MGS Weight Loss 2008

[Big Virgil]

Friday weigh in - 224.2.  Big drop frm last week, but down only about 1.5 lbs from 2 weeks ago.  Pretty pleased.  Not working today so I'm heading of to the gym.  Going to do full cardio and upper body lifting.  2 hours or Racquetball tomorrow and probably run on Sunday.  That should be 3500 to 4000 calories burned from exercise, over the weekend, and hopefully that translates to another lb or two on the scale next week.

Going to try to not have any liquor tonight, but might have to have some on Sat night (just one or two), and definitely having some on Sunday along with plenty O food.



 

[Finnegans Wake]

Virg, if you have some time and some patience, read Good Calories, Bad Calories.  Sounds like a typical BS diet book, but it's actually a very thorough overview of the science of health, weight loss, and changes to diet that have occurred over the past century.  Reads a bit like an apologia for Atkins, but it's really more an indictment of lack of rigor in the scientific community.

Some arguments he puts forward, after reviewing a hell of a lot of evidence:

• Cut the carbs.
• Total caloric intake is less relevant than insulin response.
• Eating fat does not make you fat.
• Exercising may be beneficial, but it does not make you lose weight.
• The standard "expend more calories than you take in" is false.
• A lot of what we take for cause is actually effect, and vice versa.

If nothing else, it's good food for thought.  But the writing is a bit dry, and at times is repetitive.  

[otismalibu]

You can pick up my book Nacho Cheese, Cool Ranch at Amazon.

I just finished shoveling snow for an hour. That has to be worth something.  

[Big Virgil]

Virg, if you have some time and some patience, read Good Calories, Bad Calories.  Sounds like a typical BS diet book, but it's actually a very thorough overview of the science of health, weight loss, and changes to diet that have occurred over the past century.  Reads a bit like an apologia for Atkins, but it's really more an indictment of lack of rigor in the scientific community.

Some arguments he puts forward, after reviewing a hell of a lot of evidence:

• Cut the carbs.
• Total caloric intake is less relevant than insulin response.
• Eating fat does not make you fat.
• Exercising may be beneficial, but it does not make you lose weight.
• The standard "expend more calories than you take in" is false.
• A lot of what we take for cause is actually effect, and vice versa.

If nothing else, it's good food for thought.  But the writing is a bit dry, and at times is repetitive.

 I'll look at that Finny.  I subscribe to the first three points you listed. I don't really subscribe that insulin is more important than calories, but if you eat "good" insulin carbs, you will be taking in fewer calories, so it kind of sounds like syntax.  The 4th one, without reading it yet, and this is only MHO, is kind of like point #2, they go hand in hand.  Exercising may not directly make you lose weight, but your body works more efficiently with regular exercise, you burn more calories and therefore you lose weight over time.  The 5th woud take some convincing.  The last point you listed sounds interesting.  I'll check it out.

I'm off to workout world.

 

[bamf16]

Not buying that fifth point either...not because of what I myself think but because of what all the research says.  I'm not ready to throw it all out yet b/c of one book.  I'll definitely look into it though.

[Big Virgil]

Virg, if you have some time and some patience, read Good Calories, Bad Calories.  Sounds like a typical BS diet book, but it's actually a very thorough overview of the science of health, weight loss, and changes to diet that have occurred over the past century.  Reads a bit like an apologia for Atkins, but it's really more an indictment of lack of rigor in the scientific community.

Some arguments he puts forward, after reviewing a hell of a lot of evidence:

• Cut the carbs.
• Total caloric intake is less relevant than insulin response.
• Eating fat does not make you fat.
• Exercising may be beneficial, but it does not make you lose weight.
• The standard "expend more calories than you take in" is false.
• A lot of what we take for cause is actually effect, and vice versa.

If nothing else, it's good food for thought.  But the writing is a bit dry, and at times is repetitive.

 I couldn't read that without making some sort of purchase.  Am I missing something?


Thinking about the bullets you posted, on the surface it sounds like the author is twisting words to make his observation sound different.  Like, "food doesn't make you fat".  OK, if you eat healthy, eat smaller more frequent meals that include a lot of fruits and vegetables, it won't make you fat.  If you eat 10,000 calories a day, the food will make you fat.  Maybe the author has some compelling arguments.  There is a book out there that says your diet should be based on your blood type.  It is a whole book, that is sounds logical, from what I have heard, with the research or facts to backit up.  That theory has not been accepted or even regarded by any science or medical commuinity.

I wonder if that is kind of what this is about.

[Big Virgil]

Weigh in.  225.8, up 1.6 from last week.  Definitely a fluctuation.  I had the same amount of exercise and ate well all week.  I had a larger than usual piece of steak last night for dinner, left over from earlier in the week, so probably food sitting in the stomach/poop weight.  

That's OK, "I feel like 100 dollars".

I know I'm turning into a wacko freak, becasue I can't wait to get to the gym after work.  Major racquetball action tomorrow morning too.  I might have the midweek weigh on Monday, just for giggles.

[otismalibu]

Tonight on Lifetime.

"Bunged Up & Giddy" the Big Virgil story.

[Finnegans Wake]

Reading Michael Pollan's follow up to the Omnivore's Dilemma, titled In Defense of Food.  So far, so excellent.  His basic thesis is: eat food, not too much, mostly plants.  But he really does pull apart some difficult stuff, and devoted an early chapter to the dismantling of the lipid hypothesis (reduce sat fat and cholesterol).  He makes a special note of the Taubes book and articles as basically having brought the whole thing down, and gives a cogent encapsulation of the Taubes critique in chapter 5, so if you're not down with reading 400+ pages of Taubes, this book is highly recommended.  

Pollan, thus far, is really fighting against processed foods and "nutritionism," which I think removes much of the label-reading anxiety that many folks feel.  He seems to be hewing pretty close to Nina Planck's Real Food, although she reveled in animal products like lard, eggs, whole milk, red meat.  There seems to be an interesting common ground, though, and Pollan did not the benefits of pasture-raised eggs and beef in Omnivore.

I think my own weight and serum glucose issues have more to do with a fondness for drink than anything else, as my diet is good and getting better.  Can't wait for spring, as it just rejuvenates me.

Currently 238# (+1 from recent stasis, +8 from last year low, and +30 from target), but not seeing the usual winter gains.  The Mrs. and I often get the comment that we don't look our age, and God knows we don't act it.  

[Big Virgil]

Tonight on Lifetime.

"Bunged Up & Giddy" the Big Virgil story.

Nice Otis.

I'm sure you picked up on the classicChevy Chase line.  He is with that naked hottie (Caddyshack), giving her a little rub down and says "I feel like 100 dollars".

IF YOO DONET WENT TO GETE IN SHAEPE AND ECERZIZE I;LL MATE YO AT THEA ORANG GULEUS!!!!!