The answer is yes, yes they would and yes they do.

I don't know about Kosher but I know that people are forever trying to sneak meat into me, "Oh, we'll just give her this soup with chicken broth in it she'll never know, maybe she'll even like it ha-ha wouldn't that be funny". It doesn't happen often but it certainly happens. (For those wondering I've been a strict veg since birth).

I'm an alcoholic, sober for many years. Some people will try to cajole me into having a drink. "C'mon, it's Christmas. You can have one drink at Christmas, can't you?"

They think they are doing me a favour.

I've found the defense of being allergic quite effective. With the current awareness of the wide variety of food sensitivities / allergies, it's usually accepted without further discussion. If the matter is still pushed, a simple "No, thank you" works. If they still push it, then they've requested the lecture ...

(To Steamer: The line "You don't have enough" usually stops 'em ...)

I'm also a low-carber and people get REALLY defensive about dessert, as though by abstaining I'm somehow judging them for having it.

"Go on, have a little bit. Just a little bit! Here, I'll cut you a small slice. Just a sliver, really, go on, try it, it's good. It won't do you any harm!"

Yes actually, it will cause me harm. I assume a rueful look and say "insulin".

When pushed past the limit, I've said, "Why are you so keen to make me ill? Do you have Munchausen by proxy?"

In restaurants and diners, I don't tell the wait staff I don't eat carbs, I tell them I'm diabetic. It's an all-purpose excuse that gets ready cooperation for holding all the white evils.

What Steamer said. Exactly.

Re: food being forced on me I can't eat because of gluten or sugar, I say the same thing I do with alcohol. "I'm insulin resistant and my body is allergic to it, but thank you. ". If they persist I merely change the subject or just repeat what I said. "I'm allergic.". Because, it is the truth. I am.

I think your boyfriend is going to have to take responsibility, OR eat the corn. It's really his choice in the end. I know he does well, but it sounds like he doesn't really **believe** that LC is what he needs to do.

He has to decide...and then you can help him. (Amy, I realize you are not asking for advice - this is for anyone who might still not be understanding the model.)

I have been through all this for well over ten years, so I know whereof I speak. If Howard decided he wanted to eat corn on the cob, he would eat it! He decided a long time ago, he didn't want to eat it, and so he doesn't. Makes life easier for us both :-)

I must have a favored circle of friends though, because not one of them I know of would DARE try to make me (or Howard) eat something we told them "no" to even once. Maybe we just look mean....or maybe they have all seen our "before" pictures.

I get this with desserts. "You have to indulge once in a while. Life is for living." I get that, and I'll decide when. You don't know what else I've eaten this week.

Also, "Men don't like anorexic women." There's a big gap between slender and anorexic.

Some people don't believe in whatever dietary restrictions you've self-imposed and don't take them seriously. Some people are just nice and don't want you to feel deprived. They think you're secretly waiting for someone to push your hand. And there's a third group that has the "crabs in a pot" mentality. They're overweight or unhealthy, and your discipline makes them feel lazy.

I admit I've done this to make a point. My ex's mother would make up dietary restrictions to get her way in terms of menus and restaurant choices, but later if offered food she liked with similar ingredients, she'd "forget" and eagerly accept the cheesecake or whatever.

Also, I had a culturally Jewish friend who would sporadically "keep kosher" when it would gain him attention. He'd make "an exception" for a plate of nachos or chicken cordon bleu.

I had a boss who was vegetarian unless we went to Burger King or someplace where lamb was on the menu.

I didn't take their so-called restrictions seriously.

"I'm now going to put this in the eating and drinking chapter of my next book - "Manners For Nice People Who Sometimes Say F*ck" (writing it now)."

Would you also tell people that if they say "Ewwww!" in reaction to something another person is eating, they should be made to live in a barn?

"I didn't take their so-called restrictions seriously."

