The following should be written in the past tense now as you'll see from my last paragraph, but I'm keeping it present because it's even now mostly what I'm still doing and I only very recently changed in any case.
=================
I've been continuing my new eating regime and continuing to lose weight slowly, about three to four pounds a month, which is a rate I'm happy with. As I've said, I've been doing a loose version of Atkins, the differences being that I'm counting calories, which he discourages, and allowing my own chosen level of a daily carb count of 25-to-40 grams. This allows slow weight loss and keeps my blood sugar within acceptable limits.
The starting phase of the Atkins diet, the two-week Induction phase, keeps you under 20 carbs a day, and I've never tried to be that strict with myself although I have had some days when my carb count comes in at about 20. I do believe the testimonies that the Induction phase gets most people off to a very motivating large early weight loss without hunger, but I'm just not that organized or disciplined. What I'm doing takes organization and discipline enough for me. I'm not sure how many carbs he allows after that beginning period, I'd have to go look it up, but I recall that you are to gradually phase carbs back in one at a time to test their effect on your weight loss, and to avoid any that interfere with the loss until you are at or near your goal weight -- and even then for most people there are some carbs you are going to have to recognize you have to keep to a minimum for the rest of your life.
I recently encountered a typical misunderstanding about Atkins that I would like to answer. This was from my doctor, who is happy enough with my weight loss and not trying to discourage me from what I'm doing, but did express what is apparently a common notion that the Atkins diet is "just meat and fat." In his book Atkins mentions that people often get this wrong idea about the diet.
This idea may come from mistaking the Induction phase for the diet itself. But there are four phases to his diet and I didn't really study them all since I ended up skipping the Induction phase and did my own thing with the basic formula of majoring in protein, keeping carbs low and not worrying about fat. He is aiming for a special effect with his Induction phase, speeding up the burning of your own body fat which occurs when the carbs are kept under 20 grams. I'm counting calories instead because losing weight fast isn't my objective and I don't want the technical concerns that require you to do a home urinalysis to be sure you're burning fat as he wants you to. Maybe I'm just lazy but since I am losing weight it hasn't become an issue. Some people who have a really hard time losing weight may stay in the Induction phase for a long time, but it's not the norm of his diet. There is also a very specialized diet he puts a very few rare individuals on for a brief period because of their severe metabolic resistance to weight loss, which is, interestingly, all fat (cream cheese, pork rinds, macadamia nuts for instance). He only keeps them on this for a few days as I recall. But these are exceptions to his basic diet plan and it's not fair to characterize the overall plan by them.
In my own experience Atkins is mostly "meat and non-starchy vegetables," not "meat and fat." The very strict minimal-carb Induction phase is meat and green leafy vegetables, which are the lowest carb vegetables, even in that case not really describable as "meat and fat." You do have more meat proportionally on this phase because of the low carb requirement but still you can have a slice of tomato or some spinach with your bacon and eggs and a very large green salad at your other two meals, or one large green salad and some steamed asparagus or the like.
The idea that Atkins is loaded with fat is also wrong. It's simply that he doesn't restrict fat, considers it very important to get enough fat because fat satisfies hunger which is crucially necessary when you want to lose weight. So you are allowed the bacon and eggs, you don't remove the chicken skin, you can have a chicken salad or an egg salad made with real mayonnaise, and you can put butter on the cooked vegetables -- it doesn't affect your weight loss and it helps with the hunger. You have to use a non-carb salad dressing like olive oil and vinegar, and the oil is another fat that adds up the calories if you're counting, but again not interfering with weight loss. And he gives lots of research information showing that fat is NOT the health hazard people have been claiming for decades, in fact that cholesterol counts DECREASE on his diet. My doctor agreed that this is so.
My own sloppy version of Atkins usually results in a plate that is a half to three-quarters non-starchy vegetables, hardly all "meat and fat," -- except for breakfast which is harder to do that way. I've been gravitating to having lean ham rather than bacon with eggs for breakfast and thinking of putting the egg on a bed of spinach cooked in butter with onion [July 24: I tried it! GREAT combination egg and spinach!]. Eggs Florentine is a spinach-based egg recipe that could be adapted to eliminate the carbs. The famous Joe's Special of San Francisco is something I want to try for breakfast when I get around to it -- a perfect Atkins style meal -- hamburger with onion and spinach all scrambled together with eggs. So even at breakfast this way you are getting some vegetables. At dinner I usually include a salad with three or four raw vegetables, and a cooked vegetable as well, alongside the meat -- which is only three or four ounces and may be beef or pork or fish or chicken etc., not a huge slab of beef or whatever people imagine Atkins inspires. I may saute the meat in oil or butter and don't worry about the fat, but neither the meat nor the fat is in great quantity. (Of course some people may require greater quantities of both. If you read Atkins you'll see how individual the diet plans can be based on different metabolisms).
In fact, since I've been eating this way I've noticed that I buy a LOT less butter, even only a quarter of the usual, probably because it's the "bad" carbs that need butter -- the potatoes and rice and bread that I'm no longer eating -- except for the occasional half slice of rye bread or a Wasa cracker. I can eat steamed vegies without butter though sometimes I'll add some. I've also been using a lot less mayonnaise, no doubt because I don't have sandwiches any more. I now put heavy cream in my coffee instead of milk because of all the carbs in milk, but you usually need only a very small amount of cream compared to milk. Overall I'm sure I've reduced my fat intake by quite a bit.
Of course I can't claim to be doing the Atkins diet, but I do believe what I'm doing is based on his principles enough to justify these claims in his favor.
However, although I did want to defend Atkins, all that has changed for me recently anyway as I'm now eating according to the Lord's leadings instead of according to Atkins or my own reasonings. Much has stayed the same, some items have been eliminated as luxuries, and the overall calorie count has gone down by a couple hundred points. The Lord's objectives are not the same as a dieter's. He's interested in training a believer in obedience and self-denial and weaning us away from worldly attachments. The result will certainly be weight loss as well.
Showing posts with label Diet. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Diet. Show all posts
Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Wednesday, June 1, 2011
I'm an Atkins fan
What I've been doing to lose weight is a sort of rough-and-ready version of my own of cutting carbs and calories, and otherwise I'm not following any particular diet plan. I mentioned in an earlier post that I've read up on some of the plans and got tips from them but it's just easier for me to make it up as I go along than try to follow any particular system.
However, I have been reading in my old copy of Atkins' Diet Revolution, and have to say he makes terrific sense. I found another book based on his diet that's aimed specifically at diabetes and its precursors, found it at a remaindered price so I got it.
I'm convinced. Atkins was way ahead of his time, if that's the way to put it. He was right anyway, and the medical establishment still hasn't recognized his well researched information, let alone the food industry. People still talk of Atkins as if his diet were a recipe for deteriorating health just because it contradicts the party line. Most "diet" products out there are reduced fat and high carb -- and THAT's the recipe for deteriorating health. They think fats are the problem, Atkins thinks fats are a necessary part of the solution, both for weight loss and for general health, and he showed plenty of research, his own and others that demonstrated that. They think you have to get rid of red meat, he thinks not. They think you have to have plenty of carbs, he thinks not, and he's proved it both in research citations and client testimonials.
That standard wisdom touts whole grain carbs, as in the illustration to the left, while Atkins treats even whole grains, the "good" carbs, as something to be minimized, in some cases not really much better than the "simple" carbs if you want to lose weight and need to watch your blood sugar. Diabetes organizations are still following the old way pretty much, restricting fats and proteins and allowing way too many carbs, and the "food pyramid" that reflects the establishment position still has grains at the bottom and de-emphasizes meats, which is the exact opposite of Atkins.
The Atkins food pyramid puts proteins at the bottom as the foods to dominate in a healthy diet, and grains at the very top, to be severely limited. The standard plan has vegetables and fruits about equal while Atkins emphasizes vegetables and puts fruits higher up the pyramid, to be moderately limited. On a diabetic diet they may have to be extremely limited.
Most of the new diet plans I've run across do mostly follow the same kind of thinking as Atkins, interestingly enough, without giving him the credit. The emphasis is on protein, not restricting natural fats, but avoiding sugar and other bad carbs like the plague they are, and keeping ALL carbs to an absolute minimum.
Most of these diets reject artificial sweeteners -- with the exception of stevia -- and soy, while Atkins accepts them, and I certainly agree with them about soy. (I had a horrible experience on a packaged diet plan based on soy protein and can hardly think of it without gagging). But these differences are minor while the basic understanding of body chemistry is what's important and the trend seems to be toward Atkins style eating to judge by the newer diet plans I find advertised on the web.
I'm still not quite ready to abandon my rough-and-ready approach for Atkins, it's just so much easier for me than following any program, and it's working after all, and it's very much in tune with Atkins anyway. But I'm still reading up on him and more and more appreciating his thinking and incorporating ideas as I go.
====================================
One thing I would like to add is that the Atkins diet is clearly what's needed particularly by AMERICANS with our intensely high-sugar, high-carb standard unhealthy diet and lack of exercise. It did always bother me about the Atkins plan that grains clearly dominate the diets of most of the world, which seems to put him out of touch with normal eating -- the Bible even refers to the staple food as "bread." And we know some peoples live mostly, sometimes almost exclusively, on carbs such as rice, and that meat is usually a very small part of their diet, really a luxury.
