Podcast on the Shangri-La Diet
Do you ever groan when a new diet book comes into vogue and people are talking about how little fat or sugar they are eating? Sounds pretty boring. Today, we are talking with Dr. Seth Roberts, the author of The Shangri-La Diet,
who actually tells you to drink sugar water and eat olive oil in order to lose weight. Sound impossible? Not so, says Dr. Roberts, a psychology professor at the University of California at Berkeley. Listen to Dr. Roberts tell us about his self-experimentation with his own diet and how he and many others in the blogosphere have lost the weight for good. Hey, I guess we all need all the inspiration we can get with bathing suit season around the corner. You can even join a forum with Dr. Roberts here to discuss the diet and to get support.Tune in here (no iPod needed) to listen to the podcast or subscribe via iTunes. You can listen to other podcasts at our podcast archive here.
Please leave comments or suggestions below.
posted by Helen at 6:57 PM
53 Comments:
It is endlessly fascinating to me to see how otherwise intelligent people can never cease to have faith that easy, painless food choices can magically wipe away obesity.
Unfortunately, fantasies like this must remain so.
The key to weight management always has been, and still remains, a sensible diet AND sensible exercise plan, in tandem. One without the other is doomed to fail.
That is the case whether it sugar water, the Atkins Diet, the South Beach Diet, the Long Island Diet, or any other diet one wishes to advocate.
One last point: the body is a very adaptive mechanism. When it is underfed for long periods of time, it will lower its metabolic rate and increase its fat storage -- that's how humans survived difficult times before. Depriving the body of sustenance will cause body fat (and muscle) to be lost-- but it will all be regained as fat as the body moves to compensate over the next several months.
That is why we all know someone who has successfully lost 10+ lbs on whatever diet you'd like to fancy, and then regained all the weight and then some months thereafter.
I tried the diet when it was first reported and discussed at the Freakonomics site. It didn't work for me.
The key to any weight loss is motivation. I lost 130 pounds in six months. All i did was diet and exercise. I had tried all kinds of diets and they failed. This time I was trying to lose enough weight to be able to join the Marine Corps and that made all the difference. Now it might have been easier (not easy) because I was 20 and had only been fat for 12 years, but i think the idea of finding a motivation is what is key. I have been able to keep the weight off for over a year now and this is due simply to the fact that I no longer desire non-diet soda, fast food or chips like I used to and because the body begins to crave exercise
(sorry if this a double post)
"The key to weight management always has been, and still remains, a sensible diet AND sensible exercise plan, in tandem. One without the other is doomed to fail."
"One last point: the body is a very adaptive mechanism. When it is underfed for long periods of time, it will lower its metabolic rate and increase its fat storage -- that's how humans survived difficult times before."
These two are mutually exclusive. If the body's metabolism slows enough, then it will be impossible to lose weight without dropping to calorie intake levels that are so unhealthy they do more damage than the weight itself.
It is endlessly fascinating to me to see how otherwise intelligent people can never cease to have faith that simply lowering calorie intake and increasing exercise can magically wipe away obesity.
This diet (which I've been on almost a week) makes sense to me. My wife and I came to almost the same conclusions about 20 years ago. She was down to eating 700 calories per day and was gaining weight! We decided she was an "ice-age survivor". So something that tricks the set-point (metabolic rate?) ought to work.
I am not sure I've lost weight, yet, but I sure feel full all the time now, The oil has been easier for us (we use quite a bit of olive oil normally), and we're using canola oil.
"These two are mutually exclusive. If the body's metabolism slows enough, then it will be impossible to lose weight without dropping to calorie intake levels that are so unhealthy they do more damage than the weight itself."
Bill, this just shows ignorance of the facts. Moderate, substantial aerobic exercise sustained 4-5 times per week at the right heart rate for at least 30 minutes or so will raise the metabolic set point. Thus, the body will burn more calories at rest than before. It will also store less fat now and in the future.
This is why athletes in aerobic sports (such as in tennis) can stay quite lean and eat voluminous amounts of food for their activity (which is primarily aerobic in nature). And their body weight (for men, often around 200 lbs) is by no means insubstantial. It is comprised mostly of lean body mass. You will find similar excellent metabolisms in swimmers. These men, too, weigh around 200 lbs if not more, at about 6 feet in height. And they eat prodigiously.