So you read through this column where Amy describes how difficult it is to maintain low carbs, alcoholics tell you how people want to force alcohol on them, vegetarians tell you that people want to force meat on them, and you tell us how you get that around desserts, and your takeaway is that:

People who aren't 100% according to YOUR rules and YOUR interpretations of diets you have not an utter clue about, aren't serious, at least not as far as you are concerned.

"People who aren't 100% according to YOUR rules and YOUR interpretations of diets you have not an utter clue about, aren't serious, at least not as far as you are concerned."

"Utter clue"? Are you Rex Harrison?

People who state their restrictions (which are uncomplicated) and then adhere to them only when they feel like it will not be taken seriously by me. That is correct.

This is especially true if their so-called restriction presents an inconvenience such as limiting a choice of entree or conveniently steers us to their preferred restaurant over and over.

That goes for special religious rules too. You can't invoke them only when it suits your purposes and expect me to cater to you.

My ambivalently Jewish friend would eat ham and foods that mixed dairy and meat, and would just make a little show of laughing and saying, "I really shouldn't." So if I was making food, I'd ask him if he wanted cheese on his burger.

There's something about personal choices (going to the gym, eating what's right for you, spiritual pursuits) that just throws controlling people into a hissy fit.

If the Higgs Boson had wanted us to all be the same, He would have made us the same.

Personally, people don't seem to take allergies or my hypoglycemia, or my alcoholism seriously.

I can only imagine that having an allergic reaction, passing out, or running around drunk for days, is the only way to make them understand.

"That goes for special religious rules too. You can't invoke them only when it suits your purposes and expect me to cater to you."

There is an enormous difference between asking you to cater to them, and them choosing for themselves how they go about choosing what to eat in accordance to their personal beliefs and then you judging them on issues that once more, you don't have an utter clue about.

Feel free to insert everything you know about keeping kosher.

Or for that matter all the different ways of being a vegetarian.

"My ambivalently Jewish friend would eat ham and foods that mixed dairy and meat, and would just make a little show of laughing and saying, "I really shouldn't." So if I was making food, I'd ask him if he wanted cheese on his burger."

Yes, I understand, this is why I like to chat your wife up.

I've been on the receiving end of "oh, just one" or "what kind of silly thing is that, eat it." It can be uncomfortable at times and I shouldn't have to explain to anyone outside of "no thank you," but growing up in an Italian area I can tell you that low carb is considered the same as belonging to a cult so it takes practice saying no. Ultimately as uncomfortable as it can be sometimes, it still is up to me to say no.

Yes, there ARE people who would try to push pork on Jews who keep kosher (and who have said they don't eat pork). I've seen it.

When I was pregnant the first time, I had gestational diabetes. I took my blood sugar regularly and found what foods I had to avoid and what I had to limit. I also checked out lots of online forums. Apparently, some diabetics can eat bananas w/o a problem. The rest have to avoid them like the plague (that's me).

I don't have a blood sugar problem with corn on the cob, so I was a bit surprised to hear it causes problems for others. I think perhaps the fiber keeps it from being a problem for me (for now anyway).

This is the sort of thing that (helps) cause well-meaning others from "getting" dietary restrictions. Some diabetics CAN eat things that others cannot. There are varying degrees of sensitivity. Just like some people who are allergic to cats/dogs can not come in my house and others just have to not touch their eyes when they come over.

I've learned from the gastroenterologist that people's stomachs empty at different rates (although there is a "normal" rate, it can very quite a bit). So, that probably has something to do with it too (how long the food has to be broken into components before absorption, perhaps).

Jerry, I don't need to know everyone's interpretation ever. We're not talking about a vegetarian who eats fish and eggs, and me deciding that's wrong. We're talking about people who make exceptions to their own rules, which they defined and advertised themselves, when they felt like it, if they craved the food in question.

Do you get that? They told /me/ they're breaking their own rules.

If my friend eats chocolate-covered cheesecake on a stick at the fair, I'm not going to make a special sugar-free dessert for her at my party. Clearly she eats sugar sometimes. That's the extent of it. I don't understand why your response is so defensive and melodramatic.

