course not. Lass Chance, Luna and dr_ernie are far above that. Never
>>sully their mental thresholds with such barbaric thoughts. Not a glimmer
>>of such uncivilized behavior. I hope you've learned your lesson from
>>this. There are people who wouldn't *dream* of such stuff. We should all
>>hang around with them more so it wears off on us. Listen to their
>>*deeeeeep* thoughts.
>>
>>I'd vote for Sun Tsu.
>>
>>No, seriously...
>>
>>Pastorio
>>
>
>What huh? Why do you think I never want to hurt people? I work with
>kids, and sometimes I want to smack them. Or their parents. Or my
>coworkers. But I don't actually do it.

It was sarcasm.

Quoted message said:

>Are you referring to my meditation mantra? Once again, no one got my
>joke. Go read it again. Out loud. Several times.

Oh, please. Everybody got it but didn't want to embarrass you by noting it.

But it's so funny! Why would I be embarrassed?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

On second thought, so you don't have to find the post, here's the mantra
I recommended for JC.

Ohhhh-whaaa
Taaaa-jerrrr
Kie-yammmm

Right. 10-year-old summer camp stuff.

Which is about my level of humor. One of the best things about working
at a summer camp with 6-12 year olds is that I can tell them all the
jokes I first heard at that age, and most of them have never heard them
before!

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Now you won't be under any illusions that I'm deep or whatever.

I wouldn't worry on that account if I were you.

Then stop calling me deep! You lumped me in with ernie and Lass Chance,
when my contributions to this thread have been way different from theirs
in both tone and content.

Bob has a thing about picking fights. Anger problem.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Pastorio

You ever read Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy"?

JC Der Koenig said:

Well done.

--
Dost thou come here to whine? -- Shakespeare

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

Quoted message said:

I imagine you'd like this link:

http://mind.ucsd.edu/misc/diversions/fatisdead.html

JC Der Koenig said:

Kant and Schopenhauer were depressed Germans, Nietzsche was Dionysian.

--
There's a difference between an opinion and an informed point of view.
For
some reason people always get them confused and think that whatever pops
into their head is worth sharing as part of a debate. -- MFW

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...
>
>
> JC Der Koenig wrote:
>> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
>> news:[email hidden]...
>> >
>> > It's probably not a good thing to want to choke people, but it is
>> > illuminating about you.
>> >
>> > I bet you're a Immanuel Kant fan.
>> >
>>
>> I prefer Nietzsche.
>
> Makes even more sense. I believe both were horribly depressed and
> German, IMHO.
>

JC Der Koenig said:

"Marsha" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I prefer to use a .38. It's faster.

But rather impersonal compared to hands-on techniques.

Yes, but there are so many out there that my hands
would get cramped before I was done. Got any good
exercises for hand strengthening?

Marsha/Ohio

In article <KHPre.11271$9a1.5161@trnddc01>,

rich said:

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

Quoted message said:

1/ Does anyone have an idea how your blood sugar levels either contributes
or dont to LC weight loss....

2/ if your BS count is, let's say 175 (assuming you are non diabetic) will
that 175 slow or stop weight loss.....

If your blood sugar level is 175 then the assumption that you are not
diabetic is very questionable.

Rich

Not necessarily...
It can spike in stressful situations or if you are sick.
My mom's spiked to 180 once when she was in serious pain passing a
kidney stone.

She was not diabetic.
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

In article <[email hidden]>,

warren said:

Thanks.....
Good points. I thought 106 was good. My BS is usally araound 105-111
every day. But I will call my Dr.
The 175 was a spike because I was LC all day. BUT I you may very well be
right...

111 fasting is too high.
Mine usually hangs out around 90.

175 is not good! You say you spiked that low carbing???
That does not sound right. What did you eat?

Quoted message said:

Thanks to all for the good advice....
Warren

Yes, you do need to be seen......

Good luck!
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-[censored]." -Jack Nicholson

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

Quoted message said:

JC Der Koenig said:

"Marsha" <[email hidden]> wrote in message

Quoted message said:

>

I prefer to use a .38. It's faster.

But rather impersonal compared to hands-on techniques.

Yes, but there are so many out there that my hands would get cramped
before I was done. Got any good exercises for hand strengthening?

Wrap your hands around a COC and squeeze.

Are those the tactics you use to escape a factual debate?

--
I wake up every morning and remember that I get to spend all day with me. It
doesn't get any better than that. -- MFW

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

Quoted message said:

You ever read Schopenhauer's "The Art of Controversy"?

JC Der Koenig said:

Well done.

--
Dost thou come here to whine? -- Shakespeare

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

Quoted message said:

I imagine you'd like this link:

http://mind.ucsd.edu/misc/diversions/fatisdead.html

JC Der Koenig wrote:
> Kant and Schopenhauer were depressed Germans, Nietzsche was Dionysian.
>
> --
> There's a difference between an opinion and an informed point of view.
> For
> some reason people always get them confused and think that whatever
> pops
> into their head is worth sharing as part of a debate. -- MFW
>
>
> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> news:[email hidden]...
> >
> >
> > JC Der Koenig wrote:
> >> <[email hidden]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email hidden]...
> >> >
> >> > It's probably not a good thing to want to choke people, but it is
> >> > illuminating about you.
> >> >
> >> > I bet you're a Immanuel Kant fan.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I prefer Nietzsche.
> >
> > Makes even more sense. I believe both were horribly depressed and
> > German, IMHO.
> >

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

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If your blood sugar level is 175 then the assumption that you are not
diabetic is very questionable.

Rich

Not necessarily...

I didn't say he had diabetes, I said his assumption was questionable. As it
is. An isolated incident where an alleged non-diabetic spiked to 180 does
not change the fact that it is questionable (i.e, one should question) that
a non-diabetic would have a reading of 175.

Rich