This is of course the diet of poverty and our problem in America is our diet based on wealth -- it's the cause of our obesity problem and our diabetes problem. Wealth produces a great variety of foods strictly for self-indulgence rather than nutrition, and it also minimizes physical activity with all kinds of transportation options and labor-saving devices. High-powered athletes can afford to indulge in thousands of calories packed with carbs, but most of us can't. Poverty also of course guarantees plenty of physical activity, often having to walk everywhere, or maybe ride a bicycle, as well as a great deal of physical labor just in the activities of daily work and living that Americans no longer have to experience. It's probably one of the few things one can appreciate about poverty -- certainly in general it's not something to wish on anyone, but it has to be acknowledged that the high carb diet is well used by such active bodies, while the sedentary low-activity lifestyle is what makes a high carb diet bad for us in America and to some extent the West in general.
However, we also have worse carbs than they do overall anyway, all the processed foods that are part of being a wealthy nation, all the sugar in everything to cater to taste, the processed cereals, the packaged meals, the cookies and candies, the soda drinks, the french fries, the white breads.
However, I have been reading in my old copy of Atkins' Diet Revolution, and have to say he makes terrific sense. I found another book based on his diet that's aimed specifically at diabetes and its precursors, found it at a remaindered price so I got it.
I'm convinced. Atkins was way ahead of his time, if that's the way to put it. He was right anyway, and the medical establishment still hasn't recognized his well researched information, let alone the food industry. People still talk of Atkins as if his diet were a recipe for deteriorating health just because it contradicts the party line. Most "diet" products out there are reduced fat and high carb -- and THAT's the recipe for deteriorating health. They think fats are the problem, Atkins thinks fats are a necessary part of the solution, both for weight loss and for general health, and he showed plenty of research, his own and others that demonstrated that. They think you have to get rid of red meat, he thinks not. They think you have to have plenty of carbs, he thinks not, and he's proved it both in research citations and client testimonials.
That standard wisdom touts whole grain carbs, as in the illustration to the left, while Atkins treats even whole grains, the "good" carbs, as something to be minimized, in some cases not really much better than the "simple" carbs if you want to lose weight and need to watch your blood sugar. Diabetes organizations are still following the old way pretty much, restricting fats and proteins and allowing way too many carbs, and the "food pyramid" that reflects the establishment position still has grains at the bottom and de-emphasizes meats, which is the exact opposite of Atkins.
The Atkins food pyramid puts proteins at the bottom as the foods to dominate in a healthy diet, and grains at the very top, to be severely limited. The standard plan has vegetables and fruits about equal while Atkins emphasizes vegetables and puts fruits higher up the pyramid, to be moderately limited. On a diabetic diet they may have to be extremely limited.
Most of the new diet plans I've run across do mostly follow the same kind of thinking as Atkins, interestingly enough, without giving him the credit. The emphasis is on protein, not restricting natural fats, but avoiding sugar and other bad carbs like the plague they are, and keeping ALL carbs to an absolute minimum.
Most of these diets reject artificial sweeteners -- with the exception of stevia -- and soy, while Atkins accepts them, and I certainly agree with them about soy. (I had a horrible experience on a packaged diet plan based on soy protein and can hardly think of it without gagging). But these differences are minor while the basic understanding of body chemistry is what's important and the trend seems to be toward Atkins style eating to judge by the newer diet plans I find advertised on the web.
I'm still not quite ready to abandon my rough-and-ready approach for Atkins, it's just so much easier for me than following any program, and it's working after all, and it's very much in tune with Atkins anyway. But I'm still reading up on him and more and more appreciating his thinking and incorporating ideas as I go.
====================================
One thing I would like to add is that the Atkins diet is clearly what's needed particularly by AMERICANS with our intensely high-sugar, high-carb standard unhealthy diet and lack of exercise. It did always bother me about the Atkins plan that grains clearly dominate the diets of most of the world, which seems to put him out of touch with normal eating -- the Bible even refers to the staple food as "bread." And we know some peoples live mostly, sometimes almost exclusively, on carbs such as rice, and that meat is usually a very small part of their diet, really a luxury.
This is of course the diet of poverty and our problem in America is our diet based on wealth -- it's the cause of our obesity problem and our diabetes problem. Wealth produces a great variety of foods strictly for self-indulgence rather than nutrition, and it also minimizes physical activity with all kinds of transportation options and labor-saving devices. High-powered athletes can afford to indulge in thousands of calories packed with carbs, but most of us can't. Poverty also of course guarantees plenty of physical activity, often having to walk everywhere, or maybe ride a bicycle, as well as a great deal of physical labor just in the activities of daily work and living that Americans no longer have to experience. It's probably one of the few things one can appreciate about poverty -- certainly in general it's not something to wish on anyone, but it has to be acknowledged that the high carb diet is well used by such active bodies, while the sedentary low-activity lifestyle is what makes a high carb diet bad for us in America and to some extent the West in general.
However, we also have worse carbs than they do overall anyway, all the processed foods that are part of being a wealthy nation, all the sugar in everything to cater to taste, the processed cereals, the packaged meals, the cookies and candies, the soda drinks, the french fries, the white breads.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Overweight, now diabetes
I feel really stupid I didn't see it coming. I haven't officially been diagnosed and possibly I won't be for a while, but my own private blood sugar testing has shown some spikes up into the Definitely Diabetes range. If it EVER gets that high, if it EVER takes three or more hours to come down to a reasonably normal range, most sources say that is diabetes, no longer "pre-diabetes" but there's still some doubt about it and I'm still hoping I'm not really over the line yet. The one time it spiked up to 204 and took three hours to come down to 118 (Normal is 70-100) I was testing myself on a very high carb meal of chips (Spicy Nacho Doritos) and lemonade (Simply Lemonade brand). I measured both very carefully, tallied the calories and the carbs and I have to say that that was a very modest indulgence for me -- a SMALL bag of chips, not the usual 3/4 or more of a large one, a measured cup of lemonade, not the usual guzzling of what must have amounted to over 20 ounces. I shudder to think what I was doing to myself on those periodic binges.
A couple years ago I got worried about my blood sugar and got a blood monitor. My readings were pretty low as I recall. I lost the monitor, wish I could find it and whatever notes I took at the time. I concluded I was hypoglycemic, I remember that much, and was relieved I wasn't diabetic but also felt a little foolish for being worried about it. Not foolish at all as it turns out, I was on the way to diabetes even then but didn't put two and two together. You'd think I'd have seen it coming but I didn't.
I didn't change my eating at that time but it might have saved me what I'm going through now with HAVING to change my eating or ELSE. For one thing I never thought of my eating pattern as being bad for me. I go for fresh natural foods, I eat lots of vegetables, I don't drink sodas, I very rarely even eat a hamburger. BUT I WAS eating too many potatoes, fried, hash browned, baked, boiled and mashed, whatever, I was really into potatoes, and if I had spaghetti I always had seconds, and any other pasta as well. I would make the occasional sugary dessert and usually ate too much of that too. A local bakery has a great raspberry cream cheese croissant. That and a cafe latte were an occasional indulgence. Not very often but still, now I think of it as death by carbohydrates. One thing that's been hard to get into my head is how much carbohydrate there is in milk. That latte packs a powerful carb punch of its own on top of the lovely flaky fruity creamy pastry.
Never had soda pop but lemonade has just as much sugar in it and has exactly the same effect on blood sugar. Not that I drank a lot of lemonade either but it's SO good on hot days. I'd also get that great juice mix of banana, pineapple and orange from time to time and drink it over ice cubes. Same thing carbohydrates-wise. You can't just have a little bit of such tasty thirst-quenchers either, at least I can't, has to be a couple of large glasses at a time. Again I shudder at the thought of all that sugar bombarding my system and overwhelming my poor pancreas. If I weren't overweight and had been more active -- hard to do with painful arthritis of the hips -- perhaps it wouldn't have been such a dangerous thing to have such periodic indulgences, but the overweight and the inactivity are all part of the syndrome on the way to diabetes.
Why DIDN'T I see it coming? Isn't the national obesity problem in the news enough these days, and the rising incidence of diabetes too, for that matter?
I didn't even register that hypoglycemia is one of the steps to diabetes, when it seemed that was my problem a few years ago. Well, that's probably understandable. How often do you hear that connection made?
A year ago I went to the doctor about worries about taking NSAIDs for my hip pain. He put me through some general testing. My renal function was OK, which is the main worry with NSAIDs, but I was told my fasting blood sugar was a little high. I had no idea what that meant and the doctor didn't explain. Maybe he expected me to know, but I didn't. It doesm't sound good but it doesn't necessarily sound bad either -- a LITTLE high. We discussed diet and the necessity of losing weight, but I've also known for a long time I needed to lose weight and didn't put it together with the slightly high blood sugar reading. It's not easy losing weight, I've tried for years off and on, make some headway and then regress, so unless I'm told something flat-out like You are on the way to getting diabetes UNLESS you lose weight I just sort of figure OK I can try again, but I don't really have much hope for it. I did try again. I lost five pounds. But I wasn't very motivated. I wasn't putting two and two together yet.