Some people's so-called restrictions are very ephemeral and inconsistent, yet they want others to work around them. I do take them less seriously, and yes, I judge them.

Apologies: I don't get the wife joke.

People are assholes about food. When I was a vegetarian, people would force meat on me all the time. "Oh, it's just a little piece of chicken. Protein is good for you!" Like it never occurred to me to get protein in other ways. I don't eat huge meals now, and I'm always getting people "encouraging" me to eat more because "you don't want to be anorexic." Apparently, being a normal weight = anorexic.

@Insufficient Poison:

Just imagine the wife tossing her head and laughing, saying "Oh, I really shouldn't!" in response to an inappropriate suggestion...

...but only MOST of the time.

My second ex-wife's mother was a big dessert server. I am not much a dessert eater. I like food, get filled up with it, and have no room for a huge sugar load. It's mostly a flavor issue for me, but I just don't care much for cake or pie (unless it Dutch apple, and then I need about 1/4 of what someone would consider a portion). I'll have a dessert wine, but it was never offered.

And when I said, "No, thank you, I'm not much into dessert. Your dinner was great, and I'm quite full." you'd thought I called her dog ugly. It was a way for her to exhibit control over others. Should have been a clue for the relationship; it's safe to say I'm wiser now.

I've been making beer. There's a group of people I get together with every summer, and one of them is three years sober. There's *no* *way* I'd try to convince him he could have Just One! because dammed if I'm going to be the cause of his next binge and the reason he needs to reset his sober clock. It would be beyond rude. If someone tried that on me, I'd probably stop seeking their company.

Thank you, Professor. :)

I don't usually drink alcohol. I think I've had maybe 6 drinks in my life - and I didn't finish most of them.

I've never had a problem with people pushing it on me. I think when I say, "No thanks," people either think I'm a sober addict, pregnant, or they ask and I just say, "I don't drink." The two times somebody has followed up after that, I said, "I don't like it," and that was the end of it.

I think when people explain a difference up front (for anything, not just food stuff), then people have some inherent urge to try to logic/convince the reason they are given. So, "no thanks" works better than, "no thanks. I don't really like desserts/alcohol/salmon." Give an opening and people will take it (we're curious & argumentative beings).

The friends who want to know (so they can accommodate in the future) might ask a follow-up question or two (was dinner too heavy, are you allergic, etc).

That being said, I was once at a work lunch and this guy kept insisting that I try the crab cakes. No number of, "no thanks" would deter this guy who KEPT insisting. I finally turned and faced him directly (he was sitting next to me) and said, "I keep kosher" in the same end-of-discussion voice I now use on my kids.

If I'm hosting a party it usually on the nature of barbecue or cookout. I'm going to have bunches of beer, some soda (none diet) usually a cola and Sprite/7-up.

The menu will be pork or beef and some sort of poultry will be available. The side dishes will at least include a pasta and a potato salad. There will probably be some other sort of salad or veggie as well. There may be some desserts laid out as well.

If I offer you a drink or food more than once, it is because I suck at hosting and want to make sure you are enjoying yourself, not because I'm pressing it on you.

If you can't find something to eat, it is your problem, not mine.

I've been keeping to a mostly-primal diet for a while now, with the occasional slip, and I recently started a Primal Challenge (30 days of strictly primal eating) and junk food has just come out of the woodwork.
I was able to get around a lot of the junk at work by explaining (truthfully) that I have Celiac. But of course, Celiac-friendly desserts abound these days, so people went OUT OF THEIR WAY to get gluten-free cupcakes, cookies, and brownies. I wound up thanking people profusely for their kindness, because the fact they were thinking of me WAS nice, and then surreptitiously chucking the junk in the bin at my desk.

