RE: warrior diet question - how long the undereating phase

September 24, 2003

Hmm, my undereating phases are always 20 hours, 19 minimum. (unless I have

trouble sleeping and eat something.) I'm curious about this, since I thought

the overeating phase was supposed to be four hours.

chris

September 24, 2003

In a message dated 9/24/03 4:20:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

christiekeith@... writes:

> Because IMO for most women (again, obviously this wasn't true for Heidi and

> I'm sure for others too), the long undereating phase followed by the one big

> meal of the " Warrior Diet " is a recipe for insulin resistance and blood

> sugar swings.

>

Then why isn't it for rodents? The rats or mice or whatever they studied as

posted on the WD site had *increased* insulin sensitivity without any

reduction in calories through systematic fasting. I think there is something

about

sytematism that is important. Hapazardly skipping meals or skipping breakfast

and binging on lunch, then snacking, then eating dinner doesn't seem to help

(and granted these people are always drinking sugar water all day long anyway),

but it seems perfectly reasonable that fasting would increase insulin

sensitivity by giving the cells a rest from being overcrowded with insulin.

I'm of the type that fasting is supposed to be bad for, and it seems to be

helping me.

Chris

September 24, 2003

>> what are the rest of you doing to make sure you don't go over the 18 hour

mark for the undereating phase? ori says something to the effect that it's

counterproductive if you go over 18 hours. perhaps that's why i've often

been so hungry during the undereating phase.

i just haven't been able to get my eating schedule to fit his plan to well. <<

Suze, just wondering... WHY are you trying this? I understand why Heidi is, and

it seems to me that others are doing it out of curiousity, but what are your

specific reasons for giving this a try?

I have had my best energy, most stable blood sugar, most fat loss, best moods,

best health, since eating three meals plus a snack a day, never going more than

six waking hours without eating, and of course, doing the high fat/low carb

thing. I feel fantastic after workouts, in the morning - pretty much all the

time. Did you try this and it not work for you? Because IMO for most women

(again, obviously this wasn't true for Heidi and I'm sure for others too), the

long undereating phase followed by the one big meal of the " Warrior Diet " is a

recipe for insulin resistance and blood sugar swings.

Curiously yours,

Christie

September 24, 2003

Quoting Christie <christiekeith@...>:

> Because IMO for most women (again, obviously this wasn't true for Heidi

> and I'm sure for others too), the long undereating phase followed by the

> one big meal of the " Warrior Diet " is a recipe for insulin resistance and

> blood sugar swings.

What is your basis for this belief?

--

Berg

bberg@...

September 24, 2003

>what are the rest of you doing to make sure you don't go over the 18 hour

>mark for the undereating phase? ori says something to the effect that it's

>counterproductive if you go over 18 hours. perhaps that's why i've often

>been so hungry during the undereating phase.

>i just haven't been able to get my eating schedule to fit his plan to well.

>

>any suggestions?

Suze:

I guess I didn't do the arithmetic. I start eating at 7pm every day, to 11,

which I guess is 20 hours. But the hunger part has been going away,

probably because I'm better at accessing my own energy stores, so

if I don't eat til 9 it isn't an issue.

But again, I have plenty of energy stores. I eat carbs in the evening

to replenish my glycogen, and I have too much fat. For me

it's all a matter of my body actually learning to USE it and

to regulate those darn hormone signals that are what actually

make you feel hunger.

Christie, I would have agreed totally with you before I

tried this. I worked on a 3-6 meal a day strategy for ages.

I think the trick is that your body has to actually ADAPT and

mine never did before. When I " skipped meals " I was still

drinking soda or eating crackers or snacks, it wasn't really

fasting. Having only ONE insulin surge a day has to be better

for your body than the constant barrage of insulin most people

get, and eating a big meal means it digests more evenly.

I don't think anyone has really studied a feast/fast type diet

in humans, but the mouse results seem to indicate it

works fine.

--- Heidi

September 24, 2003

In a message dated 9/24/03 5:56:17 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

christiekeith@... writes:

> I feel there were too many other factors in the rodent study to evaluate

> this appropriately, primarily, the nutrient composition of the lab rodent

diet.

> We had a long discussion of this on this list a month or two ago.