I started putting on weight when I quit smoking in 1989. At times in the previous twenty-five-plus years I'd smoked as much as three packs a day. I did quit for a while in my thirties but went back, never again got as high as three packs after that, but still over time I accumulated an awful lot of pack-years. After I became a Christian in the mid-80s I was able to quit finally by giving it all to God, in 1989.
Then I started gaining weight. Do you eat more when you quit smoking or is it just that your metabolism changes?
Anyway I slowly put on weight. In the early 90s I put myself on a drastic self-invented diet and lost a lot, in fact too much. I'd cut out nearly all fat and my daily calorie count was ridiculously low, something like 700-800 a day. My hair and nails got dry and brittle. That was the clue that fat is necessary. It wasn't exactly a healthy diet for those reasons although I did stick to basic natural foods, lots of fresh vegetables, and it certainly worked. I also do have to say I felt good on it: aches and pains went away, stomach problems went away, had a big boost in energy.
Of course after that I started gaining it all back bit by bit. An artificial diet aimed strictly at losing weight is just impossible to live on indefinitely. Took, oh, another ten years to reach my maximum weight, just a bit short of 200 pounds -- on a frame that carries about 130 comfortably and 125 ideally. By that time I was sitting in front of a computer almost all the time, hardly ever got any exercise, had developed severe arthritis in both hips that made even walking difficult, and I was more or less resigned to the situation.
I'd still diet occasionally, usually Atkins style. It does work but I was never able to do it strictly and never stayed on it long enough to give it a real test -- I'd lose a few pounds, even up to ten or more, but then abandon it.
Partly I was just never sure about its claims: is this a good way to eat or not?
Then a few months ago I noticed I had this sweet smell about me. Very odd. Also a yeasty sort of smell. It was in my clothes, in my bedding even. I didn't think much of it for quite a while but then it hit me. Uh oh. Yeast thrives on sugar, my skin smells sweet. Is sugar coming out of my pores or what? What does that make you think of? Yeah, diabetes. So I looked it up on line but the usual diabetes sites never mention a sweet smell as a symptom. Then I finally found a message board where one person said she had that symptom and wondered what it was. She said she smelled "like cookie dough." Exactly! At last! The other contributors to the board had never heard of it either but most of them immediately thought *diabetes* -- better go get it checked out.
So I bought another blood glucose monitor, cut down my calories and carb intake, started reading up on diabetes, and eventually made an appointment with the doctor.
So abruptly, startlingly, I finally put two and two together. NOW I'm motivated. Fear is a wonderful motivator. I am losing weight. I've lost over thirty pounds and am still losing. It's slowed down but as long as the trend is still downward I'm content. I know I'm doing something right and it's going to keep going even if there are some lengthy plateaus on the way. My blood sugar readings are rarely down into the normal range, but they aren't really high either as long as I watch what I eat, and I'm hoping to learn how to master the situation until they ARE normal.
And that first of all means keeping carbs to an absolute minimum.
It's the carbs that raise your blood sugar, nothing else, just carbs. It doesn't matter if it's "good" carbs or "bad" carbs, they ALL raise your blood sugar. The only difference is that the good carbs often come with enough fiber to slow down the effect, and if you eat them along with protein and low-carb vegetables that also helps keep them from spiking your blood sugar level. But still, they have to be kept to a minimum. They DO raise your blood sugar, there is no getting around that, and it's high blood sugar you want to avoid because it's the high blood sugar that does all the damage to your body in diabetes. The bad carbs have to go out just about absolutely.
NO MORE SUGAR
NO MORE RECIPES THAT REQUIRE FLOUR
NO CEREALS OF ANY KIND
NO POTATOES, RICE, PASTA AT ALL UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE
HARDLY ANY BREAD.
NO FRUIT EITHER.
JUST LOW CARB VEGETABLES, AND MEAT AND OTHER PROTEINS
A couple years ago I got worried about my blood sugar and got a blood monitor. My readings were pretty low as I recall. I lost the monitor, wish I could find it and whatever notes I took at the time. I concluded I was hypoglycemic, I remember that much, and was relieved I wasn't diabetic but also felt a little foolish for being worried about it. Not foolish at all as it turns out, I was on the way to diabetes even then but didn't put two and two together. You'd think I'd have seen it coming but I didn't.
I didn't change my eating at that time but it might have saved me what I'm going through now with HAVING to change my eating or ELSE. For one thing I never thought of my eating pattern as being bad for me. I go for fresh natural foods, I eat lots of vegetables, I don't drink sodas, I very rarely even eat a hamburger. BUT I WAS eating too many potatoes, fried, hash browned, baked, boiled and mashed, whatever, I was really into potatoes, and if I had spaghetti I always had seconds, and any other pasta as well. I would make the occasional sugary dessert and usually ate too much of that too. A local bakery has a great raspberry cream cheese croissant. That and a cafe latte were an occasional indulgence. Not very often but still, now I think of it as death by carbohydrates. One thing that's been hard to get into my head is how much carbohydrate there is in milk. That latte packs a powerful carb punch of its own on top of the lovely flaky fruity creamy pastry.
Never had soda pop but lemonade has just as much sugar in it and has exactly the same effect on blood sugar. Not that I drank a lot of lemonade either but it's SO good on hot days. I'd also get that great juice mix of banana, pineapple and orange from time to time and drink it over ice cubes. Same thing carbohydrates-wise. You can't just have a little bit of such tasty thirst-quenchers either, at least I can't, has to be a couple of large glasses at a time. Again I shudder at the thought of all that sugar bombarding my system and overwhelming my poor pancreas. If I weren't overweight and had been more active -- hard to do with painful arthritis of the hips -- perhaps it wouldn't have been such a dangerous thing to have such periodic indulgences, but the overweight and the inactivity are all part of the syndrome on the way to diabetes.
Why DIDN'T I see it coming? Isn't the national obesity problem in the news enough these days, and the rising incidence of diabetes too, for that matter?
I didn't even register that hypoglycemia is one of the steps to diabetes, when it seemed that was my problem a few years ago. Well, that's probably understandable. How often do you hear that connection made?
A year ago I went to the doctor about worries about taking NSAIDs for my hip pain. He put me through some general testing. My renal function was OK, which is the main worry with NSAIDs, but I was told my fasting blood sugar was a little high. I had no idea what that meant and the doctor didn't explain. Maybe he expected me to know, but I didn't. It doesm't sound good but it doesn't necessarily sound bad either -- a LITTLE high. We discussed diet and the necessity of losing weight, but I've also known for a long time I needed to lose weight and didn't put it together with the slightly high blood sugar reading. It's not easy losing weight, I've tried for years off and on, make some headway and then regress, so unless I'm told something flat-out like You are on the way to getting diabetes UNLESS you lose weight I just sort of figure OK I can try again, but I don't really have much hope for it. I did try again. I lost five pounds. But I wasn't very motivated. I wasn't putting two and two together yet.
I started putting on weight when I quit smoking in 1989. At times in the previous twenty-five-plus years I'd smoked as much as three packs a day. I did quit for a while in my thirties but went back, never again got as high as three packs after that, but still over time I accumulated an awful lot of pack-years. After I became a Christian in the mid-80s I was able to quit finally by giving it all to God, in 1989.
Then I started gaining weight. Do you eat more when you quit smoking or is it just that your metabolism changes?
Anyway I slowly put on weight. In the early 90s I put myself on a drastic self-invented diet and lost a lot, in fact too much. I'd cut out nearly all fat and my daily calorie count was ridiculously low, something like 700-800 a day. My hair and nails got dry and brittle. That was the clue that fat is necessary. It wasn't exactly a healthy diet for those reasons although I did stick to basic natural foods, lots of fresh vegetables, and it certainly worked. I also do have to say I felt good on it: aches and pains went away, stomach problems went away, had a big boost in energy.
Of course after that I started gaining it all back bit by bit. An artificial diet aimed strictly at losing weight is just impossible to live on indefinitely. Took, oh, another ten years to reach my maximum weight, just a bit short of 200 pounds -- on a frame that carries about 130 comfortably and 125 ideally. By that time I was sitting in front of a computer almost all the time, hardly ever got any exercise, had developed severe arthritis in both hips that made even walking difficult, and I was more or less resigned to the situation.
I'd still diet occasionally, usually Atkins style. It does work but I was never able to do it strictly and never stayed on it long enough to give it a real test -- I'd lose a few pounds, even up to ten or more, but then abandon it.
Partly I was just never sure about its claims: is this a good way to eat or not?
Then a few months ago I noticed I had this sweet smell about me. Very odd. Also a yeasty sort of smell. It was in my clothes, in my bedding even. I didn't think much of it for quite a while but then it hit me. Uh oh. Yeast thrives on sugar, my skin smells sweet. Is sugar coming out of my pores or what? What does that make you think of? Yeah, diabetes. So I looked it up on line but the usual diabetes sites never mention a sweet smell as a symptom. Then I finally found a message board where one person said she had that symptom and wondered what it was. She said she smelled "like cookie dough." Exactly! At last! The other contributors to the board had never heard of it either but most of them immediately thought *diabetes* -- better go get it checked out.
So I bought another blood glucose monitor, cut down my calories and carb intake, started reading up on diabetes, and eventually made an appointment with the doctor.