I have worked so hard to lose the weight that I've lost (140 lbs so far), and I don't want to gain it back, and I am just sick of being told I "need to have a little indulgence." An indulgence for ME is particular Spanish red wine, thank you. I just want to say "I don't even LIKE chocolate cupcakes, so it's not an indulgence, it's YOU trying to make ME break my plans so YOU can feel better about YOUR failures. And also fuck off." But that would be rude....

Keep in mind that some people may not realize that watermelon *is* in fact a carb. Just like the average person likely doesn't know the difference between vegetarian and vegan, the definition of keeping kosher, and exactly what a diabetic can and can't eat. Or they're basing their knowledge off the one vegan/Jew/diabetic they know, who might be the exception and not the norm. When these things are important to you it's easy to forget that the rest of the world isn't going to be as well-informed.

Also keep in mind that any dietary practice that veers from the norm is going to attract its share of prothelytizers ("Meat is murder!"), concern trolls ("I'm just saying this for your health"), know-it-alls ("Let me recite to you 20 facts about why bread is bad for you"), and special snowflakes ("We must all eat at exclusively vegan restaurants"). As well as yo-yo dieters ("Sorry I can't eat the vegetarian lasagna you made specially for me because I'm on the Atkins diet this week), people who pretend to have trendy medical conditions ("I can't eat glute--oh wait is that cheesecake?) and people who adopt the practice only when it suits their convenience ("I keep kosher. Except for bacon.") The former put people on the defensive and are obnoxious to be around, the latter made it hard for the practice to be taken seriously. Unfortunately just announcing that you're a vegetarian/low-carber etc gets you tarred with the same brush.

For that reason I think it's best to frame your dietary preferences in terms of personal preferences ("I'm not a big fan of ___") or individual medical reasons (allergies, intolerances, stomach problems etc) which isn't offensive and no one can argue with. Instead of saying "I don't eat __" which implies health/weight-loss/ethical reasons and therefore makes people feel guilty and defensive.

Finally, as Joe points out, most people really don't care what you eat--they just want you to enjoy yourself and make sure that you aren't unhappy/hungry/snubbing their cooking. As long as you find something to eat then it doesn't really matter what, and you can then use it as an excuse for not eating other things ("Sorry can't eat any watermelon, filled up on hamburger patties.")

"Um, thanks, but he's been just wonderful about being disciplined about this, but when somebody forces food on him at a party, he just takes it instead of getting into an argument about it and shoving it back at them. And if food is on a person's plate, they're likely to eat it."

My entire point: no, not if they **actually** eat low carb. No, they don't shove it back in their host's face; they just don't eat it. I totally agree with ALL your other points concerning low carb, but not this one. He doesn't really mean it, Amy. Do you eat the corn on the cob if someone puts it on your plate? If you do, that's your choice. WHEN he does, that's HIS choice. He chooses to eat it.

Honestly, you are making excuses for him; something I never thought I'd see you do.

Ah, I forgot to say this: especially since he doesn't really NEED an excuse to eat corn, or whatever. And yeah, the person who shoved it on him was, really, rude.

...and second, I don't want him to eat carbs because he's unusually sensitive to them and I want to keep him alive.

What, exactly, would happen to him if he ate a huge piece of corn on the cob?

But, force a piece of corn on and he'll take it.

He'll take it because he "has" to or because he wants to? I would think a guy who's not a wimp could easily refuse any food being "forced" on him.

"you need to be gracious and not argue with a host who just put food on your plate or maybe use your fingers to throw it back in the serving dish with the rest of the corn?"

This is a false dichotomy. The first time you stated it, I was willing to politely not mention it. This is the second time.

There are other options. Being polite and quiet and not eating the corn, which is apparently what your boyfriend did, is a very good option. If the corn isn't on the plate yet, "No, thank you," said as many times as needed, is another good one. That won't physically restrain the corn-giver, either, but it WILL result in not eating the corn, one way or another. Big smiles help, but the main trick is to repeat as needed. No other explanation is necessary.