I don't recall there being any discussion of this study. I recall discussion

of fasting and calorie restricted rat studies, but do not recall discussion

of the study that controlled the calorie intake.

The particular study on the WD site controlled for calorie intake, so that

the fasters were eating just as much and the same food as the control group.

Therefore, the eating pattern was effectively isolated and the diet composition

is irrelevant.

>

> >>I'm of the type that fasting is supposed to be bad for, and it seems to be

>

> helping me.<<

>

> I think, no matter the species, you have to ask first " What did this species

> evolve eating? " , and then modify that based on reality, IE, " How does this

> individual respond to dietary changes? " BUT.... I also believe that it

> doesn't MATTER what the species evolved eating, or what most members of the

species

> do best on - everyone is an individual (canine, human, whatever), and we'll

> all vary in our needs. Even at different times of life, we'll vary.

>

> I also, frankly, think men and women are very different in how their bodies

> deal with eating schedules, amounts, and nutrients, especially as we get

> older. So I don't believe that you, are a good indicator, as a very

young

> man, of how a woman of my age (mid-forties) is going to do on a given eating

> plan. I did say my comments were particularly applicable to women. Suze is

> also around my age, I believe, and that is more what my comments were aimed

at.

>

> I do agree that settling into a routine of when you eat and how much is

> probably very important for insulin resistance, and that most likely the body

> will adapt if given a chance.

I agree with all of this.

Chris

September 24, 2003

Suze,

My husband went on the WD two weeks ago after witnessing my success.

He complains every day that he is starving all day long and he can't

eat a very big meal in the evening – just the size he ate when he ate

three meals a day. He isn't much overweight, ten pounds and it's all

around his midsection. In two weeks he has not lost any weight at

all. He eats exactly what I eat and I've lost about fifteen pounds

so I'm pretty sure it's not what he's eating. Not losing any weight

and being hungry makes me think that his body just won't kick

into " burn your own fat/glycogen " mode. I talked him into sticking

with it a couple more weeks because I think it's important for the

body to use it's reserves, and it makes me think that maybe his body

isn't working quite right. The WD is the only way we can gauge

whether his body starts being able to use it's own reserves. I had

wondered if any of the " stubborn fat " protocol in Ori's book would

help him adjust to using his own reserves and not be as hungry. Hope

this makes sense, I'm trying to get this down fast before I leave to

go home. We're going to experiment with some things to see if

anything helps.

Cara

September 24, 2003

>> Then why isn't it for rodents? <<

I feel there were too many other factors in the rodent study to evaluate this

appropriately, primarily, the nutrient composition of the lab rodent diet. We

had a long discussion of this on this list a month or two ago.

>> I'm of the type that fasting is supposed to be bad for, and it seems to be

helping me.<<

I think, no matter the species, you have to ask first " What did this species

evolve eating? " , and then modify that based on reality, IE, " How does this

individual respond to dietary changes? " BUT.... I also believe that it doesn't

MATTER what the species evolved eating, or what most members of the species do

best on - everyone is an individual (canine, human, whatever), and we'll all

vary in our needs. Even at different times of life, we'll vary.

I also, frankly, think men and women are very different in how their bodies deal

with eating schedules, amounts, and nutrients, especially as we get older. So I

don't believe that you, are a good indicator, as a very young man, of how

a woman of my age (mid-forties) is going to do on a given eating plan. I did say

my comments were particularly applicable to women. Suze is also around my age, I

believe, and that is more what my comments were aimed at.

I do agree that settling into a routine of when you eat and how much is probably

very important for insulin resistance, and that most likely the body will adapt

if given a chance.

Christie

September 24, 2003

> I have had my best energy, most stable blood sugar, most fat loss, best

moods, best health,

I could say all of that regarding the WD! It is like a black and white

difference for both my husband and I. I'm hoping that one of these days

he'll get on here and post his own experience, and tell of the meds he has

gone off since he switched to WD timing of what he eats.

I am so glad I gave WD timing of foods a try. And it sounds like you too

have a timing of foods that works wonderfully for you.