So abruptly, startlingly, I finally put two and two together. NOW I'm motivated. Fear is a wonderful motivator. I am losing weight. I've lost over thirty pounds and am still losing. It's slowed down but as long as the trend is still downward I'm content. I know I'm doing something right and it's going to keep going even if there are some lengthy plateaus on the way. My blood sugar readings are rarely down into the normal range, but they aren't really high either as long as I watch what I eat, and I'm hoping to learn how to master the situation until they ARE normal.
And that first of all means keeping carbs to an absolute minimum.
It's the carbs that raise your blood sugar, nothing else, just carbs. It doesn't matter if it's "good" carbs or "bad" carbs, they ALL raise your blood sugar. The only difference is that the good carbs often come with enough fiber to slow down the effect, and if you eat them along with protein and low-carb vegetables that also helps keep them from spiking your blood sugar level. But still, they have to be kept to a minimum. They DO raise your blood sugar, there is no getting around that, and it's high blood sugar you want to avoid because it's the high blood sugar that does all the damage to your body in diabetes. The bad carbs have to go out just about absolutely.
NO MORE SUGAR
NO MORE RECIPES THAT REQUIRE FLOUR
NO CEREALS OF ANY KIND
NO POTATOES, RICE, PASTA AT ALL UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE
HARDLY ANY BREAD.
NO FRUIT EITHER.
JUST LOW CARB VEGETABLES, AND MEAT AND OTHER PROTEINS
Friday, April 8, 2011
Hoping to find a diet that really can become a lifestyle.
Still losing weight, but more slowly now because I'm not keeping to the lowest calorie count any more, aiming to find the calorie level I could possibly go on living with after I've lost the weight.
Keep seeing ads and articles about this or that diet plan, the latest being the 17-day diet. Read some reviews at Amazon. Really, there's no point in trying a specific diet plan. I can get some ideas from some of them but I don't do well with prescribed detailed recipes. The reason you -- or at least I -- gain back the weight lost on a diet plan is because you can't live with the foods required on the plan. I have to eat what I like. Many diet plans claim you can do this on their scheme, but when you really get into it, no, you can't.
I know I have to cut carbs and I know I have to cut calories. Within those requirements I want food I enjoy eating. I took a Metabolism Type Test on one of these diet plans recently (turns out there are many different versions of this test out there but they all get at the same basic concept) and found out I'm a Protein Type rather than a Carb Type and according to them we are to gear our eating to our type. This makes sense to me up to a point. The "Power Cookie" that is breakfast on the 17-day Diet, for instance, does not appeal to me AT ALL. I love carbs of course but I think we're all different in WHAT carbs we favor and the Metabolic Test seems to recognize that. Carbs are not my first choice for breakfast, I'd much rather have bacon and eggs. Of course I don't mind the hash browns with that, but I've realized that part has to go or at least be cut back to a minimum. Anyway I don't particularly like pancakes or cereal or muffins or cake -- much prefer fruity and creamy pastries but I don't need to eat them very often -- and the Power Cookie sounds too much like a muffin, just a crumbly dry sweet thing. A Carb Type could probably do very well with that sort of breakfast, but it won't work for me.
What DOES make some sense on the 17-day Diet to my mind is the idea of sticking fairly closely to the same foods for a while -- 17 days according to that particular plan -- and then switching to different foods in an effort to stave off the famous Plateau effect which is understood to be caused by your body's adapting to a particular style of eating. It seems worth a try anyway.
I hope that means a simple switch from beef to chicken or fish, or from one kind of veggie to another, so I could do steak and salad for a couple of weeks and then chicken or fish and a different vegie for another two weeks. And I WILL eat the crispy chicken skin, sorry, that's not going away. I'm convinced that high cholesterol is not caused by fat, and some diet plans agree with me about that. My cholesterol has never been very high and I love fat. If there were a Fat Type I'm sure I'd be in that type rather than the Protein Type. Well, maybe that's an exaggeration (but not a big exaggeration -- Bacon, oh yes tons of it I COULD eat, eggs too -- all that yummy fatty yolk, butter of course -- and Hollandaise sauce which is nothing but yolks and butter and lemon has always been a favorite of mine -- heavy cream in coffee for sure, sour cream by the tub -- tangy sour cream dips for instance, the fattiest nuts -- cashews and macadamias -- also avocadoes, and of course the spicy crispy chicken skin etc. etc. etc. I also like the sweet versions of fat, the Haagen Dazs, the cream puffs, the rich chocolatey things etc, but since those raise blood sugars I'm now sticking with the spicy versions instead).
Anyway, this Atkins type of eating I can do quite easily and I don't get bored with it either. I can do a meat-and-veggies dinner almost indefinitely - it's food I love, but it does create carb cravings after a while so I have to be sure I'm getting enough carbs when I do this. So far so good. A piece of toast here, a quarter cup of pasta there, or half a small potato with butter - and not with every meal either. It works, it really does. Just add up the calories and stay close to the allotted number.
Another thing I love is Mexican Salad -- just spicy browned hamburger meat over a pile of lettuce, tomato, cucumber, green pepper, onion etc., and sometimes grated cheese and/or sour cream --carefully measured of course. But I can't cut the salad dressing down to a couple of teaspoons, sorry just can't. It's GOOD salad dressing too, EV olive oil with wine vinegar, minced garlic and herbs, sometimes a dollop of dijon mustard, good stuff. Three tablespoons on a very big raw vegie salad is about the minimum. Again, just add the calories into the total for the day.
I LOVE bacon and eggs but I've found that only one egg and one strip of bacon is surprisingly satisfying. Add a sliced half tomato with salad dressing and a spoonful of cottage cheese OR a piece of buttered toast and that makes a good breakfast for me and only about 250 calories. Just add up the calories and the carbs and check the blood sugar monitor an hour or so later if toast is on the menu. Some days it may be two eggs and two strips of bacon. Way it goes. Just add up the calories.
Of course I'm getting into a routine, even a rut, with these things, and if switching foods is the thing to do to keep up the weight loss I'm going to have to come up with a new routine soon.
===================
April 12: Gotta report that I'm continuing to lose even though I haven't yet switched my routine. Counting calories is the way to go, eating what I LIKE to eat -- that's crucial. You HAVE to eat what you like or you'll never make this a lifetime habit, and it does keep down the hunger pangs when you do. Now it seems I might even be losing too fast and need to up my daily calorie intake a bit. But it's only about a pound a week on average. OK, that's probably not too fast.
Keep seeing ads and articles about this or that diet plan, the latest being the 17-day diet. Read some reviews at Amazon. Really, there's no point in trying a specific diet plan. I can get some ideas from some of them but I don't do well with prescribed detailed recipes. The reason you -- or at least I -- gain back the weight lost on a diet plan is because you can't live with the foods required on the plan. I have to eat what I like. Many diet plans claim you can do this on their scheme, but when you really get into it, no, you can't.
I know I have to cut carbs and I know I have to cut calories. Within those requirements I want food I enjoy eating. I took a Metabolism Type Test on one of these diet plans recently (turns out there are many different versions of this test out there but they all get at the same basic concept) and found out I'm a Protein Type rather than a Carb Type and according to them we are to gear our eating to our type. This makes sense to me up to a point. The "Power Cookie" that is breakfast on the 17-day Diet, for instance, does not appeal to me AT ALL. I love carbs of course but I think we're all different in WHAT carbs we favor and the Metabolic Test seems to recognize that. Carbs are not my first choice for breakfast, I'd much rather have bacon and eggs. Of course I don't mind the hash browns with that, but I've realized that part has to go or at least be cut back to a minimum. Anyway I don't particularly like pancakes or cereal or muffins or cake -- much prefer fruity and creamy pastries but I don't need to eat them very often -- and the Power Cookie sounds too much like a muffin, just a crumbly dry sweet thing. A Carb Type could probably do very well with that sort of breakfast, but it won't work for me.
What DOES make some sense on the 17-day Diet to my mind is the idea of sticking fairly closely to the same foods for a while -- 17 days according to that particular plan -- and then switching to different foods in an effort to stave off the famous Plateau effect which is understood to be caused by your body's adapting to a particular style of eating. It seems worth a try anyway.
I hope that means a simple switch from beef to chicken or fish, or from one kind of veggie to another, so I could do steak and salad for a couple of weeks and then chicken or fish and a different vegie for another two weeks. And I WILL eat the crispy chicken skin, sorry, that's not going away. I'm convinced that high cholesterol is not caused by fat, and some diet plans agree with me about that. My cholesterol has never been very high and I love fat. If there were a Fat Type I'm sure I'd be in that type rather than the Protein Type. Well, maybe that's an exaggeration (but not a big exaggeration -- Bacon, oh yes tons of it I COULD eat, eggs too -- all that yummy fatty yolk, butter of course -- and Hollandaise sauce which is nothing but yolks and butter and lemon has always been a favorite of mine -- heavy cream in coffee for sure, sour cream by the tub -- tangy sour cream dips for instance, the fattiest nuts -- cashews and macadamias -- also avocadoes, and of course the spicy crispy chicken skin etc. etc. etc. I also like the sweet versions of fat, the Haagen Dazs, the cream puffs, the rich chocolatey things etc, but since those raise blood sugars I'm now sticking with the spicy versions instead).
