Fw: re-set dump-o-meter & full

[Guest guest]

OK, I can't find what *I* wrote. But obviously, this well written

person was agreeing with me. LOL! Maybe she will recognize herself. I

did get permission to use this as is, way back in 2001.

>

> > IMPORTANT BULLETIN:

> > is right, you can reactivate in most cases of people I

have spoken

> > to who have tried this-- you can reactivate the dumping

mechanism by

> > " fasting gastrically " from sugars for a minimum two weeks,

preferably three.

> > This means not taking in any or very little (It is in hidden

form in many

> > processed foods, that is, store-bought wrapped and boxed and

packaged foods.

> > If it isn't as it came from the tree or ground or creature, it

is PROCESSED

> > FOOD,

> >

> > meaning something more has been done to it; nutritional coatings

taken off,

> > chemicals added to make it look bright red when in fact it is

dead yellow,

> > chemicals added to make what would normally spoil in three days

last

> > throughout a nuclear winter, cheap empty " vitamins " added as a

sales

> > gimmick--so it can be said this spongy white bread builds

muscles in 7

> > different ways--mostly the muscles to open your vulnerability

to buying

> > more of that mattress stuffing (please no flaming from white

bread lovers--

> > grin)

> >

> > Or to add massive amounts of sodium, that means salt--those TV

dinners carry

> > the whole daily requirement of sodium in one meal and then some

(sodium bonds

> > to water molecules, thereby weight is held by the body as water

weight. This

> > is good for such is needed for electrolyte balance--electrolytes

regulate

> > heart rhythm amongst other things) but too much sodium just

makes people

> > water-logged. You can usually tell it in their faces esp around

the eyes.

> >

> > Or manufacturers fill processed food with MSG to make what is

embalmed taste

> > less embalmed. Or cereal is added, not nutritious whole wheat or

bran, but

> > chaff, that is, the flaky hull leavings that would normally be

thrown out--in

> > order to extend the bulk of the thing whatever it is...okay so

one need be

> > careful with PROCESSED FOOD, for it is loaded with all sorts of

things that

> > one would want to be careful about... and not ingest much of)

Lastly,

> > PROCESSED FOOD has much added sugars in various forms. To make

it taste good.

> > I have been amazed when years ago, I discovered that there was

sugar in

> > catsup, in unsweetened cereal, in skim milk, in yogurt, added to

sushi, in

> > wasabe, in pickled ginger, in tomatillo sauce, spaghettios,

spam,. in

> > jalapeno preps, salsa, in just about everything PROCESSED, even,

for years

> > and years, in baby food. Sort of like tobacco, the baby foods

were delivery

> > systems for setting up sugar cravings in our little ones so they

could be

> > sold all kinds of junky sugar processed foods later.

> >

> > Below are some of the forms of sugars, sweeteners one would look

for on the

> > package ingredients.

> >

> > Sorbitol, manitol, maltitol, lactitol, pannitol (sugar

alcohols), simple sugars, brown sugar, white sugar, sprinkles, clown

candy, sugar alcohols, corn syrup, aspartame, sucrose, dextrose,

glucose, saccharine, sucralose, stevia, diet candy (some of the

most heavily saturated) diet

> > anything, pie, cake, ice cream, yogurt, milk, fruits, and

more.

> >

> > It appears that abstaining from sugars reorients the intestinal

and stomach

> > flora, resensitizes the st and int to receiving sugar once again

as a foreign

> > substance. So, if one eats candy daily for three weeks, there

may no longer

> > be dumping as the intestine particularly adjusts its environs to

handle it.

> > The body is miraculous in this way. If the person then eats

carrots instead

> > ( and no other sugars) for the next three weeks instead of

candy, chances are

> > when they return to candy, they will dump big time---for the

firs t few times

> > until the int and stom flora again readjust themselves. I think

this is a

> > reasoned theory.

> > \

> > Secondly, regarding tummy shrinking. (This is not scientific)

I once dreamt

> > that the stomach has a nerve near the top, bottom and sides

that signals

> > fullness when the food especially reaches that top line and

touches or

> > presses that nerve; that this signals the brain which then

signals the body

> > that it is full and satisfied. When alot of food in put into the

tummy, the

> > weight of the food causes the sac to sag, and the nerve that

signals fullness

> > is not reached/touched by the food until you have eaten more and

filled the

> > pouch to the very top. By eating more and more food, or food

that when chewed

> > finely--like popcorn--may pass through almost as fluid, thereby

emptying out

> > the pouch, this nerve at the top is not reached and satiety is

not activated.

> >

> > Even though this came to me in a dream, I find it fascinating,

and for my

> > body, likely true. I spoke to Dr. W about it (my surgeon) and

asked him if

> > there is a difference in size of tummies he sees in surgery. He

said yes,

> > that some are long and some are flabby and have lost their

resilience. I

> > thought this was all very interesting. Anecdotally, in science,

there is a

> > theory that one can " shrink " one's stomach by eating less and by

fasting.

> > That thereafter, the same amount of food the person was

ingesting before,

> > now seem like way too much.

> >

> > I agree with Vicki and C and others that keeping the

pouch,

> > " protecting the pouch " as MC calls it, is a very good thing--not

filling it

> > so it sags and gets longer and longer.

> >

> > Okay, okay, I go now.

> > tummy dreamer,

>

>