: )

Rhea

September 24, 2003

In a message dated 9/24/03 9:46:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

bberg@... writes:

> Not necessarily. Just as with calorie restriction, the benefits caused by

> the feasting/fasting pattern could be due to the fact that it mitigates the

> effects of poor food choices. It's conceivable that a person making better

> food choices could see less or no benefit, or even suffer harm as a result.

But they were eating as much poor food or whatever kind of food as the other

group. So while that certainly doesn't prove the food wasn't operative, it

was controlled for food, which means the probability lies with the eating

pattern being operative.

I'm not claiming proof, just evidence. To deny that this is evidence which

supports the idea that fasting/feasting increases insulin sensitivity, one has

to come up with a compelling alternative explanation. So it " could " be due to

the poor food choices, but until someone explains exactly how they would

affect the eating pattern, we should go with what is the probably implications

of

the study.

Chris

September 24, 2003

>> Having only ONE insulin surge a day has to be better

for your body than the constant barrage of insulin most people

get, and eating a big meal means it digests more evenly.

I don't think anyone has really studied a feast/fast type diet

in humans, but the mouse results seem to indicate it

works fine. <<

I am not talking about how most people eat, or a constant barrage of insulin. I

agree totally on that.

But the way I eat, I don't have a constant barrage of insulin, because I limit

my carbohydrate intake so much and eat so much fat. That is (I assume) why my

energy levels evened out and my energy became so abundant. And you know, I have

lost 50 lbs since May, with no hunger whatsoever. I feel fantastic. I do see

people trying the WD talking about hunger or how they find it hard to go the

recommended length of time between eating, or having to have protein shakes or

smoothies after working out and so on, and yet I just eat my 3 meals and a snack

and I never feel hungry or tired or low blood sugary or have any of these

feelings. So I wanted to just put out there, that there are more ways than the

WD approach to get the same benefit, with again, the caveat that everyone is

different. If someone tries WD and doesn't get the benefits they are looking

for, there ARE other things to try.

Heidi, you said you didn't want to restrict carbs, and I respect that. You were

very clear about why that approach wouldn't work for you. For me, it's been the

best thing that ever happened to me, and I want to make sure that gets in the

mix too, not to change your mind, or the mind of anyone for whom the WD approach

is working (any more than I think you are trying to change MY mind!), but just

to keep all the various options out there.

Just as Dr. Price found more than one healthy traditional diet, I believe there

is more than one healthy eating schedule.

Christie

September 25, 2003

>But the way I eat, I don't have a constant barrage of insulin, because I limit

my carbohydrate intake so much and eat so much fat. That is (I assume) why my

energy levels evened out and my energy became so abundant. And you know, I have

lost 50 lbs since May, with no hunger whatsoever. I feel fantastic. I do see

people trying the WD talking about hunger or how they find it hard to go the

recommended length of time between eating, or having to have protein shakes or

smoothies after working out and so on, and yet I just eat my 3 meals and a snack

and I never feel hungry or tired or low blood sugary or have any of these

feelings.

This is a point. However, I've heard the SAME ISSUES from people on low-carb

diets. I've been listening to our local low carbers talk for MONTHS about their

discomfort and cravings (which might be why I come across strong sometimes). And

people here always offer solutions for low-carbers ( " eat more fat " ). Anyway,

the WD isn't much different from the low carb diet during the day, except you

can eat fruit and you should work toward eating less during the day.

I'd totally agree there isn't a one-size fits all approach, and besides, most of

us are still experimenting (which is why we are talking so much!). However, a

lot of the reasons I've been suggesting the WD are NOT weight related, or have

to do with insulin resistance. I have had a lot of gut problems, as have others.

If you CAN stick to one eating period a day, it makes figuring out that stuff a

lot easier. If I ate fat all day long, then my liver would have to produce bile

all day long to digest it, and it doesn't seem to be very good at that. On this

list people suggest a lot of stuff, from liver cleanses to eating raw liver ...

people can ignore what they don't like. Though the WD seems to draw more flak

than liver cleanses!

