|
|
|
Comment |
Sorted by
Date Written |
Counting Your Lucky Stars (Reply to this comment)
by thinnerme
After my second knee surgery I knew the 20 pounds I put on my legs was not going to help. Getting older does not help either. Everyday it is a battle and a choice how you live your life. Pick ONE diet and give it a chance to work. My favorite thing to do is give a diet one week to work, and then I change my mind and do a different diet with different types of food. Think of your body as a sports car. If you are used to putting high test in it surely you would not expect diesel to get you very far. Which is like switching diets so quickly. PATIENCE....and exercise. Be lucky you have the ability to move your body. Watch your SALT intake ladies...you can lose 2-3 pounds very fast just by eating low sodium foods and do not add salt. If you like to drink beer or alcoholic beverages...then you will have to exercise for a half hour for every 2 drinks you drink. On Atkins I lost 18 pounds years ago....my newest phase is Weight Watchers...which is easy if you can handle logging every single thing you eat. It is fun! Try it.
|
Sep 05 '04
5:04 pm PDT
|
|
Explaining my "Somewhat" Helpful Rating (Reply to this comment)
by baybrat
Hi. I thought what you wrote was a good start for this topic, but it is a really big topic. You described well the corner of the tip of iceberg. I also think that our "eating styles" are what has got us into the health and weight troubles we suffer from today.
To my mind, the first delineation is to divide diets into three groups: 1) calorie-counting, 2) food-combining, or 3) metabolic supplement. You either count calories and choose from all foods, OR you do some sort of food-combining which always eliminates some types of foods, or you take some type of drug and either do #1 or #2. WW is in the first group, Low Carb in the second.
I can remember when salt was evil in any amount. For the last 30 years, fat in any amount has been the evil. We have been inundated for a century with processed sugar in everything, and it's about time we started recognizing that unrestricted sugar damages insulin balance and creates insulin resistance. That is one big reason why Low Carb'ing has helped so many people who are afflicted with many illnesses and conditions, ie. diabetes, arthritis, allergies. After seeing my rail-thin teenage athlete daughter suffer with joint dislocations and soreness, yet scream in real fear if we even urge her to eat a tiny piece of fat on her dinner meat, that is enough for me to realize that we have erroneously scared an entire generation into believing that they should never eat fats regardless of whether they are good or bad fats. I'd site an excellent article about this, but epinions won't approve my post with the url in my comment (do a google search & type in "Can female athletes be too thin to win?", it's on MSU's website). Fat is necessary for correct female bone and joint development, as well as correct hormone development.
The above paragraph is a good example of what needs to be discussed when deciding on the right diet regime. But it also is only an iceberg tip. When we know what we need to eat and what we don't need to eat, the diet choice becomes easier.
Sorry, just had to expound. I'm an original Atkin "Quick Weight-Loss" dieter from the 70's who felt like I was gonna die and hated it, yet I am an Atkins believer today. The man stuck with it and got it right finally. His important research should not be dismissed or trashed. I'm not parroting Atkins, I arrived at the same conclusions after much research about nutrition and illness (Bircher-Benner, for example). Processed sugar and processed carbs are the real evils and our modern convenience foods are chock full of them. If you could just limit those two, you'd be doing your body and health a big favor, and you might not even need any of the fad diets out there.
|
Feb 17 '03
9:54 am PST
|
|
Good job! (Reply to this comment)
by rummyll
I hate it when someone rates Not Helpful and doesn't explain why, then hides behind a rock. It helps the author when a low rating is explained. Obviously the majority found it VH, must have been personal. Keep up the good work!
|
Sep 10 '01
11:50 am PDT
|
|
Some of The Best Advice I Have Heard. (Reply to this comment)
by azirish
I have been on so many diets that your common sense hits home. NOOOOOOOO diet is going to work if you can't work it in to your life. Atkins worked but I had the gut feeling it was bad. No matter how much Atkins proves it isn't bad my gut tells me it is. Weight Watchers has the best advice and balanced plan along with kicking butt in exercise. Opray Winfrey's book with her trainer said it best. You have to be willing to kick butt with exercise. Now if I can put down my beer and get outside with my walking shoes I can begin, ha.
|
Sep 01 '01
10:53 am PDT
|
|
Re: Excellent+job (Reply to this comment)
by Kris.
Ah, I was caught in a generalization :) Time to explain myself. I meant: moderate-intensity cardio will usually burn more calories than moderate-intensity weightlifting.
If you do a very light cardio workout (like slow walking or yardwork) or an activity that only requires intermittant movement (like volleyball) then you may very well burn less calories than you would during a moderate weight session.
The are calculators at http://www.exrx.net/calculators/calories.html if anyone is interested.
I got the following numbers for a 150 lb person, exercising 30 minutes:
104 cal Volleyball
120 cal Yardwork
176 cal Normal weight training
178 cal Golf (carrying clubs)
206 cal Playing frisbee
225 cal Cycling (10 mph)
233 cal Walking (4.5 mph)
240 cal Intense weight training
270 cal Rollerblading (casual)
307 cal Stair stepping (8")
317 cal Rollerblading (fast)
|
Aug 21 '01
7:58 am PDT
|
|
Excellent job (Reply to this comment)
by jo.com
It would help to know where some of the info came from, actually just from my own curiousity. It isn't necessary for the review because you aren't quoting anyone. Just one point...you say, "Weight training will burn less calories per session"
I am not sure where you got that information. It depends on what type of cardio work you do and what kind of weight training you do. I can burn 100 calories sitting on a bike for 30 minutes and 300 lifting for 30 minutes. Also there is a lot of research that weight training continues to burn calories (Yes, muscles burn more calories and raise the metabolism.) for 3x longer than aerobic training. I suggest doing both...just wanted to make that point. jo
|
Aug 08 '01
7:32 pm PDT
|
|
:) (Reply to this comment)
by disartain
A great review with some good pointers.
Diane
|
Aug 07 '01
3:57 pm PDT
|
|
Beautiful job! (Reply to this comment)
by Suzer
I love that you didn't pick one diet which is supposed to fit everyone's lifestyle, tastes, eating habits, etc. Everyone is different. I'm eating a chocolate chip cookie right now. Oh well, anyway, thanks for the review and reminder!
Suzi
|
Aug 07 '01
3:42 pm PDT
|
|
|
|
