Guest guest Posted October 11, 2005 Report Share Posted October 11, 2005 > On 10/10/05, Christie <christiekeith@...> wrote: > > > Women, whether " matronly " or " hot, " are no more decorative objects to >be > admired than men are. We are human beings. > > Isn't that in the eye of the beholder? No one suggested that men were > not decorative or worthy of visual admiration. Whether they match up > to women in this respect is dependent on the perception of those > viewing them. This sounds like a non sequitur to me. Perhaps I've missed something. Surely, historically, women have had more of a problem with being ogled and treated as 'objects' than men have, which is not to say that it doesn't happen for them also. So, also, more women have an understandable problem with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Ron- >Get over yourself, get into the gym >and get yourself fit. If someone's not comfortable in a gym, why go to a gym when home is a perfectly good option? I don't like the smell of gyms, I don't like many of the people in gyms, I don't like the attitudes in gyms, and while it may just be that I've had bad luck in gyms, what I don't like most of all is spending the time going to and coming from a gym, so I work out at home -- and it's worked just fine for me. Gym membership simply isn't necessary. And most of the point of a gym is to spread around the expense of pricey machines, at least 90% of which (and probably a lot more) I'm sure you'd agree are unnecessary at best and counterproductive at worst. Free weights and kettlebells, by contrast, aren't _that_ expensive, and for those who can't afford or use them, there are body weight exercises and running and walking. >Give up the bitterness that frequently informs your posts. My facial >expressions do not drive you away. Your response to the facial expressions >of others, and your interpretation of them, drive you away. I don't see the bitterness that you do, but more to the point, the issue isn't _your_ facial expressions, because AFAIK you and Christie have never met. And why is it only her response to other people's expressions, and not at all those expressions themselves, which drive her away from unnecessary-anyway gyms? - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Ron- >I chose, back in the beginning, to lay 100 of the responsibility for my >condition on me. I did the work, I got the result, I don't resent the looks >that I get (or, more importantly, got) from others. I didn't even resent >them back then although I sure didn't like them. > >Is your choice of responsibility distribution making your life better? Is >it getting you where you want to go? Why fight what you can't change? The >only thing you have any control over is yourself. Blaming others for your >circumstances or for their contributions to your circumstances is a waste of >energy. All it does is give you permission to hold your unwanted condition >in place because, in your own mind, it's not all your fault. You're conflating two meanings of the word 'responsibility'. I can shoulder and accept all the responsibility for improving my health and fitness without pretending that I'm 100% to blame for my lack of perfect health and fitness. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Chris- >The Bio-Light is pretty interesting. I definitely need bright lights >when I get up in the morning. I should look into that. Interesting >experiment. Let us know how it continues! So far it's an outstanding success. I'm sleeping better (particularly on workout days) and at least some of the time, my workouts have gone even faster. Today, for example, came in at 1:14, which is a new record -- even though I slightly increased the size of the non-squat sets. No blood sugar problems whatsoever, increased energy, more time in the day, more productivity... I'm unbelievably glad I thought to try this. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Ron- >Yoga, yoga, yoga. Forget about the woo-woo factor. It's just the best >stretch you will ever get. I started back about three weeks ago and my hips >and hams were so locked down I could barely move them. After 4 classes I'm >already halfway to normal. > >Plus it's fun. An hour or hour and a half of tranquility amidst the buzz of >daily life. Yoga's just not my thing, I'm afraid. I found it very stressful, not relaxing. And besides, I don't have the time to head out for some hour and a half session of torture somewhere every week -- or worse yet, multiple times per week. I'll just have to get religious about doing _Relax Into Stretch_ exercises, I guess. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Christie- >I lost her on Sept. 26. Thank you very much for asking after her. I miss >her horribly. If anyone would like to read about her, her story is here: I'm so sorry. I hope her final days weren't too horrible. >No, but my bedroom is three walls of floor to ceiling windows, no >curtains, and my bed is in the eastern corner of the room, so I get tons >and tons of natural light. I also live in California, so we tend to have >more sunshine and more hours of sunlight than people who live in more > " wintery " climes. So I probably don't need it. On the other hand, I AM >whining about sleeping too late so maybe I'm wrong, LOL! Who knows. I live in a very dark apartment, but even lots of windows probably don't yield 10k lux. The bright light I have, which is a pretty standard one, is ridiculously bright, and it's all of about a foot and a half away from my eyes. >I noticed that during the first week of the leptin plan I'd spontaneously >dropped my caloric intake by 20 percent. Yeah, that was a big mistake. I should've thought to tell you to make a point of keeping calories level, at least initially. >I am sure I could accelerate my weight loss if I increased my exercise >dramatically and probably also if I cut my calories a lot, although my >experiments with reducing calories have actually not been very productive >(or maybe I should say reductive <G>). But I hate adding in an amount of >exercise that I'm not likely to stick with, because I'm afraid my >metabolism will adapt to the new, higher level of exercise, and if I can't >sustain it longterm, I'll end up worse off than when I started. I'm trying >to be realistic. It may be that after the weight loss I've already had, I >just have to accept that the rest of it will come off very, very slowly. I'd never recommend calorie restriction, as it's terrible counterproductive in the medium and long terms even for people it helps (excuse me, appears to help) in the short term, but increasing your exercise, at least moderately, might be useful. Building muscle is a great way to lose fat. Lots of so-called " aerobic " exercise, though, is little more than a waste of time IMO, and it can have exactly the effect you fear. >There are not that many people who have lost this kind of weight while >eating " normally " (ie, not on fasts or special liquid or prepared diets, >or after weight loss surgery), so I don't have a lot of people to talk to >about it or get a sense of how it works from. The truth is, it usually >DOESN'T work. I really am not sure why it has worked for me, and the >things that worked for me don't always work for other people. It's very >individualized, I think. For whom does low-carbing not work? In my experience, it's only people who do it wrong, but it's not like I've made a serious survey. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 > Yoga's just not my thing, I'm afraid. I found it very stressful, not > relaxing. And besides, I don't have the time to head out for some hour and > a half session of torture somewhere every week -- or worse yet, multiple > times per week. I'll just have to get religious about doing _Relax Into > Stretch_ exercises, I guess. > > - I never liked yoga either and I've tried multiple approaches and classes. What I really love is the " joint mobility " approach. I use Sonnon's " Warrier Wellness " and I know Pavel has one too. It was really an eye-opener to learn about the difference between mobility, full range-of-motion, and stretching. I thought flexibility was only about stretching before but now I don't. And just with doing ROM joint mobility, I've gotten more flexible and even understand the point of yoga poses even though to me they are yawn- -worthy. I think part of it is, I don't carry the kind of tension that yoga is good at dissipating. My extreme is from too much relaxation! So I never even build up tension. Connie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Christie- >Women, whether " matronly " or " hot, " are no more decorative objects to be >admired than men are. We are human beings. Repulsive and off-putting as many people's attitudes are, it's human nature (and particularly male nature) to appreciate pleasing visuals, so while people ought to be polite and not make gyms and the like unpleasant for those who don't have supermodel or bodybuilder physiques, I don't think it's reasonable to argue that people should magically suppress their visual natures. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 On 10/17/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > Repulsive and off-putting as many people's attitudes are, it's human nature > (and particularly male nature) to appreciate pleasing visuals, so while > people ought to be polite and not make gyms and the like unpleasant for > those who don't have supermodel or bodybuilder physiques, I don't think > it's reasonable to argue that people should magically suppress their visual > natures. Well said. On a tangential note, it seems like some people must have awful bad luck with gyms, or I just go to an unusual one. I don't notice a smell to the gym, there are plenty of people who are not in fit shape but don't seem to get any discouragement from anyone, I've never noticed a " bad attitude " of anyone, and everyone seems rather friendly. Chris -- Statin Drugs Kill Your Brain And Cause Transient Global Amnesia: http://www.cholesterol-and-health.com/Statin-Drugs-Side-Effects.