The WD approach may not work for some people, or they may take a long time to

adapt (which is also in the book). The fact is, some people *can't* access their

own fat and glycogen stores. But I don't think the argument can be made that

this is either normal or desirable ... it is the result of bad eating, damaged

organs, lack of exercise, food allergies, stress, high cortisol or who knows

what, but most people at most times have been able to go without eating without

having major problems, and most animals can and do also. I am shocked and amazed

that my body re-adapted, but if you can't, you can't. I would not have known I

could do it though, if I didn't try. I'm in my late 40's too, and have an

insulin-resistant profile and scads of health issues.

>Heidi, you said you didn't want to restrict carbs, and I respect that. You were

very clear about why that approach wouldn't work for you. For me, it's been the

best thing that ever happened to me, and I want to make sure that gets in the

mix too, not to change your mind, or the mind of anyone for whom the WD approach

is working (any more than I think you are trying to change MY mind!), but just

to keep all the various options out there.

Certainly. I was mainly responding to the " it is a recipe for insulin

resistance " part. There is ample reason to believe some people do better with

fewer carbs (not to mention all the allergy issues). But I don't see ANY reason

to believe the WD would cause insulin resistance, unless you are saying ANY

carbs might cause insulin resistance. I've never said anything against low-carb

diets that I recall (except that I can't do them!). And Ori's take is that

cutting starches helps you lose weight anyway, so he's on your side.

The bit about cakes etc. was mainly us talking BEFORE we read the book. Ori does

not allow sugar or pastries on the diet (technically they are not part of the

diet) though some of us eat them anyway.

-- Heidi

September 25, 2003

Quoting ChrisMasterjohn@...:

> The particular study on the WD site controlled for calorie intake, so

> that the fasters were eating just as much and the same food as the

> control group. Therefore, the eating pattern was effectively isolated

> and the diet composition is irrelevant.

Not necessarily. Just as with calorie restriction, the benefits caused by

the feasting/fasting pattern could be due to the fact that it mitigates the

effects of poor food choices. It's conceivable that a person making better

food choices could see less or no benefit, or even suffer harm as a result.

--

Berg

bberg@...

September 25, 2003

Quoting ChrisMasterjohn@...:

> In a message dated 9/24/03 9:46:10 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> bberg@... writes:

>

> > Not necessarily. Just as with calorie restriction, the benefits caused

> by

> > the feasting/fasting pattern could be due to the fact that it mitigates

> the

> > effects of poor food choices. It's conceivable that a person making

> better

> > food choices could see less or no benefit, or even suffer harm as a

> result.

>

> But they were eating as much poor food or whatever kind of food as the

> other

> group. So while that certainly doesn't prove the food wasn't operative,

> it

> was controlled for food, which means the probability lies with the eating

> pattern being operative.

If the CR experiments don't demonstrate that the amount of food eaten is

operative, then why does this experiment demonstrate that the eating

patterns are operative? If we're going to allow for the possibility that CR

works only by mitigating the effects of poor food choices, then isn't just

as reasonable to suspect that the benefits attributed to the f(e)ast

pattern may come with the same caveats?

--

Berg

bberg@...

September 25, 2003

>

>I'm not claiming proof, just evidence. To deny that this is evidence which

>supports the idea that fasting/feasting increases insulin sensitivity, one has

>to come up with a compelling alternative explanation. So it " could " be due to

>the poor food choices, but until someone explains exactly how they would

>affect the eating pattern, we should go with what is the probably implications

of

>the study.

>

>Chris

I think this came up in the previous discussion too. The fact the mice lived

longer eating the SAME food (good food or not) says something about the

eating pattern. Then people keep bringing up " well, they might do better

on a low carb diet " . Maybe they would ... but that would be *another*

experiment!

If mice live 150 mouse-years eating every other day (bad food), how long

do they live on a low-carb diet? (good food) Has anyone done that experiment,

and if so

and it turned out good, how come you don't hear about it? To date there

have only been two diets that provably extend the lifespan of mice.

Maybe mice eating good food every other day would live 200 mouse years ...

-- Heidi

September 25, 2003

>If the CR experiments don't demonstrate that the amount of food eaten is

>operative, then why does this experiment demonstrate that the eating

>patterns are operative? If we're going to allow for the possibility that CR

>works only by mitigating the effects of poor food choices, then isn't just

>as reasonable to suspect that the benefits attributed to the f(e)ast

>pattern may come with the same caveats?