Anyway, this Atkins type of eating I can do quite easily and I don't get bored with it either. I can do a meat-and-veggies dinner almost indefinitely - it's food I love, but it does create carb cravings after a while so I have to be sure I'm getting enough carbs when I do this. So far so good. A piece of toast here, a quarter cup of pasta there, or half a small potato with butter - and not with every meal either. It works, it really does. Just add up the calories and stay close to the allotted number.
Another thing I love is Mexican Salad -- just spicy browned hamburger meat over a pile of lettuce, tomato, cucumber, green pepper, onion etc., and sometimes grated cheese and/or sour cream --carefully measured of course. But I can't cut the salad dressing down to a couple of teaspoons, sorry just can't. It's GOOD salad dressing too, EV olive oil with wine vinegar, minced garlic and herbs, sometimes a dollop of dijon mustard, good stuff. Three tablespoons on a very big raw vegie salad is about the minimum. Again, just add the calories into the total for the day.
I LOVE bacon and eggs but I've found that only one egg and one strip of bacon is surprisingly satisfying. Add a sliced half tomato with salad dressing and a spoonful of cottage cheese OR a piece of buttered toast and that makes a good breakfast for me and only about 250 calories. Just add up the calories and the carbs and check the blood sugar monitor an hour or so later if toast is on the menu. Some days it may be two eggs and two strips of bacon. Way it goes. Just add up the calories.
Of course I'm getting into a routine, even a rut, with these things, and if switching foods is the thing to do to keep up the weight loss I'm going to have to come up with a new routine soon.
===================
April 12: Gotta report that I'm continuing to lose even though I haven't yet switched my routine. Counting calories is the way to go, eating what I LIKE to eat -- that's crucial. You HAVE to eat what you like or you'll never make this a lifetime habit, and it does keep down the hunger pangs when you do. Now it seems I might even be losing too fast and need to up my daily calorie intake a bit. But it's only about a pound a week on average. OK, that's probably not too fast.
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Losing Weight to avoid diabetes
A few months ago I got seriously worried that I might have diabetes, and there's nothing like fear for motivation. I've already lost fifteen pounds which has already reduced my blood sugar levels, but I'm going to keep going (yes, I have a lot to lose).
I got a blood glucose monitor so I can keep track of the effect of foods on my blood sugar, and am hoping I can eventually get myself out of the "prediabetic" range back to normal. If not, I'm at least happy to find out I'm not outright diabetic, which for a while there I thought might be the case, and glad to know that I have so much control over it with diet. No fad diets, just emphasizing good nutrition and counting calories. Counting calories is the only thing that ever worked for me and it's working now.
Thought I'd post some helpful information I've found on the internet for anyone who needs the information who stumbles on this post:
So You Wanna Lose Weight: The basics about losing weight very convincingly presented.
Here's a very helpful Calorie Calculator site -- to figure daily calorie intake for weight goals. They have a calculator for men and a calculator for women.
I'm a bit surprised to find myself including this ad for a diet program but I watched the video and thought they did a very good job. This is called The Diet Solution -- good advice about what kinds of foods are best. I learned a lot about which carbs to avoid and which to choose. The video alone gives helpful advice. I didn't get the program but it looks like a good one. They emphasize natural foods, avoid processed foods, which I do anyway.
They also put down calorie counting and I haven't read enough to find out how good or bad their reasoning may be about that, but I'm certainly not giving that up for now as it is the ONLY thing that works for me to lose weight. Whatever I eat I measure and I write it down, I look up its calorie count if I don't already know it, also its carb count, and keep a running tally for the day.
I also ran across some independent recommendations for that diet plan. Here's one.
I got a blood glucose monitor so I can keep track of the effect of foods on my blood sugar, and am hoping I can eventually get myself out of the "prediabetic" range back to normal. If not, I'm at least happy to find out I'm not outright diabetic, which for a while there I thought might be the case, and glad to know that I have so much control over it with diet. No fad diets, just emphasizing good nutrition and counting calories. Counting calories is the only thing that ever worked for me and it's working now.
Thought I'd post some helpful information I've found on the internet for anyone who needs the information who stumbles on this post:
So You Wanna Lose Weight: The basics about losing weight very convincingly presented.
Here's a very helpful Calorie Calculator site -- to figure daily calorie intake for weight goals. They have a calculator for men and a calculator for women.
I'm a bit surprised to find myself including this ad for a diet program but I watched the video and thought they did a very good job. This is called The Diet Solution -- good advice about what kinds of foods are best. I learned a lot about which carbs to avoid and which to choose. The video alone gives helpful advice. I didn't get the program but it looks like a good one. They emphasize natural foods, avoid processed foods, which I do anyway.
They also put down calorie counting and I haven't read enough to find out how good or bad their reasoning may be about that, but I'm certainly not giving that up for now as it is the ONLY thing that works for me to lose weight. Whatever I eat I measure and I write it down, I look up its calorie count if I don't already know it, also its carb count, and keep a running tally for the day.
I also ran across some independent recommendations for that diet plan. Here's one.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
A short word in favor of The Carrot
BIG pot of carrots cooked then pureed, eaten as a thick soup with some ginger and sour cream, yum. I'm actually stuffed. On carrot soup! Hardly any calories.
I was going to do a post on the wonderful carrot, carrot juice which I love, and the lore I'm aware of about people curing themselves of cancer on the stuff. I could repeat a couple anecdotes but it probably deserves more research.
I did at least find a website on the glorious carrot for anyone who might be interested, and a page linked from that one that discusses the relative merits of cooking them versus eating them raw . In a nutshell: Cooking makes the beta carotene more available than eating carrots raw, but there are good and better ways of doing it, and juicing the carrots is even better for releasing the nutrients.
I was going to do a post on the wonderful carrot, carrot juice which I love, and the lore I'm aware of about people curing themselves of cancer on the stuff. I could repeat a couple anecdotes but it probably deserves more research.
I did at least find a website on the glorious carrot for anyone who might be interested, and a page linked from that one that discusses the relative merits of cooking them versus eating them raw . In a nutshell: Cooking makes the beta carotene more available than eating carrots raw, but there are good and better ways of doing it, and juicing the carrots is even better for releasing the nutrients.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Down Off the Green Smoothy Cloud, Part 2: Adelle Davis and the history of Nutritionism
Really bogged down on this Green Smoothy topic, haven't I? Have versions of other posts I thought I'd have put up by now waiting in the wings. Don't know if I'll even get them finished now.
I think I started this diet change at the wrong time of year. Not only does the cold make it difficult but my finances are extra low now too and although they say it's not an expensive diet, for me it is. A green smoothy takes enough greens and fruit for three or four normal meals. That's of course what gives it such a powerful nutritional impact. And if you buy organic produce it's even more expensive. And other changes go along with it that can also get expensive as you get deeper into the dietary requirements. It would be nice to be able to give it a serious try, but it isn't going to happen for me right now. Maybe some other time.
As I've been reading about the Raw Food Diet of which the Green Smoothy is a big part I've also been getting into the general Health Food lore, and was reminded of Adelle Davis who is really the grandmother of the whole alternate nutrition world. There were a few faddist health food places in the 40s and 50s -- I know because I had an aunt who was into them. I remember going with her to a health food bar as a child and getting a carrot juice. But Adelle Davis gave all that a big boost and now there are health food stores in every town, and the big market chain Whole Foods. It's become quite the industry and Adelle Davis should get a big share of the credit. I read at least one of her books back in the late 60s - early 70s and was enough of a follower to use her advice when I was pregnant. Gained WAY too much weight packing in the protein and vitamins her idea of healthy eating required.
As I've been reading along about these things it's struck me how these days some nutritional ideas that are going out of favor with the Health Food people are ideas she originated, although these are not attributed to her but to the evil "food industry" or the evil "medical profession" or the evil FDA -- the nutritional enemy of the day whatever it happens to be.
For instance, protein is no longer the big deal she made of it. I don't really know why it was in her day either. If the American diet is low in anything it's not protein. We've always been a bunch of meat eaters and milk drinkers too -- it's why Americans were known even in the early part of the 20th century to grow taller than others around the world. But Adelle carried on as if Americans were suffering from protein malnutrition, and just like all Health Foodists blamed the "food industry," whatever that is, or some other favorite boogyman. Her nutritionist heirs have picked up the blame habit although now they may be complaining about something she actually originated and not know it.
For instance, now saturated fat is making a comeback after years of being regarded as bad for health, but who gets the blame for that assessment of it? The "soy industry," or the evil "medical profession" or some such, when it was Adelle Davis who started that notion, the nutritionists' own Great Lady. She had a recipe for mixing unsaturated oil with butter to cut down on the saturated fat in the butter. It was a big thing with her. And if the "food industry" or the evil "medical profession" picked up on that and made it the staple of a "heart-healthy" diet, it's because of her and those who followed her lead. I remember Davis talking about certain oils as if they were poison itself because they are saturated fats, the very same oils you may find recommended along with the Green Smoothy diet these days, coconut oil for instance.
Also, in some areas soy is going out, some even calling it a "poison" after years of its being considered a great health boon. Guess who started the soy bean craze? No, not the "soy industry," Adelle Davis -- because of her protein mania, soy being supposedly this wonderful cheap source of protein. The soy industry was created as a result of the clamoring of those who followed Davis' and other health-foodists' advice, just as the unsaturated fat industry was created from the same influence. Specially advertised unsaturated fats started appearing in the supermarkets in the late 60s or early 70s.