I am pretty sure most of us have been at parties. Saying no graciously is one of those things most people learn at a young age, so you know and I know and the rest of us know that throwing the corn back with one's fingers isn't the only allowed option.

If your boyfriend decides to accept and eat corn on the cob, that's his decision. If he feels that he has to accept and eat inappropriate "food" on social occasions because doing otherwise might offend someone, then he needs to grow a backbone. You can't grow one for him. If you love him anyway, that's *your* decision.

The very rare person who insists on offering me something I have chosen not to eat more than once simply gets excluded from my social circles. Rare, because I actually mean it when I say "No." People can actually tell (most of the time) when you really mean it.

Most of my social occasions are a non-problem anyway, because nobody really notices or cares about my food choices. Even if my choice is to eat nothing at all, which is a viable option on low-carb.

"To say, "No thank you! No thank you! No thank you!" six times is socially awkward, not "saying no graciously."

Social awkwardness is a useful tool sometimes. I certainly have no problem using it. My 1st response is a pleasant, "No, thank you." My second response is, "No." Firmly, without a smile, with the "thank you" pointedly omitted, and with a direct-in-the-eye stare. So far, I've never had to come up with a 3rd response.

""People can actually tell (most of the time) when you really mean it." Like when you tell the host, as I did, to please not give my boyfriend corn because I care about keeping him alive and it's bad for his health?"

Now if **your boyfriend** had just told the host that, the host might have believed that HE meant it.

Guess how many times I have told someone not to feed Howard corn...or candy...or cake. Or wheat? (And yes I want to keep him alive and yes, it's bad for his health, too.) Just in case you're wondering: Zero. And, yes, these are also people we care about, and who have kids we care about, too. And we both have insulin sensitivity issues, and after thirteen years, we know a little bit about low carb.

I don't think either of us thinks that it's NOT rude what your host did. That is not what we are talking about, Amy.

Amy, I must disagree with your statement that people, "don't think it's appropriate to force a big slab of bacon on someone keeping Kosher."

Just as some people will not try to force food on others for healthy reasons, some will not for religious reasons. Others will force no matter what the reason.

I've had people try to sneak bacon into my food (I can tell the difference between Bacos and bacon). Somebody served my husband ham after asking if there was anything he didn't eat and he said, "ham."

Much more common, of course, is the mixing of milk and meat, but that's usually forgetfulness in my estimation.

Whoa! Amy went all helicopter girlfriend on the host as though she and the host were in control of what boyfriend chooses to eat.

Gregg is a big boy. Let him wear his big boy pants and choose his own food.

Amy, I second what Howard (If he feels that he has to accept and eat inappropriate "food" on social occasions because doing otherwise might offend someone, then he needs to grow a backbone.) and Georgene (Saying no graciously is one of those things most people learn at a young age, so you know and I know and the rest of us know that throwing the corn back with one's fingers isn't the only allowed option) said.

I wholeheartedly agree with you that it was rude for the host to give the corn to Gregg once you told him that you didn't want Gregg to eat it for health reasons (and, presumably, that Gregg himself didn't want to eat it for those same reasons.) However, once the host persisted, Gregg wasn't helpless and, as you noted yourself, he didn't touch it the toxic offering so he obviously does have a backbone in a situation like this.

Um, ever been a guest at a party? Your mom ever tell you how party manners work?

My younger sister had severe allergic reactions to many foods when she was very young. I don't recall ever hearing my mother tell her: "If you are served one of those foods at a party, then good manners dictate that you simply must eat it, regardless of how you may end up physically suffering."

Amy, you will eventually HAVE to come to a watershed moment in which you reckon with the biological reality that the human species is OMNIVOROUS.

That means "CARBS" are in and of themselves, not unhealthy for the human physiology.

The reason why "low carb" seems to be a panacea is that 1) it makes people stop eating grains full of gluten, phytic acid and other anti-nturients, and 2) many carbs are prepared with artificial, man-made fats like hydrogenated oils and other pro-inflammatory crap (potato chips, margarine, etc.).