A "sensible diet" does not mean starvation. These athletes can and do eat anything they desire, on occasion (cheesecake or "sugar water"), but primarily they subsist on (as every trainer knows) protein, complex carbohydrates, and good fats (fish oil, almonds, etc).
None of these athletes are successful from magic pills, sugar water or painless diet quick-fixes. But it's always easier to believe that no effort will miraculously work for you.
The idea that permanent weight loss is impossible is an easy out for people that want to go back to eating the way they used to.
It's easy to find examples of permanent weight loss with all kinds of diet programs.
You just can't go back to your old ways.
I've lost 82 pounds over 10 months.
Cruel to be kind, but I actually read the entire book in the Starbucks within my local Barnes & Noble bookstore. Took about 45 minutes, I was skimming slightly but caught the essential points.
The concept of how we become attached to foods is intriguing. Once fats and sugars become unflavored then food begins to loose its psychological potential and becomes what it should be (in my opinion); necessary fuel for the body.
I've been on the olive-oil for two weeks and have lost 4.5 pounds. I'm very hesistant to go with the sugar-water, sounds like a potential glycemic disaster in the making particularly if you are an active person.
So far it appears to actually be curbing my appetite and I find myself eating less at meals. This cannot help but result in weight loss. Too early to say if that is the diet or perhaps a placebo effect related to my feelings about the diet or just a change in my metabolism. In any case, something is happening and without cravings, tiredness or irritability aside from my normal nature. We shall have to wait and see, but so far, I'm impressed (with my 4.5lb weight loss mostly) and with the concepts within the Shangri-La Diet.
After seeing the initial link on Instapundit I was curious to check it out. And it sounded interesting so I went ahead and bought the book. I'm 5'9", and weighed 250 when I started it a week and a half ago, so I need to lose 60-70 pounds to be healthy.
I don't know that I buy the reasoning behind why the diet is supposed to work, but I can say this. For me, drinking 2 tablespoons of canola oil first thing in the morning, and then another 2 in the afternoon, very definitely decreases my appetite, and by a lot more than 500 calories would suggest. I'm full much quicker. I've gone from probably eating 3000 calories a day, to eating about 1800 including the oil, without any particular hunger problems. For me the effects are so strong its startling. Although maybe it shouldn't surprise us. I mean, our mothers always told us not to eat candy or it would ruin our appetite, as if 200 calories of candy would ruin the appetite for a thousand calorie dinner.
I have no idea if the diet will work long-term for me, but 12 days in I've lost 5 pounds. I certainly don't expect to keep losing at that rate.
I am also endlessly bemused by those who are thrilled by massive weight loss.
To Rick: how many of your 82 pounds consisted of fat? How many were pounds of water weight? How many were pounds of critical muscle mass you needed to keep your metabolism running? Do you think losing 82 pounds in less than a year seems healthy? What is your body fat percentage? Everyone is so focused on losing a "pound." A pound of what? Water is irrelevant. Losing muscle is destructive. Losing fat is healthy.
Mr. Arens, how many of your 4.5 lbs was simply lost water weight? How much was fat weight? What is your body fat percentage?
If you simply wish to lose weight fast, why don't you try sitting in a sauna? A 190 lb man will fluctuate 5-10 lbs in weight every day simply based on water weight. Losing this weight is irrelevant.
"Bill, this just shows ignorance of the facts. Moderate, substantial aerobic exercise sustained 4-5 times per week at the right heart rate for at least 30 minutes or so will raise the metabolic set point. Thus, the body will burn more calories at rest than before. It will also store less fat now and in the future."
You just show ignorance of reality. I keep food charts. I now weigh 210 pounds. I average 1200 calories a day. I ride my bike from 45-60 per day.
I have gained 12 pounds in the past month.
If you folks' blather about "exercise and eat less" had any validity, every weight loss plan known to man would not have a success rate under two percent, as is the case out in the real world.
The guy who said a good definition of insanity was trying the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result must have been talking about all those people pushing this simplistic solution. And as for the guy who lost 85 pounds, big deal. How much do you want to bet that two years down the road you will have gained every ounce of it back, and then some more?