So did yogurt start getting big about that time, another Adelle Davis favorite (as was milk in general with her, which now is rejected by the Raw Foodists). Of course Americans had to have yogurt sweetened, so it was only a compromise and plain yogurt has remained a low seller by comparison. But business gets created where there is a market. The market first of all caters to habits and to taste, that's why we get SO much sugar in everything. People LIKE it so it sells. But nutritional information also has an impact, and Adelle Davis was probably the biggest influence on that market for years. Organic foods were pushed by nutritionists and most big stores now carry them. Now I think I see signs that the Raw Food diet may be catching on as well.
I think I started this diet change at the wrong time of year. Not only does the cold make it difficult but my finances are extra low now too and although they say it's not an expensive diet, for me it is. A green smoothy takes enough greens and fruit for three or four normal meals. That's of course what gives it such a powerful nutritional impact. And if you buy organic produce it's even more expensive. And other changes go along with it that can also get expensive as you get deeper into the dietary requirements. It would be nice to be able to give it a serious try, but it isn't going to happen for me right now. Maybe some other time.
As I've been reading about the Raw Food Diet of which the Green Smoothy is a big part I've also been getting into the general Health Food lore, and was reminded of Adelle Davis who is really the grandmother of the whole alternate nutrition world. There were a few faddist health food places in the 40s and 50s -- I know because I had an aunt who was into them. I remember going with her to a health food bar as a child and getting a carrot juice. But Adelle Davis gave all that a big boost and now there are health food stores in every town, and the big market chain Whole Foods. It's become quite the industry and Adelle Davis should get a big share of the credit. I read at least one of her books back in the late 60s - early 70s and was enough of a follower to use her advice when I was pregnant. Gained WAY too much weight packing in the protein and vitamins her idea of healthy eating required.
As I've been reading along about these things it's struck me how these days some nutritional ideas that are going out of favor with the Health Food people are ideas she originated, although these are not attributed to her but to the evil "food industry" or the evil "medical profession" or the evil FDA -- the nutritional enemy of the day whatever it happens to be.
For instance, protein is no longer the big deal she made of it. I don't really know why it was in her day either. If the American diet is low in anything it's not protein. We've always been a bunch of meat eaters and milk drinkers too -- it's why Americans were known even in the early part of the 20th century to grow taller than others around the world. But Adelle carried on as if Americans were suffering from protein malnutrition, and just like all Health Foodists blamed the "food industry," whatever that is, or some other favorite boogyman. Her nutritionist heirs have picked up the blame habit although now they may be complaining about something she actually originated and not know it.
For instance, now saturated fat is making a comeback after years of being regarded as bad for health, but who gets the blame for that assessment of it? The "soy industry," or the evil "medical profession" or some such, when it was Adelle Davis who started that notion, the nutritionists' own Great Lady. She had a recipe for mixing unsaturated oil with butter to cut down on the saturated fat in the butter. It was a big thing with her. And if the "food industry" or the evil "medical profession" picked up on that and made it the staple of a "heart-healthy" diet, it's because of her and those who followed her lead. I remember Davis talking about certain oils as if they were poison itself because they are saturated fats, the very same oils you may find recommended along with the Green Smoothy diet these days, coconut oil for instance.
Also, in some areas soy is going out, some even calling it a "poison" after years of its being considered a great health boon. Guess who started the soy bean craze? No, not the "soy industry," Adelle Davis -- because of her protein mania, soy being supposedly this wonderful cheap source of protein. The soy industry was created as a result of the clamoring of those who followed Davis' and other health-foodists' advice, just as the unsaturated fat industry was created from the same influence. Specially advertised unsaturated fats started appearing in the supermarkets in the late 60s or early 70s.
So did yogurt start getting big about that time, another Adelle Davis favorite (as was milk in general with her, which now is rejected by the Raw Foodists). Of course Americans had to have yogurt sweetened, so it was only a compromise and plain yogurt has remained a low seller by comparison. But business gets created where there is a market. The market first of all caters to habits and to taste, that's why we get SO much sugar in everything. People LIKE it so it sells. But nutritional information also has an impact, and Adelle Davis was probably the biggest influence on that market for years. Organic foods were pushed by nutritionists and most big stores now carry them. Now I think I see signs that the Raw Food diet may be catching on as well.
Saturday, December 18, 2010
Down Off the Green Smoothy Cloud, Part 1
I want to do a series of posts now that are going to stir up some dust as I want to raise some doubts and criticisms about the worlds of alternative medicine and health foods.
Just to be clear, I'm not going to be objecting to Green Smoothies or even the Raw Diet as such. I have no reason to doubt any of the testimonials about this form of nutrition and there are many out there.
Nutritionally there's nothing wrong with the smoothies in concept or in practical application that I can see. It's all good food in concentrated form and it's bound to have good effects for those who stick to it, maybe even some very dramatic effects as some have in fact reported. I don't doubt this at all, and I happen to think there's something to the claims for the healing power of carrot juice as well, and eventually I want to write about that. (Carrots are not a part of the Green Smoothy concept, they're a pet food of my own).
I may myself be giving up on green smoothies, however, although maybe not completely, and the reason has to do with getting my head straightened out about a few things. I've had some "aha" experiences in the last day or two that led me to this.
First, although I really like the idea of the smoothies and I like the experience of drinking them too, I was running into problems. Some of it has to do with my addiction to coffee, as it conflicts with the smoothies in various ways. The bitter taste in my mouth has not gone away, and while I know that's from the coffee I also know it's somehow affected by the greens in the smoothy. From time to time I give up coffee for long periods because it's so acid in my stomach and it's about time I gave it up again, and that may make the smoothy project a lot easier. Right now, however, it's very cold out, I'm out of tea, and there's so much snow I really don't feel like going out to the market to get some. So that just puts the smoothies on hold for a while.
AHA! experience #1: You don't need smoothies to get enough vegies:
Meanwhile I got into using up the ingredients for the smoothies in ways I really have been enjoying and this is boosting my intake of good vegies for the better. The potato and chard dish I made night before last was beyond delicious. Last night I made a carrot soup that was so good I gobbled down what was left of it straight out of the refrigerator this morning. Hardly any calories, a ton of beta carotene and total yum!
Tonight I plan to make a spinach soup on the same basic plan -- saute some onion in a little olive oil and butter, add some water, part of it chicken broth, then as much of the sliced/diced/shredded vegie as will fit just under the liquid - or shrivel down to that level in the case of spinach. Simmer until soft, then puree in the blender. I also added some garlic powder to the carrot soup at the end, may do the same with the spinach.
Unless you are really convinced of the raw-foodist idea that cooking food ruins it nutritionally (and I am not -- more to come on this subject), this has to be a power-packed soup, carrot or spinach to the max, and if the blender does help to make nutrients more available for digestion, as the green smoothy lore says it does, it ought to do the same to the hot soup as well. The aha experience in this was the recognition that the raw smoothies are not the only way to pack in the nutrition from greens and other vegetables that we tend not to get enough of. I just hadn't been eating them this way in a long time, and I want to get back to it, and in fact I want to increase this kind of eating. And for that I can thank the Green Smoothy camp. It may not have the dramatic health benefits of the smoothies but it has to contribute to health overall.
Then I also have been increasing my intake of vegie salads, which I love anyway. In this case I'm not using up smoothy ingredients -- except apple -- just eating more vegies in general which the smoothy idea inspired. Crunchies starting with cauliflower, celery, bell pepper and apple. Oil, vinegar and garlic dressing I make myself.
Then I had a 4-oz piece of New York steak with it, beautifully browned, pink inside. They're on sale for 3.99 lb in the Family Pack, the same price as the frozen tilapia I also like to stock up on. Cut them into 3-or-4-oz pieces and freeze them and I can have steak for two weeks if I want.
I do get Carb Craving with just meat and vegies though, and having none of the usual carbs around at the moment -- like potatoes, rice and pasta -- I had a piece of toast with butter. It works.
On to AHA! Experience #2: Raw is good, but so is Cooked
Just to be clear, I'm not going to be objecting to Green Smoothies or even the Raw Diet as such. I have no reason to doubt any of the testimonials about this form of nutrition and there are many out there.
Nutritionally there's nothing wrong with the smoothies in concept or in practical application that I can see. It's all good food in concentrated form and it's bound to have good effects for those who stick to it, maybe even some very dramatic effects as some have in fact reported. I don't doubt this at all, and I happen to think there's something to the claims for the healing power of carrot juice as well, and eventually I want to write about that. (Carrots are not a part of the Green Smoothy concept, they're a pet food of my own).
I may myself be giving up on green smoothies, however, although maybe not completely, and the reason has to do with getting my head straightened out about a few things. I've had some "aha" experiences in the last day or two that led me to this.
First, although I really like the idea of the smoothies and I like the experience of drinking them too, I was running into problems. Some of it has to do with my addiction to coffee, as it conflicts with the smoothies in various ways. The bitter taste in my mouth has not gone away, and while I know that's from the coffee I also know it's somehow affected by the greens in the smoothy. From time to time I give up coffee for long periods because it's so acid in my stomach and it's about time I gave it up again, and that may make the smoothy project a lot easier. Right now, however, it's very cold out, I'm out of tea, and there's so much snow I really don't feel like going out to the market to get some. So that just puts the smoothies on hold for a while.