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 On 10/17/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > >Give up the bitterness that frequently informs your posts. My facial > >expressions do not drive you away. Your response to the facial > expressions > >of others, and your interpretation of them, drive you away. > I don't see the bitterness that you do, but more to the point, the issue > isn't _your_ facial expressions, because AFAIK you and Christie have never > met. And why is it only her response to other people's expressions, and > not at all those expressions themselves, which drive her away from > unnecessary-anyway gyms? I don't know whether that latter point is true or not, but regardless, it's extremely liminting to oneself to to pay much mind to that sort of thing. And it creates a vicious cycle of self-consciousness and inhibition. Chris > > > > - > > > > > <HTML><!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC " -//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN " > " http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd " ><BODY><FONT > FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " > > <B>IMPORTANT ADDRESSES</B> > <UL> > <LI><B><A > HREF= " / " >NATIVE > NUTRITION</A></B> online</LI> > <LI><B><A HREF= " http://onibasu.com/ " >SEARCH</A></B> the entire message > archive with Onibasu</LI> > </UL></FONT> > <PRE><FONT FACE= " monospace " SIZE= " 3 " ><B><A > HREF= " mailto: -owner " >LIST OWNER:</A></B> > Idol > <B>MODERATORS:</B> Heidi Schuppenhauer > Wanita Sears > </FONT></PRE> > </BODY> > </HTML> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Chris- >And why is it only her response to other people's expressions, and > > not at all those expressions themselves, which drive her away from > > unnecessary-anyway gyms? > >I don't know whether that latter point is true or not, but regardless, >it's extremely liminting to oneself to to pay much mind to that sort >of thing. And it creates a vicious cycle of self-consciousness and >inhibition. It doesn't necessarily create a vicious cycle if the person in question works out at home, gets trim and fit and no longer feels self-conscious thereafter. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 > I'd never recommend calorie restriction, as it's > terrible counterproductive > in the medium and long terms even for people it > helps (excuse me, appears > to help) in the short term, but increasing your > exercise, at least > moderately, might be useful. Building muscle is a > great way to lose > fat. Lots of so-called " aerobic " exercise, though, > is little more than a > waste of time IMO, and it can have exactly the > effect you fear. > , Where are you getting the information that aerobic exercise isn't as good for us, as we have been told?? Even Mercola has suggested aerobic exercise for 90 min. (which I think is ridiculous), to lose weight. I do know that it is very catabolic to the body. jafa __________________________________ Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music./unlimited/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Christie for some reason I just found this post of yours. I too have more than a hundred still to lose and my experience is just like yours. On a food and exercise plan like that I too would lose about a pound a month. I know because I did it for months. > The first week I lost three pounds. > The second week I gained them back... I have to say I was really miserable. If I ate low-carb the way you describe, I would feel like that too. What I think happens is we get into low-leptin starvation. The Mastering Leptin meal timing only feels good if you also do Mastering Leptin meal composition, in my humble opinion. > ...I tend to gain weight when I eat fruit every day, even if it's got the same calories and carb count as the veggies it's replacing. Did you read in Mastering Leptin where depending on the health of your liver, high fat and fruit can make insulin resistance worse? A really sluggish liver could explain this response when you eat fruit every day. Happens to me too. > I am sure I could accelerate my weight loss if I increased my exercise ... But I hate adding in an amount of exercise that I'm not likely to stick with, because I'm afraid my metabolism will adapt to the new, higher level of exercise, and if I can't sustain it longterm, I'll end up worse off than when I started. I'm trying to be realistic. Sounds like we think the same. I finally added in more exercise in the form of 10-20 minute sessions before breakfast and dinner, and it makes a big difference. More like 6 pounds a month. These are " sets " of 1-2 minutes with 1-2 minute rests. And not that intense, either. For one thing, it's easy to get the heart rate up really fast at this size so I keep it easygoing and it STILL works. Honestly, all I do is the joint mobility and either standing bodyweight exercises or the clubs. I'd do kettlebells too if I had em. Just a few sets with rest periods and it feels refreshing and great, not awful and exhausting. What I think is, I went as far as i could tweaking the " incoming fuel " side, so I had to find a way to create more demand on the " outgo " side. And just a few minutes in each of s' " fat burning periods " seems to work. Connie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Connie- >If I ate low-carb the way you describe, I would feel like that too. >What I think happens is we get into low-leptin starvation. The >Mastering Leptin meal timing only feels good if you also do Mastering >Leptin meal composition, in my humble opinion. Not in my experience! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 >> For whom does low-carbing not work? In my experience, it's only people who do it wrong, but it's not like I've made a serious survey. << I agree, but I also feel that when someone finds a certain way of eating unappealing and burdensome, that way of eating didn't " work " for them - even if it would have resulted in a desirable weight loss. This gets very clouded by the fact that many foods disrupt our healthy state of appetite, satiety, cravings, and food desires. I'm not meaning to say that just because someone doesn't WANT to stop eating high carb, that low carb won't work for them or wouldn't potentially be appealing once they got off high carb. But I also believe that no one is going to stick with or do well on a way of eating that they just plain don't like and doesn't appeal to them. All that said, I admit, I think that most people who want to lose weight, have type 2 diabetes, or are insulin resistant, would be healthier, feel better, and lose weight easily doing low carb, and I tend to be highly skeptical of those who tell me it " didn't work " for them, and assume they just didn't do it right. Christie Caber Feidh ish Deerhounds Holistically Raising Our Dogs Since 1986 http://www.caberfeidh.com/ http://www.doggedblog.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 17, 2005 Report Share Posted October 17, 2005 Right I was thinking afterward about how some people have to work up to the 5-6 hours and I should have said that. I wasn't able to feel good the whole 6 hours at the beginning eating like that, and for exactly the reasons s describes for people who might be better starting out with 4 hours. > Not in my experience! > > > > - > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Connie- >Right I was thinking afterward about how some people have to work >up to the 5-6 hours and I should have said that. I wasn't able to feel >good the whole 6 hours at the beginning eating like that, and for >exactly the reasons s describes for people who might be better >starting out with 4 hours. Oh, for sure, most people are going to need to work up to it rather than jumping in, but I don't think it's at all necessary to eat as many carbs as he says to get there. In fact, I think eating that much carb would make it harder. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Must be a YMMV thing. He doesn't say you HAVE to eat that much carb, by the way. That's a starting guideline and a max. He's addressing a huge variety of people with that book. You know what else has changed a lot for me is how well I metabolize things. So many times all we talk about is the input side and not how the outgo side changes. Almost as if we're buying the idea that everything on the " burning " side is uniform and the same for everyone like those charts where a 150 yo college male athlete burns x calories while jogging for y minutes. puh-leeze. Honestly at first it felt like my muscles were so insulin resistant and deconditioned, that I could only process a trickle of carb input. As I got reconditioned and started to heal the leptin- related systems, I can handle more and it feels much, much better. I'm one of those muscular mastodon-type body types, not the bird- like ones. I think that makes a difference too. Wasn't it here where I saw the reference to the article, " Problems in the Furnace " that goes into problems on the burning side. Connie --- In , Idol <Idol@c...> wrote: > > Connie- > > >Right I was thinking afterward about how some people have to work > >up to the 5-6 hours and I should have said that. I wasn't able to feel > >good the whole 6 hours at the beginning eating like that, and for > >exactly the reasons s describes for people who might be better > >starting out with 4 hours. > > Oh, for sure, most people are going to need to work up to it rather than > jumping in, but I don't think it's at all necessary to eat as many carbs as > he says to get there. In fact, I think eating that much carb would make it > harder. > > > > > - > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Connie- >Must be a YMMV thing. He doesn't say you HAVE to eat that much carb, >by the way. That's a starting guideline and a max. He's addressing >a huge variety of people with that book. True, but the book needed some editing, because he contradicted himself at times, and even accounting for that, he reserved his greatest vitriol for Atkins, and warned people against cutting carbs " too much " because that leads, in his opinion, to being a " carb cripple " . There's a lot of value in the book, but you have to sift through a lot of crap too. And at at least one point, he directs people to eat a starch serving that is the same volume as the meat serving -- e.g. a serving of potatoes that's the size of the serving of beef. Terrible advice. >You know what else has changed a lot for me is how well I metabolize >things. Yeah, me too, at least to a small degree, anyway. > So many times all we talk about is the input side and not >how the outgo side changes. Almost as if we're buying the idea that >everything on the " burning " side is uniform and the same for >everyone like those charts where a 150 yo college male athlete burns >x calories while jogging for y minutes. puh-leeze. But that's the mainstream belief! A calorie is a calorie is a calorie, etc. etc. etc. I can't even believe how many people parrot such obvious bunk! >Wasn't it here where I saw the reference to the article, " Problems >in the Furnace " that goes into problems on the burning side. Yeah, I think Wanita posted that. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 , Does the 5-6 hrs. also include those with hypoglycemic tendencies? jafa --- Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > Connie- > > >Right I was thinking afterward about how some > people have to work > >up to the 5-6 hours and I should have said that. I > wasn't able to feel > >good the whole 6 hours at the beginning eating like > that, and for > >exactly the reasons s describes for people > who might be better > >starting out with 4 hours. > > Oh, for sure, most people are going to need to work > up to it rather than > jumping in, but I don't think it's at all necessary > to eat as many carbs as > he says to get there. In fact, I think eating that > much carb would make it > harder. > > > > > - > > __________________________________ - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 http://mail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Jafa- >Where are you getting the information that aerobic >exercise isn't as good for us, as we have been told?? >Even Mercola has suggested aerobic exercise for 90 >min. (which I think is ridiculous), to lose weight. I >do know that it is very catabolic to the body. I don't have time right now to dig up a bunch of references, but here's the argument in a nutshell: There are basically two kinds of training effects: physiological and neurological (though obviously in a sense they're both physical changes). Strength training causes concrete physiological changes -- muscle growth and improvements in muscle quality, essentially. And any kind of athletic activity, including weight lifting, will lead to neurological changes as your body learns how to perform the activity effectively and efficiently. But in general, that effect is extremely specific to the trained activity. Walking or running on a treadmill, for example, doesn't yield anything like the benefits you'd expect when walking or running in the real world because the motions and adaptations involved are actually somewhat different. All exercise also causes oxidative damage. So-called " aerobic " exercise often does a lot of oxidative damage because it's supposed to be carried on for long periods of time, but since it doesn't prompt meaningful muscle development, it doesn't yield that much in the way of lasting and concrete physiological benefits. It can be an effective means of burning off undesirable stored fat, but your body can become accustomed to that extra level of activity (90 minutes a day, for example, per Mercola) so that if you slack off, you'll gain weight immediately, because the exercise regimen hasn't given your body a built-in mechanism for burning more calories -- namely extra muscle mass. Also, a significant portion of the performance improvement people experience over time in their aerobic exercises of choice isn't actually due to increased general physical fitness at all, but simply to neurological adaptations to those particular exercises. And worse yet, if your metabolism has any problems with burning fat, aerobic exercise can actually cause muscle catabolism, which is the very last thing you'd want! Strength training, by contrast, causes lasting physical improvements in your body and lasting improvements to your metabolism, and because it isn't typically done for the extended periods that some people do so-called " aerobic " exercise, it can also do less oxidative damage. I've actually been down both roads. Years ago I lost a bunch of weight by going on the Atkins diet and putting in many hours a week on a treadmill (before I learned even a fraction of what I know today about diet and nutrition, not to mention exercise and fitness). And in spite of all that exercising, I had to adopt a particularly extreme sort of no-carb all-fat diet towards the end of my weight loss in order to continue making progress. Then I suffered a financial reversal, couldn't afford much animal fat anymore (and didn't fully understand its importance either) and presto, my health fell apart and the weight came back. Nowadays, I'm exclusively doing strength work (albeit arranged in a circuit training fashion, and my heart rate certainly gets up there during each circuit) and as I'm approaching my fat loss goal, I'm not only not having to cut further and further down on carbs, I've actually been able to add a few! Not only that, as far as I can tell I'm getting just as much of an endurance benefit as I did from all my intense aerobic exercise years ago. And this is despite a major