I tried the diet for two weeks, and had absolutely no weight loss, no gain, either, tho. I am 6'4", weigh 217, work out vigorously 3-4 times a week, and have a bodyfat composition of between 21 and 23%. I am a foodie, I love hole in the wall cafes, and I eat a lot. My daily caloric intake is usually around 3200 calories, and the virgin olive oil didn't seem to curb my appetite at all. I only took 1 tbs., twice daily, though. Now I am tempted to try 2 tbs. of canola twice daily to see if there is any difference.
Bill, what is your heart rate when you ride the bike? What is your age and body fat percentage? A 40 year old man weighing 210 lbs should be getting his heart rate to 120-40 beats per minute. Keep it at that level for no more than 45 minutes. 60 minutes is overkill.
Where are you? If your answer is "I dunno," that is probably the cause for your lack of success.
1200 calories a day is close to starvation and is an absurd caloric level to maintain for long periods. I would wager you have driven your body to store fat at near-obscene levels and have similarly dragged your metabolism down to nothing. 210 pounds sounds like you are overweight. Get your body fat checked.
A 180 lb 40 year old with moderate body fat levels should be eating 2,200 calories per day. If you are obese/overweight, you should STILL be getting in about 1800 or so calories per day to keep your metabolism thriving and not kill yourself.
You should eat 6 times per day in moderate amounts (300-400 calories per meal). That keeps your metabolism high. Eat breakfast. Don't starve yourself through the day- that just makes your body conserve fat more.
Again gaining or losing "pounds" is a silly sort of point. What kind of pounds? Water weight? Fat? Or muscle? Get your body fat checked and monitored and you'll know the answer. If that's too hard for you, check your waist size. If it's expanding, you're fattening up. If it's shrinking, you're losing fat. Focus on that.
Change with exercise and diet is quite achievable. But it requires some focus and some measurement.
Gaining 12 pounds is not even necessarily bad, if it's 12 pounds of muscle. I doubt you're doing that.
Bill, you're right: insanity is trying the same thing over and over again with no success. I suggest you start measuring where you are and setting some realistic goals. And no extreme steps.
I've only had access to the book for a few days...and in those few days I have been trying his sucrose-water suggestion as I am on the road a lot, and don't have reliable access to the other choices. (And drinking oil feels scary to me.) I have felt very noticeable appetite reduction (going to get my habitual afternoon snack after a lighter than normal lunch, and not being able to stomach the idea of puting more in), much like described by Mr. Roberts in his book.
Some table sugar into glass or pint of water near mealtime is all I'm doing, but appetite (amount I eat before full) is much reduced.
Bill,
If you have gained 12 pounds in the last month eating 1200 calories a day you NEED to go see a doctor!
There are approximately 3500 calories in a pound of fat.
1200 cal/day X 30 days = 36000 calories
36000 calories / 3500 cal/pound = 10.28 pounds
If you have gained 12 pounds something medically is up! You have gained more weight than the your caloric energy intake for the month would allow even if your body burned no calories to survive.
If your calorie math is accurate, the only other explanation would be some sort of abnormal growth causing the weight gain. A 12 pound gain in a month is startlingly rapid weight gain for someone who is exercising and controlling their intake. Please see a doctor!
Mike,
Bill's problem is that he is clueless about what kind of pounds he has in his body.
Yes, a pound of fat is about 3,500 calories. But a pound of muscle is only 1,800 calories. And a pound of water is 0 calories. If he's been drinking 2 gallons of diet ice tea per day, he'll gain 16 lbs of water weight, which he'll excrete the next day. Whoop de doo.
You are right that it's impossible he's gained 12 pounds of fat. I also suspect he's not diligently counting all calories he's ingesting (Starbucks coffees count, too -- and with cream, they count for a lot).
Well, I lifted weights and did aerobic target bicycle (with heart monitors so I knew I was on target) for three years. No results.
I then started this program in November of last year, I've lost about 56 lbs so far.
Since I'm still lifting weights and started back in Judo two months ago, I've a good idea of what I'm doing in terms of what I'm losing (muscle mass in arms and shoulders up, weight moved up or the same).
I'm full much quicker. I've gone from probably eating 3000 calories a day, to eating about 1800 including the oil, without any particular hunger problems
That was my experience as well. It has been really strange, nothing like this before, though I've been on various diets ever since I went out for wrestling in high school. I'm fifty now.