>

>--

> Berg

Basically it comes down to this: no one has come up with a diet

that makes mice live long, except these two diets. You can

say they are eating bad food, but they still live longer and

are healthier than any other known mouse diet. And they feed

mice a LOT of different diets. If these two diets just mitigate

a " bad " diet, then WHAT is the GOOD diet?

No one likes the idea of CR, so if they came up

with any diet that worked as well, I'd

think the person would publish the results and get famous!

No one is claiming they know *why* these two diets

work, so sure, it could be anything. Antioxidants and

insulin are the current theories.

-- Heidi

September 25, 2003

In a message dated 9/24/03 10:48:32 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

bberg@... writes:

> If the CR experiments don't demonstrate that the amount of food eaten is

> operative, then why does this experiment demonstrate that the eating

> patterns are operative? If we're going to allow for the possibility that CR

> works only by mitigating the effects of poor food choices, then isn't just

> as reasonable to suspect that the benefits attributed to the f(e)ast

> pattern may come with the same caveats?

No. The CR experiments use high-carb high-insulin-promoting food, and the

treatment groups get, say, half as much of it. I think that *does* show that

less high-insulin food is better, but doesn't necessarily show less food

overall.

Now the fasting/feasting study is similar but a little different. The mice at

e just as much high-insulin high-carb food in both groups. Therefore, we can

take two implications from it.

One: periods of fasting from high-insulin food give just as much benefit as

consuming less high-insulin foods

Two: since all foods promote insulin, it might be extrapolated that the

benefit to insulin sensitivity would be increased by fasting from moderate or

low-insulin foods as well.

Two is less clear, but it more logically follows from one than the idea that

the *opposite* effect would occur with moderate- or low-insulin foods, since

the apparent mechanism to increase insulin sensitivity is going through periods

where insulin is not secreted in response to food.

Chris

September 25, 2003

In a message dated 9/24/03 11:58:37 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

heidis@... writes:

> I think this came up in the previous discussion too. The fact the mice

> lived

> longer eating the SAME food (good food or not) says something about the

> eating pattern. Then people keep bringing up " well, they might do better

> on a low carb diet " . Maybe they would ... but that would be *another*

> experiment!

> If mice live 150 mouse-years eating every other day (bad food), how long

> do they live on a low-carb diet? (good food) Has anyone done that

> experiment, and if so

> and it turned out good, how come you don't hear about it? To date there

> have only been two diets that provably extend the lifespan of mice.

>

> Maybe mice eating good food every other day would live 200 mouse years ...

Ha! Maybe!

I think the CR studies though do not effectively isolate the low-caloriing,

simply because it is the amount of food being changed, rather than the eating

pattern. In other words the composition of the diet is different in several

ways, not one, between the two groups. Whereas the fasting study the

composition of the diet was the same in both groups. In the CR group, the

treatment

group ate less, and also ate less carbs, so we can't tell for sure which one had

the effect (what we know about insulin indicates to *me* that it was primarily

the latter, but maybe 10% attributable to the former, very roughly).

Chris

September 25, 2003

>>>I do see people trying the WD talking about hunger or how they find it

hard to go the recommended length of time between eating, or having to have

protein shakes or smoothies after working out and so on, and yet I just eat

my 3 meals and a snack and I never feel hungry or tired or low blood sugary

or have any of these feelings.

----->christie, the question i posted was a concern that i was going *too

long* without eating, not the opposite. but since ori more or less clears up

the time periods on his website with a pie chart, i now know that my time

period fits right in!

also, the post workout recovery shakes are not specific to the WD. i was

drinking them prior to the WD, and would continue to do so if i weren't

doing the WD.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

September 25, 2003

>> what are the rest of you doing to make sure you don't go over the 18 hour

mark for the undereating phase? ori says something to the effect that it's

counterproductive if you go over 18 hours. perhaps that's why i've often

been so hungry during the undereating phase.

i just haven't been able to get my eating schedule to fit his plan to well.

<<

>>>>Suze, just wondering... WHY are you trying this? I understand why Heidi

is, and it seems to me that others are doing it out of curiousity, but what

are your specific reasons for giving this a try?