digestive disaster that happened in the intervening years courtesy of an asthma drug which caused me to lose a huge amount of muscle mass (at one point a couple years ago Binky commented that I looked like I had a wasting disease) and require digestive aids with every meal apparently for the rest of my life. So I'd say that strength training -- weight lifting -- should be the foundation of ANY exercise and fitness program, and that any endurance or " aerobic " exercises added should at worst be carefully designed and chosen to mimic as closely as possible whatever sport or activity one wants to become proficient in and at best should be lifted directly from said sport or activity. IOW, if you want to play tennis, strengthen the muscles you need to play tennis and do lots of serving and volleying and so on to become good at serving and volleying and so on. Obviously I'm talking about genuine functional strength training, though, not drug-assisted bodybuilding or anything resembling or derived from it, and the difference can cause a lot of confusion. I was riding the subway with someone last night when some other passenger started showing off by doing pullups on one of the overhead handrails. I commented that he wasn't doing proper pullups because he was doing them curl style, and my friend asked what on earth I meant. I said that curl-style isn't a functionally useful way to do pullups, because in the real world you'd never find a situation in which you could climb something with your hands and arms in the curl position. He looked at me as if I was crazy and responded that people don't work out so they can _do_ things, they work out so they can build their biceps and look good! - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 Jafa- >Does the 5-6 hrs. also include those with hypoglycemic >tendencies? Heck yeah! I've had extreme hypoglycemic tendencies at times in my life (I dropped off the chart in a glucose tolerance test) and I know eat two meals a day. The first comes around midday, the second starts 6 hours after the first concludes and then I go about 16 hours before starting over again. Two meals might not work so well for everyone, but at the very least 5-6/5-6/11-12 is a minimum I think everyone should work towards. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 On 10/20/05, Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > Jafa- > > >Does the 5-6 hrs. also include those with hypoglycemic > >tendencies? > > Heck yeah! I've had extreme hypoglycemic tendencies at times in my life (I > dropped off the chart in a glucose tolerance test) and I know eat two meals > a day. The first comes around midday, the second starts 6 hours after the > first concludes and then I go about 16 hours before starting over > again. Two meals might not work so well for everyone, but at the very > least 5-6/5-6/11-12 is a minimum I think everyone should work towards. This has been my experience too. My hypoglycemia has almost completely disappeared after extending the time between meals and increasing the ratio of fat:carbs (though I'm definitely not low-carbing). Even if I have to skip a meal and go all day without eating. Pretty amazing, cause I used to be way sensitive to that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 - >>and I know eat two meals Blurk. Can't believe I typed that. >This has been my experience too. My hypoglycemia has almost >completely disappeared after extending the time between meals and >increasing the ratio of fat:carbs (though I'm definitely not >low-carbing). Even if I have to skip a meal and go all day without >eating. Pretty amazing, cause I used to be way sensitive to that. Pretty much the same here, except that I am eating low-carb. I can delay meals a _lot_ now if necessary without any of the crashing I used to experience. - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted October 20, 2005 Report Share Posted October 20, 2005 , Is this then similar to the warrior diet, but in the lectin diet,you eat 2 large meals instead of 1 large meal at dinner with some undereating if you get hungry earlier? Also what about eating after a workout if he says to wait for 6 or so hrs and you have a few more hrs to go? Also, I don't seem to have enough strength to exercise w/o some food in me first, but feel some nausea exercising after a large meal. Any suggestions? jafa --- Idol <Idol@...> wrote: > - > > >>and I know eat two meals > > Blurk. Can't believe I typed that. > > >This has been my experience too. My hypoglycemia > has almost > >completely disappeared after extending the time > between meals and > >increasing the ratio of fat:carbs (though I'm > definitely not > >low-carbing). Even if I have to skip a meal and go > all day without > >eating. Pretty amazing, cause I used to be way > sensitive to that. > > Pretty much the same here, except that I am eating > low-carb. I can delay > meals a _lot_ now if necessary without any of the > crashing I used to > experience. > > > > > - > > __________________________________ Music Unlimited Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music./unlimited/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.