Stephen M (Ethesis)
http://ethesis.blogspot.com/
(away from my home computer at the moment)
Oh, for anyone who really buys into the traditional methods, I'd suggest reading through:
http://www.amptoons.com/blog/archives/2006/04/03/the-case-against-weight-loss-dieting/
Hm, I had no idea anyone was having success with this approach, but I do know that fat in food is the controller of satiety. I think I can see that working. The only problem being that most veg. oils are dreadfully unhealthy, excepting olive and coconut and some nut oils and so on. I'm scared of the sugar water.
pbird
O.K. Dr. Helen:
I find it really "Interesting" that the lucky guy your husband, is NOT the weight diet and hard body workout expert.
YOU are.
I mean how has he kept your attention all these years, ... really. Unconditional Love, Affection, financial Support, Mr. household fixit, and Constitutional Law ? Sheesh.
1) All diets work if you work them -- Dr. Dean Addel Syndicated Radio M.D.
2) after you lose some wieght -- NOW WHAT ? Bada Bing Bada Boom Binge City , Depression, weight Gain
3) Repeat
It's the lifestyle and food is part of it.
-- Scientific Exercise, if ain't fun you won't do it, Find some sports that you and your sweety like to do TOGETHER (we lift weights and are I hate to admit this it seems foo foo, competitive Ballroom Dancers icognito)
-- good food that you like to eat in the right balance,
-- adequate sleep.
That's it.
for the World's fastest PROVEN results, go to BodyForLife.com
And buy the WeightWatchers 15 minute cookbook.
I discuss my experiences with the diet here and here.
This change, frankly, has also been oddly depressing. I use to eat alot, and enjoy doing so. But I now feel like I'm not good at something I use to be good at, and don't know what to do with the time I spent pre-occupied with food. I jokingly described it to my wife as "being impotent", but with food instead of with sex. And I was the Hugh Hefner of food. But I'm getting over this, and feeling encouragement that I'm able to moderate behavior I wasn't able to before, that I've found a physiological solution to something I've traditionally considered a vice and a moral failing.
. . . . .
This isn't bad; I wouldn't mind being at my target weight in a year. But what is best about this diet is the freedom to eat what I want. It's nice not to spend lots of money on food, either on low-carb foods or junk foods. It's nice to be able to eat dinner with my wife, and not cook our separate meals, which she enjoys. It's nice not to feel guilty eating. For these reasons alone, the diet is worthwhile.
I'd like to add that you can buy five dollars worth of extra light olive oil at SAMS or Costco and it will last you for months and months on this diet.
As diets go, this is the cheapest one you will find to experiment with. You probably have canola oil around the house, or sugar. Try it for a week and if you can feel the mental difference, you'll completely understand what is happening.
No new food to buy, nothing. Then, if it has worked for the first week, you can buy five dollars worth of extra light olive oil with the money you've saved on the food you haven't eaten.
I'm eating about 2,000 to 2500 calories a day less than I was, my food bill is down a lot. I could buy a half gallong of oil and a copy of the book every week and I'd still be ahead.
As for the neo-calvinists who see weight loss as a sign of inherent virtue and a manifestation of the mandate of heaven, sorry.
There is plenty of science about that too.
Anyway, I'm glad you did the podcast and that you have opened up comments.
It sounds to me like there is no "one size fits all" diet. 12 years ago I lost about 50 pounds (about a quarter of myself) between Memorial Day and Labor Day. I have gained about 15 pounds back. My Secret? Eat much less and keep up the exercise. I'm now in my mid 50's and try to not like a pig. (Pizza and donuts are the tools of the devil.) It won't work for everyone.
There is a little know Fifth Law of Thermodynamics at work here. I call it "conservation of fat in the universe." If anybody anywhere in the entire universe looses a pound, someone else gains it. Fat is only created and never destroyed. If you want to loose weight you must work harder than the other guy to make sure it flows in the desired direction. Fat is created by people whose weight never seems to fluxuate much. They are like carriers. They create prodigious amounts of fat and loose it into the ether where it is pick up by unsuspecting innocent people who don't know the Fifth Law of Thermodynamics. I must post this anonymously or my life will be in danger from the dreaded Society of Mesomorphs. If they find out who I am they will send Jack Bauer after me and I'll be turned into an dead Endomorph. The Fifth Law is their greatest secret.
PIMF
anonymous 10:29
My meals are irregularly spaced: breakfast at 9, lunch at 1, dinner at 8, to bed at 1 AM.