AHA! experience #1: You don't need smoothies to get enough vegies:
Meanwhile I got into using up the ingredients for the smoothies in ways I really have been enjoying and this is boosting my intake of good vegies for the better. The potato and chard dish I made night before last was beyond delicious. Last night I made a carrot soup that was so good I gobbled down what was left of it straight out of the refrigerator this morning. Hardly any calories, a ton of beta carotene and total yum!
Tonight I plan to make a spinach soup on the same basic plan -- saute some onion in a little olive oil and butter, add some water, part of it chicken broth, then as much of the sliced/diced/shredded vegie as will fit just under the liquid - or shrivel down to that level in the case of spinach. Simmer until soft, then puree in the blender. I also added some garlic powder to the carrot soup at the end, may do the same with the spinach.
Unless you are really convinced of the raw-foodist idea that cooking food ruins it nutritionally (and I am not -- more to come on this subject), this has to be a power-packed soup, carrot or spinach to the max, and if the blender does help to make nutrients more available for digestion, as the green smoothy lore says it does, it ought to do the same to the hot soup as well. The aha experience in this was the recognition that the raw smoothies are not the only way to pack in the nutrition from greens and other vegetables that we tend not to get enough of. I just hadn't been eating them this way in a long time, and I want to get back to it, and in fact I want to increase this kind of eating. And for that I can thank the Green Smoothy camp. It may not have the dramatic health benefits of the smoothies but it has to contribute to health overall.
Then I also have been increasing my intake of vegie salads, which I love anyway. In this case I'm not using up smoothy ingredients -- except apple -- just eating more vegies in general which the smoothy idea inspired. Crunchies starting with cauliflower, celery, bell pepper and apple. Oil, vinegar and garlic dressing I make myself.
Then I had a 4-oz piece of New York steak with it, beautifully browned, pink inside. They're on sale for 3.99 lb in the Family Pack, the same price as the frozen tilapia I also like to stock up on. Cut them into 3-or-4-oz pieces and freeze them and I can have steak for two weeks if I want.
I do get Carb Craving with just meat and vegies though, and having none of the usual carbs around at the moment -- like potatoes, rice and pasta -- I had a piece of toast with butter. It works.
On to AHA! Experience #2: Raw is good, but so is Cooked
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Green Smoothy Detour
Just didn't want to do a smoothy today. I'm going to have to reorient and get back to it. Not giving up, just figuring this is the way it has to go with a new thing, on again off again until it either takes hold or doesn't.
I read one blogger recently who did the 30-Day Raw Food Diet. He'd started it four or five times previously and it didn't take for him -- not enough calories was the basic problem -- so he did more research and tried again. He analyzed the calorie deficit problem and realized getting enough in this diet depends upon the natural fats -- in the form of nuts and avocados -- and/or the fruits, and decided the emphasis should be on the fruits. I'll have to reread it to know why it didn't take this time either, but it didn't, although it had some benefits he enjoyed and he found some foods he wanted to make a part of his usual diet. So be it. We'll either find a way to make use of the ideas or not.
In researching about the green smoothies and the overall raw food diet (I do plan to post links with some opinions eventually) I ran across some interesting related foods. One I kept being attracted to was Carrot Milkshake. One health-food practice I do occasionally do is juice my own fruits and vegetables. I used to do a lot more of it but I did go through a bag of carrots in a few days about a month ago. I love carrot juice.
So tonight I made a carrot milkshake instead of a green smoothy. I juiced the carrots first and then mixed them with their own fiber in the blender. Seemed easier than grating them first or watching my blender struggle with hard pieces of carrot (Now THAT's a job for one of those huge powerful blenders). I used six medium carrots instead of one large one, used a scant cup of milk instead of 10 ounces, used 2T sugar instead of 1-1/2. I have no cardamom, wish I did but it still tasted good. Yes, very nice drink.
Then the chard I had for the smoothies was getting wilted so I cooked it and some potatoes and then sauteed them together with garlic in olive oil, added some butter at the end, and boy was THAT good. I thought that one up myself but I did check the internet and found a recipe very close to what I'd thought up, so I followed its steps.
I'll never be a vegan, or any kind of vegetarian, but I do love vegies.
I read one blogger recently who did the 30-Day Raw Food Diet. He'd started it four or five times previously and it didn't take for him -- not enough calories was the basic problem -- so he did more research and tried again. He analyzed the calorie deficit problem and realized getting enough in this diet depends upon the natural fats -- in the form of nuts and avocados -- and/or the fruits, and decided the emphasis should be on the fruits. I'll have to reread it to know why it didn't take this time either, but it didn't, although it had some benefits he enjoyed and he found some foods he wanted to make a part of his usual diet. So be it. We'll either find a way to make use of the ideas or not.
In researching about the green smoothies and the overall raw food diet (I do plan to post links with some opinions eventually) I ran across some interesting related foods. One I kept being attracted to was Carrot Milkshake. One health-food practice I do occasionally do is juice my own fruits and vegetables. I used to do a lot more of it but I did go through a bag of carrots in a few days about a month ago. I love carrot juice.
So tonight I made a carrot milkshake instead of a green smoothy. I juiced the carrots first and then mixed them with their own fiber in the blender. Seemed easier than grating them first or watching my blender struggle with hard pieces of carrot (Now THAT's a job for one of those huge powerful blenders). I used six medium carrots instead of one large one, used a scant cup of milk instead of 10 ounces, used 2T sugar instead of 1-1/2. I have no cardamom, wish I did but it still tasted good. Yes, very nice drink.
Then the chard I had for the smoothies was getting wilted so I cooked it and some potatoes and then sauteed them together with garlic in olive oil, added some butter at the end, and boy was THAT good. I thought that one up myself but I did check the internet and found a recipe very close to what I'd thought up, so I followed its steps.
I'll never be a vegan, or any kind of vegetarian, but I do love vegies.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Green Smoothy mullings, not yet taking the plunge
I'm bogging on this Green Smoothy plan. Seems to be hard to get started. I think it's just a temporary slump and I'm sure I'll recover, but at the moment it's just hard to get up and go do it. I have all the ingredients ready to go except for my mood.
Except for cleaning the vegetables it's really not a hard thing to do. Maybe I'm afraid that it isn't going to have the effect I'm hoping for. Sigh. Well, again, I'm sure I'll finally get around to doing it and then I'll find out.
I'm very taken with what I've read, not the whole context of alternative-foods thinking as some of it gets way out in La-La Land it seems to me -- AND more expensive than I can handle too -- but I love the simple idea of Green Smoothies themselves: natural foods we generally don't eat enough of, in a form that concentrates their nutritional impact, pleasant to drink too, and with hardly any calories.
What I'm hoping is that a Green Smoothy a day, or two when I'm up for it, will supply enough of a nutrient gain to lessen food cravings, thus naturally cutting down on overall calorie consumption, plus improving health in measurable ways. The theory is that overeating CAN be the result of nutrient deprivation so that you pack in the calories in an effort to increase the deficient nutrients, and it doesn't work so all you get is the calorie increase and a negative impact on health.
At the moment I have no expectation of doing more than adding in a green smoothy or two, maybe upping my salad intake as well, though I already love vegie salads and do them frequently anyway, but otherwise not trying to change anything else in any conscious way. I do have in mind that the addition of such a nutrient boost COULD alter my experience of food for the better in many other ways, and I'm rather hoping it will, but as for making any other conscious changes, no, not at this point.
I do want to get going on this and other food-related thoughts, but sometimes I just have to sit on the sidelines of my own ambitions waiting for inspiration to strike.
Except for cleaning the vegetables it's really not a hard thing to do. Maybe I'm afraid that it isn't going to have the effect I'm hoping for. Sigh. Well, again, I'm sure I'll finally get around to doing it and then I'll find out.
I'm very taken with what I've read, not the whole context of alternative-foods thinking as some of it gets way out in La-La Land it seems to me -- AND more expensive than I can handle too -- but I love the simple idea of Green Smoothies themselves: natural foods we generally don't eat enough of, in a form that concentrates their nutritional impact, pleasant to drink too, and with hardly any calories.
What I'm hoping is that a Green Smoothy a day, or two when I'm up for it, will supply enough of a nutrient gain to lessen food cravings, thus naturally cutting down on overall calorie consumption, plus improving health in measurable ways. The theory is that overeating CAN be the result of nutrient deprivation so that you pack in the calories in an effort to increase the deficient nutrients, and it doesn't work so all you get is the calorie increase and a negative impact on health.
At the moment I have no expectation of doing more than adding in a green smoothy or two, maybe upping my salad intake as well, though I already love vegie salads and do them frequently anyway, but otherwise not trying to change anything else in any conscious way. I do have in mind that the addition of such a nutrient boost COULD alter my experience of food for the better in many other ways, and I'm rather hoping it will, but as for making any other conscious changes, no, not at this point.
I do want to get going on this and other food-related thoughts, but sometimes I just have to sit on the sidelines of my own ambitions waiting for inspiration to strike.
Sunday, December 12, 2010
...and Bananas and Pears and Spinach and Chard and Kale: GREEN SMOOTHIES: a Health diet that might really work.