----->because i want to do extended fasting. i had already started liquid

fasting one or two days a week for a couple of weeks prior to starting the

WD. but i wanted to fast more than one or two days per week, yet i didn't

want to just go on a straight fast. the WD seemed like a perfect solution,

since i could still eat as much as i felt like every day, while still

reaping the benefits of fasting *daily*.

also, my typical eating pattern before doing the WD was already somewhat

similar to the WD. i usually only ate two meals/day. i've been doing that

for some time now. but the morning " meal " most often was a kefir/fruit/yolk

smoothie, which is WD-legal. the main difference is that now i'm

eating/drinking *less* during the day. i did have one of those smoothies the

other day because i was very hungry, and it filled me up so much that i

didn't even feel like drinking my post workout recovery shake about 5 hours

later, nor did i feel like eating dinner that day. it never used to fill me

up like that to my recollection, so i guess my body is adjusting to lesser

during the day and more at night.

i believe the reason i've had some days when i feel really famished is that

i fill up fast, so haven't been able to eat enough at night to carry me

through and stave off *real* hunger the next day. however, i'm beginning to

wonder if it has more to do with the fact that i stopped drinking coffee. i

i was doing fine during the undereating phase while i was still drinking

coffee or other caffeinated beverages, but i stopped last week, and my

energy took a bit of a dip for a few days. at the same time i went without

much sleep for a few days, and i got really hungry during the day. which is

typical for me if i'm sleepy and don't have a stimulant. however, my energy

is much better now as i seem to be adjusting to not having caffeine - much

better than i did the first time i tried to quit some months ago. so i've

been changing numerous variables all at once and it's hard to sort out what

caused the dip in energy and concurrent hunger during the day. i don't mind

*hunger* per se, because when i'm hungry i know my body's doing

housecleaning or whatever it needs to do besides digesting, as long as my

*energy* is not suffering.

also, ori has reworded what he wrote about the undereating phase so that i

now understand that my eating schedule actually fits quite well within the

parameters he recommends. the only thing i'm not doing is extending my

overeating phase for the 4 hour time slot, unless you include my post

workout recovery smoothie. and i don't see any reason not to include it, so

i guess my current pattern seems to fit the plan.

>>>I have had my best energy, most stable blood sugar, most fat loss, best

moods, best health, since eating three meals plus a snack a day, never going

more than six waking hours without eating, and of course, doing the high

fat/low carb thing. I feel fantastic after workouts, in the morning - pretty

much all the time. Did you try this and it not work for you?

----->i couldn't eat three meals a day if i wanted to! i'm not hungry enough

to eat three meals a day. although i do typically snack at least once, in

addition to my two " meals " . but again, one of those meals was usually a

smoothie and nothing else. so, i usually just had one real " meal " a day

prior to WD. if i eat every 6 hours i feel sluggish. perhaps because my

digestion is not tip top, so maybe it takes a lot of energy for me to digest

so often.

>>>>>Because IMO for most women (again, obviously this wasn't true for

Heidi and I'm sure for others too), the long undereating phase followed by

the one big meal of the " Warrior Diet " is a recipe for insulin resistance

and blood sugar swings.

------->i had my blood glucose level tested when i was eating 2 meals and a

snack a day and it was on the low end of normal. i just did a blood test

again yesterday and will get the results in about a week. it will be

interesting to see if this eating pattern has had any effect on my blood

sugar level. although maybe i haven't been doing it long enough for it to

affect something like that.

Suze Fisher

Lapdog Design, Inc.

Web Design & Development

http://members.bellatlantic.net/~vze3shjg

Weston A. Price Foundation Chapter Leader, Mid Coast Maine

http://www.westonaprice.org

----------------------------

" The diet-heart idea (the idea that saturated fats and cholesterol cause

heart disease) is the greatest scientific deception of our times. " --

Mann, MD, former Professor of Medicine and Biochemistry at Vanderbilt

University, Tennessee; heart disease researcher.

The International Network of Cholesterol Skeptics

<http://www.thincs.org>

----------------------------

September 25, 2003

I have read that weight lost during fasting is more muscle than fat. Is this

true? If so I would think the Warrior Diet, as described here, would be

counterproductive.

Judith Alta

-----Original Message-----