Around 4 PM, I've tried eating 2 tsp of canola oil. It certainly diminishes the afternoon hunger and, at 80 low-glycemic calories, is less than most any other snack.
I've seen people railing against this 'diet', but for heavens sakes, folks, 80 low-glycemic calories isn't going to hurt anyone. If it works for you, go for it. If it doesn't, drop it.
Does it work for me? Yes, it cuts the hunger, and if I get out and walk forty minutes every other day and try to stay slightly hungry, I can lose 1 - 2 pounds per week.
Anyone tried substituting flax seed oil for canola oil? I've read some negative things about canola oil but not flaz seed oil, and it, too, is supposed to act as an appetite suppressant if ingested before eating.
Compare calories eaten to calories used. If you eat more than you use, you gain weight. If you use more than you eat, then you lose weight. That's it. My very own diet and exercise book all in one paragraph.
There is a little know Fifth Law of Thermodynamics at work here. I call it "conservation of fat in the universe." If anybody anywhere in the entire universe looses a pound, someone else gains it.
It was for sharing this secret that Dave Berry was forced into retirement.
Anyway, rather than just parroting the traditional wisdom (which doesn't work), I'd invite skeptics to just try the diet and see for themselves.
Easy enough.
It is endlessly fascinating to me to see how otherwise intelligent people can never cease to have faith that simply lowering calorie intake and increasing exercise can magically wipe away obesity.
I'm always fascinated by the self-delusion in couch-potatos who think that they're fat because their bodies are more efficient than athletes...
Foolish trendy diets like this one (sugar water and olive oil? Are you kidding?) persist because of the incredible mathematical and statistical ignorance in society. Folks, you have to burn 3600 more calories than you consume to lose a pound of body weight. Why doesn't this work for people without special diets? It's because most overweight people underestimate their caloric intake. Also, once you've lost the weight, you need fewer calories per day to maintain your weight (a 200 lb person requires more energy per day than a 130 lb person, regardless of whether the weight is in muscle or fat). As a result, if you go off your diet and return to your old intake amounts, you will gain weight back. It's not because you're in starvation mode, it's because you weigh less.
Sorry if this is a double post but:
Having said the above, I also think that a lot of naturally skinny people fail to take into account the wide variation in energy levels that different people have. I have a colleague who probably burns more calories a day fidgeting than I do in my jogs. Some people have to be active, while some are naturally sluggish; the latter are going to have a harder time keeping their weight down because their daily calorie needs are so low.
It's great to see that so many people are familiar with the conventional wisdom on dieting and weight loss. Bravo!
This is all pre-4/25 thinking, people (the publication date of SLD).
The counterintuitive nature of this diet is what's giving you the fidgets, but it's conventional wisdom that has helped turn us into a nation of fat people.
Check out the forums on shangriladiet.com and see what kind of results people are getting, especially the way they describe how their attitudes toward food have changed.
And for God's sake try the diet or at least read the book before you declare it can't work. The diet is simple and easy to do; the book is very short. If you don't know what you're talking about then you're only arguing from your own ignorance.
Walmart sells a food scale for about $4. The web has many sites that show calorie content per ounce for zillions of foods. Any jackass can figure out his calorie intake if he wants to.
And that guy melded to the couch? All he has to do is read the label on the empty bag of potato chips to figure out how many calories he just inhaled.
"Also, once you've lost the weight, you need fewer calories per day to maintain your weight (a 200 lb person requires more energy per day than a 130 lb person, regardless of whether the weight is in muscle or fat)."
This is simply false. It shows no understanding of human metabolism, much less of exercise or diets. A 130 lb muscular person who runs a marathon (26 miles) is going to need A LOT more calories per day to survive than a 200 lb person who is a fat couch potato and 35% body fat and is wholly sedentary. Is that so hard to grasp?
On top of that, this kind of comment shows no understanding of the DIFFERENCE between "pounds" of weights. A pound of WATER weight burns 0 calories a day. A pound of FAT burns about 5 calories a day. A pound of MUSCLE burns about 50 calories a day.
So, a 220 lb man who is a fat couch potato (35% body fat) may need only 1,600 calories or so to survive per day -- think Norm on Cheers.