So. I may actually be starting a new "healthy" diet. I've started many in the past and never stuck one out, had pretty much given up on trying again. I might stick this one.
Friend S wrote me a few days ago:
Or maybe I just don't know why it bothers me.
So when S reassured me that green smoothies don't involve that sort of thing but are natural foods I could learn about myself, I said I was interested and she sent me some links. I spent most of the next few days reading up on it myself and deciding that I definitely wanted to try this, if only at the most minimal level.
Green Smoothies are one part of the Raw Food diet and some people do the whole thing. Some start with the smoothies and work up to the whole diet or some level of the diet, some plunge right in to the whole system at the beginning, some just add a Green Smoothy into their usual routine. The whole diet does get into some health food lore that can make your head spin if you aren't naturally geared to the alternative medicine scene, as I am not, but I was very intrigued with the basic Green Smoothy idea itself.
So simple. We never get enough green leafies in our diet. I know I don't. But greens are just chock full of important nutrients, so we're missing out on a lot. "Green leafies" means spinach, chard, collards, kale, beet tops, the green lettuces and the like. You may eat them once in a while, but not really very often, and for some of us they are hard to really like, one of those things you eat because your mother told you to, and sometimes that becomes a reason NOT to eat them after you've grown up and left the family home.
They can be bitter for one thing. But put them in a smoothy, even enough greens to make half a dozen normal-sized salads or side vegies, mix them with fresh fruit to take away the bitterness, which adds another spectrum of nutrients, blend it all until it becomes a pint or a quart of something pleasant to drink, and it begins to suggest something both enjoyable and power-packed. Then read the lore about how a good blender has the effect of releasing the nutrients in the leaf to an extent impossible with mere chewing, further multiplying the effect of the already-multiplied amount of nutrients, and I'm convinced: this is something that's really possible, really available, that could truly contribute to better health. I hardly EVER feel that way about a health-improvement program. Well, never, to be precise.
And then there are the testimonials. Every health system has its testimonials of course, but these seem especially consistent and believable. "More energy" is the number one report. S was very convincing about how much more energy three weeks of two quart-sized green smoothies a day had given her. It had cured her of insomnia and the need to take naps during the day among other things. I could certainly use that myself as my sleep pattern has been a mess for a few years now -- in fact I don't have a sleep "pattern" any more, that's the problem. I suddenly get sleepy and have to sleep -- at different hours around the clock. It sometimes becomes urgent -- I simply can't stay awake another minute at times. But I rarely stay asleep more than three or four hours at a time. Yes, a mess. Can green smoothies straighten that out? Well, if I can get this thing rolling we'll find out.
====================
Sunday December 12. Tried my first Green Smoothy this morning. A bunch of spinach leaves plus a banana. I got the idea from some website or other, somebody's blog I think, which was about a lot more than smoothies but I liked the simplicity of this one for a starter, especially since I had the ingredients on hand.
It was just a tad bitter -- two bananas or a second different fruit would probably have taken that away but I went on a banana binge yesterday and only had one left, and I'd forgotten to get apples. It was just a tiny bit bitter I want to emphasize, the faintest tinge. The dominant flavor was banana although it was intensely green. I enjoyed it.
I only got about a pint out of what I had, but I want to work up to a quart. I wasn't sure my old Osterizer would do the job, but I put about a cup of water in to start and then the greens and it worked just fine (the usual advice is to put the fruit in first but at least one expert does it greens first and I wanted to give my not-so-powerful machine a head start on the hard part of the task, which is the greens, and it worked for me). It probably wasn't as smooth as the very powerful machines can make it but it was just fine nevertheless.
From what I've been reading about the best blenders I thought I might have to rename my concoctions Green Lumpies but the spinach and banana were smooth enough. The lore of green smoothies says you get the most nutrition out of the plant when it's thoroughly pulverized and all the cells in the leaves have burst. I suppose a $400-to-$600 2-or-3-horsepower machine could be expected to accomplish that better than an old $40 Osterizer, but I'm saying So far so good anyway. Maybe fewer burst cells than optimum, but hey. Barring a miracle I'll never be able to have one of the powerful machines but with prayer the Osterizer should be able to turn out decent smoothies for some time to come.
Friend S wrote me a few days ago:
Do you have any interest in healing diet material? I did a lot of research and am now thrilled with a raw food diet. Green smoothies blending fruit and lots of green leafy vegetables. I didn't know leafy greens have so much protein. Even one green smoothy for breakfast each day starts the healing process and you have so much energy! If you're interested let me know.Well, it sounded good. My only concern was that all the "healthy" diets out there usually involve supplements I can't afford. There was a period a decade or so ago when it seemed that every church had a few members who were selling some particular health item, usually some natural food in various forms -- bluegreen algae comes to mind -- wanting to recruit you as a buyer or as a seller as well. It was always a line of products and the seller was personally using them and very sincerely recommended them. I had no doubt they were good for you, though I did often doubt they were good ENOUGH to spend the money on them. Much of it I really couldn't afford at all, and, I have to admit, I never liked the money-making emphasis in those systems. Nothing wrong with making money of course, and if the product's good what's my beef anyway? Probably have to analyze myself about that. Maybe it's as simple as not liking the idea that some natural food is singled out as the center of a business. The emphasis always seems to end up on the business, not on the food.
Or maybe I just don't know why it bothers me.
So when S reassured me that green smoothies don't involve that sort of thing but are natural foods I could learn about myself, I said I was interested and she sent me some links. I spent most of the next few days reading up on it myself and deciding that I definitely wanted to try this, if only at the most minimal level.
Green Smoothies are one part of the Raw Food diet and some people do the whole thing. Some start with the smoothies and work up to the whole diet or some level of the diet, some plunge right in to the whole system at the beginning, some just add a Green Smoothy into their usual routine. The whole diet does get into some health food lore that can make your head spin if you aren't naturally geared to the alternative medicine scene, as I am not, but I was very intrigued with the basic Green Smoothy idea itself.
So simple. We never get enough green leafies in our diet. I know I don't. But greens are just chock full of important nutrients, so we're missing out on a lot. "Green leafies" means spinach, chard, collards, kale, beet tops, the green lettuces and the like. You may eat them once in a while, but not really very often, and for some of us they are hard to really like, one of those things you eat because your mother told you to, and sometimes that becomes a reason NOT to eat them after you've grown up and left the family home.
They can be bitter for one thing. But put them in a smoothy, even enough greens to make half a dozen normal-sized salads or side vegies, mix them with fresh fruit to take away the bitterness, which adds another spectrum of nutrients, blend it all until it becomes a pint or a quart of something pleasant to drink, and it begins to suggest something both enjoyable and power-packed. Then read the lore about how a good blender has the effect of releasing the nutrients in the leaf to an extent impossible with mere chewing, further multiplying the effect of the already-multiplied amount of nutrients, and I'm convinced: this is something that's really possible, really available, that could truly contribute to better health. I hardly EVER feel that way about a health-improvement program. Well, never, to be precise.
And then there are the testimonials. Every health system has its testimonials of course, but these seem especially consistent and believable. "More energy" is the number one report. S was very convincing about how much more energy three weeks of two quart-sized green smoothies a day had given her. It had cured her of insomnia and the need to take naps during the day among other things. I could certainly use that myself as my sleep pattern has been a mess for a few years now -- in fact I don't have a sleep "pattern" any more, that's the problem. I suddenly get sleepy and have to sleep -- at different hours around the clock. It sometimes becomes urgent -- I simply can't stay awake another minute at times. But I rarely stay asleep more than three or four hours at a time. Yes, a mess. Can green smoothies straighten that out? Well, if I can get this thing rolling we'll find out.
====================
Sunday December 12. Tried my first Green Smoothy this morning. A bunch of spinach leaves plus a banana. I got the idea from some website or other, somebody's blog I think, which was about a lot more than smoothies but I liked the simplicity of this one for a starter, especially since I had the ingredients on hand.
It was just a tad bitter -- two bananas or a second different fruit would probably have taken that away but I went on a banana binge yesterday and only had one left, and I'd forgotten to get apples. It was just a tiny bit bitter I want to emphasize, the faintest tinge. The dominant flavor was banana although it was intensely green. I enjoyed it.
I only got about a pint out of what I had, but I want to work up to a quart. I wasn't sure my old Osterizer would do the job, but I put about a cup of water in to start and then the greens and it worked just fine (the usual advice is to put the fruit in first but at least one expert does it greens first and I wanted to give my not-so-powerful machine a head start on the hard part of the task, which is the greens, and it worked for me). It probably wasn't as smooth as the very powerful machines can make it but it was just fine nevertheless.
From what I've been reading about the best blenders I thought I might have to rename my concoctions Green Lumpies but the spinach and banana were smooth enough. The lore of green smoothies says you get the most nutrition out of the plant when it's thoroughly pulverized and all the cells in the leaves have burst. I suppose a $400-to-$600 2-or-3-horsepower machine could be expected to accomplish that better than an old $40 Osterizer, but I'm saying So far so good anyway. Maybe fewer burst cells than optimum, but hey. Barring a miracle I'll never be able to have one of the powerful machines but with prayer the Osterizer should be able to turn out decent smoothies for some time to come.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)