But a rock-hard muscular guy who is 220 lbs but only 10% body fat -- Arnold Schwarzenegger -- will be able to eat double that and not gain an ounce of weight.
And I'm not even talking about exercise.
For this reason, Diets (magic, special or otherwise) absent exercise are a waste of time.
But don't let me stop you: it's easier to take a teaspoon of the magic olive oil to lose the weight. Just wave the magic wand -- and poof!!! Lean and trim.
But don't let me stop you: it's easier to take a teaspoon of the magic olive oil to lose the weight. Just wave the magic wand -- and poof!!! Lean and trim.
Actually, in my experience it takes some time. About six months for the first fifty pounds or so. I've only 25 pounds left to lose, so I'm not sure how long the second fifty would have taken.
I blog about it, and other things, at http://ethesis.blogspot.com/
But it is easy to try the diet out. It isn't like you need to buy anything you probably don't have around the house to try it for a week or two. Pretty easy to see what it does and experience it.
A lot of people are found of the quote "another theory murdered by facts" -- well, it applies very much to the SLD. The facts, solid experience, are easy to come by, with a minimal investment of time or effort.
I've also blogged on why people seem so outraged at the thought that the diet might work. But being thin is not a sign of virtue or the mandate of heaven. It isn't.
Anonymous 6:39: Yes, yes, of course metabolic rate affects caloric requirements. My point, which I thought was pretty clear in context, is that if a 200 lb person loses weight and becomes a 130 lb person, all else remaining equal (daily activity levels, etc.), that person will require fewer calories per day to maintain their weight. A lot of people gain back lost weight because they fail to take this into account.
Great secret to weight loss? Be homeless. A few months spent living out of community shelters, living on a bowl of ramen a day will teach one a lot about self-control.
Anonymous 11:41: Your thinking illustrates the flaw in weight-loss strategies pursued by most people today.
There is a tremendous, obsessive desire to LOSE weight; i.e. drop from 200 lbs to 130 lbs. That is based on the idea, such as you note, that a 130 lb person "will require fewer calories per day to maintain their weight."
This is fool's gold. That's so because there is NO thought as to why the body got so round in the first place.
All of the people who write here about losing 25 lbs, 80+ lbs, exhibit the same fallacy.
When you lose such drastic amounts of weight, you wreak havoc on the body's metabolism. People who engage in 50 lbs weight loss diets lose pounds of lean body mass -- pounds of muscle.
It is those pounds that keep the metabolism healthy and humming.
When the body is wrecked from losing all those pounds (look at people who have "successfully" lost 50+ lbs and you'll know what I mean), their metabolism slows to a crawl.
What THAT means is that, in a year's time if not more, they will regain all of the weight.
So few seem to understand that by GAINING MUSCLE WEIGHT, a person can increase metabolism by hundreds of calories per day. That will make a person lean and trim and permit her to eat fully.
But again: don't let me stop you. You can live like Spc. Freeman says: on a bowl of ramen a day. That'll sure get you thin -- starving, in fact.
Or go back to the magic oil diet and lose pounds and pounds of ... of.... muscle and fat that you'll be bound to regain in a few years' time (though it'll be more fat then than now).
10:41: I don't know why you think I'm on the starvation diet or the magic oil plan. My original point was that weight loss is simple in description, hard to execute, and a lifetime commitment to maintain. As for screwing up your metabolism by losing large amounts of weight, well, that depends on how fast you lose it. A slow weight loss program, rather than a rapid crash diet, will not have the effect you describe.
Sometimes I wish there were a rule about posting in the internet: only post about what you know to be true FROM YOUR OWN DIRECT EXPERIENCE, not what you've heard or read or believed all your life. Otherwise it's just news from nowhere, as all these contradictory "facts" demonstrate. Go to the shangriladiet.com forums and read about the experiences of over 100 people who are trying this method of appetite control. Some posts are negative, but the vast majority of posters are seeing surprisingly positive results. A new diet getting good results among its adherents is not exactly earth-shattering news, but read carefully what people are saying about how this "diet" has actually changed their attitudes about food, giving them control over their eating and curbing their cravings. It's actually very moving to read some of these reports.
Not eating lots of food, you guys sound like a bunch of french flag waving anti-americans.
Eat your cheesburgers, and your french fries. Baseball is the most american patriotic sport, you don't see a sugarwater guy, or a olive oil guy, you see a chilichesse hotdog guy, the beer guy, the salty nuts guy.
I don't think George Bush would drink no fancy sugar water!
People who engage in 50 lbs weight loss diets lose pounds of lean body mass -- pounds of muscle.
Gee, that would surprise the guys at the fitness club. I chart my weights. I've lost sixty pounds now, I lift more weight than when I started.
Tell you what. Go to a fitness club. find the back machine and some hand weights. Toss on 15-20 pounds on top of the weight stack, set it to maximum and do your reps on a two count up, a full four seconds down on each rep. Then you can tell me what magical secret I've got to lifting more weight while losing muscle mass.
Or we can step out onto the mat. No one at the club thinks I've suddenly gotten weaker as I've gotten lighter.
But, feel free to believe things that do not match with observed reality, just don't expect your comments to be persuasive.
Stephen
http://ethesis.blogspot.com/
I too have been doing the Shangri-la diet now for about 5 months and have lost 23 pounds. That's about a pound per week. I figure my daily calorie intake to be between 1600-1800 calories most days.
Finally, I've found a diet I can stick with. I haven't cut anything out of my diet. I've just cultivated this one good habit of taking 2 tablespoons of hempseed oil most days (not even daily). My exercise levels have stayed the same - looking after my young son and walking for half an hour a day. My muscle mass has definitely increased as my baby son weighs more now than he did 5 months ago and I'm still carrying him around a lot.
All I can say is try the diet. I know it seems hard to imagine that someone may have invented a natural, non-drug way of making us feel full on a smaller amount of food, but that does indeed seem to be the case here.
I am delighted with the results so far, not to mention my decreased blood pressure, better sleep and lessened rheumatoid arthritis symptoms. My body really was crying out for these good fats. I'll be sticking with this regime as it requires virtually no effort and is improving my health. Try is before you dismiss it.
It kinda sounds one sided here. Doubters ganging up on the people doing the diet and the dieters having to defend themselves. I loose weight by changing my diet and living normally.
My wife has to exersise 5 days a week and change her diet (which is health and lower in calories than mine)and struggles to loose any at all. We are all different.
You doubters are telling people to drop their calories and exercise. Well it sounds like the oil thing is working on the calories and who knows maybe these "fad chasers" are exercising more than you think. Let them try it.
I haven't read the book but if the book and the diet motivates them to loose weight.........well great.
Great blog.
-----
Weight Loss
it's been 3 days since i started and i've lost 4 lbs as of this morning. i've always had problems overeating and eating when i'm not hungry. the sld really helps me to not snack and stop eating after i'm full...i've got 30lbs to go, but i am definitely encouraged to keep going!!
1-24-2007
We began the Shangri-La regimen in early July 2006.
It has worked for two of my kids (the 3rd isn't on it), one of whom has had weight gain over many years' time as a result of taking Risperdal. (He has autism).
Seth Roberts' graph of Jimmy's weight loss is here:
Jimmy on Shangri-La
We've slacked off over winter; we keep forgetting to administer the "ELOO." Both kids have regained a few pounds.
But neither is experiencing "catastrophic" weight re-gain, and we anticipate it will be easy to gear up again come spring.
"Gear up" means daily weigh-ins & no more forgetting to give everyone his dose of olive oil.
What did you mean?
I really dont like fad diets. Upsetting the naturally required balance of nutrients by the human body is enlarging the penis of a problem that is big already in America - fat.
I had to make a change of life habbits! Diets do not work for me! It's only a temporary fix. I always gain the weight back! Fish, chicken,romaine lettuce, etc. works for me with exercise!
Natural penis enlargement
視訊做愛視訊美女無碼A片情色影劇kyo成人動漫tt1069同志交友網ut同志交友網微風成人論壇6k聊天室日本 avdvd 介紹免費觀賞UT視訊美女交友..........................
ut13077視訊聊天546視訊聊天室546視訊聊天室情色視訊交友情色視訊交友彩虹視訊交友網彩虹視訊交友網視訊女郎視訊女郎尋夢園聊天尋夢園聊天小莉影像館小莉影像館6k聊天室6k聊天室哈啦聊天室視訊交友90739哈啦聊天室85cc免費影城85cc免費影城sex520免費影片sex520免費影片辣美眉173show影片辣美眉173show影片
Post a Comment
<< Home