Carbs in and of themselves? Not the health threat you think they are.

Now...if you're overweight or suffering from hypoglycemia or other metabolic disorders, low carb is certainly a great way to fix your problems.

I went very low carb for 3 years, lost 40 lbs. and got into the best shape of my life. But thanks to the blogging of Dr. Kurt Harris (archevore) I began experimenting with eating some starchy carbs in my diet (white rice, potatos, sweet potatoes and corn flour tortillas) because I had hit a plateau and found my energy levels were not as good as when I first began low carbing.

Turns out that for a person who is not overweight and adapted to burning fat for energy (evidenced by the ability to fast for over 12+ hours while still exercising without a lack of energy), a moderate portion of carbs like potatos or rice will not have any adverse effects at all...and actually help maintain good energy levels while fasting. Same goes for the occasional splurge on fructose like watermelon or other sweet fruits.

Such fruits, in moderation (not excess) are certainly good for you!

Remember that occasional insulin spikes are NORMAL. Think of man in the natural state, only ate fruit occasionally - when it was in season and ripe. Then he got to gorge on it for a short while before the fruit was all gone and about a whole year away before another fruit harvest was available again.

The problem with carbohydrates and their effects on metabolism now days is due to chronically elevated insulin levels because most people on the SAD eat excessive carbs and crappy fats at every meal (cereal and pastry for breakfast, sandwich for lunch and pasta for dinner, mixed in with grain/crap oil based snacks like cookies, chips, candy etc.)

Go visit Mark's Daily Apple and find his pieces on the 80/20 principle.

A moderate amount of carbs is actually good for you (if you're not metabolically damaged aka overweight or afflicted with some other illness due to chronic elevation of insulin.)

In other words, the occasional corn on the cob or slice of watermelon is really NOT BAD FOR YOUR HEALTH.

I'll concede that point that I do not know his personal medical history and that he may very well in fact be highly sensitive to carbohydrate consumption.

For some folks who've got severely damaged metabolism, even moderate carb consumption could be detrimental.

My only point here is to try and help you understand is that I see you have seemed to develop a form of "carb-phobia." I say that, ONLY because I used to be a carb-phobic myself.

If you're not overweight, and you are not on the sugar-burning rollercoaster (aka insulin resistant), the occasional blood sugar spike and elevated insulin response is NORMAL. In other words, our bodies evolved to deal with the occasional glut of ripened seasonal fruit once a year or so. In other words, for a metabolically normal individual, the occasional corn on the cob or a slice of watermelon is not going to have any kind of negative health consequences.

You boyfriend, of course, my not be a metabolically normal individual. But you? Based on reading you for YEARS (since the early 90's in Hawaii's Mid-Week magazine), I know you are certainly not obese, overweight, or metabolically damaged.

But then again, I also know you don't like to exercise, so perhaps a very low-carb diet is good for you.

As a highly active individual, I'll just say that once I fixed my metabolic issues from eating the SAD for years, I found that moderate carb consumption was very beneficial to my energy levels and body composition.

Oh, and one more thing....

Furthermore, until you go to med school...

You mean like until I go to med school where they teach everyone that saturated fat is bad and whole grain wheat and soy are good for you?

Come now...

Honestly, I've spoken to a few MDs who clearly needed more than the 1-2 basic stats courses they did have. I am constantly having to say things like, "what's the rate false positives?" and then explain that this is important if you want me to do some testing procedure.

Sure, it's 95% effective at detecting XYZ, how often does it say XYZ when it's NOT XYZ? Think, if XYZ is going to make you have surgery, wouldn't you want to know this stuff?

Sorry for the rant. I'll get off my soap box now.

These aren't friends who are MDs, so I don't know. I've gotten the impression that many doctors suffered and struggled through statistics and really don't have a good grasp on it. Not as much with the docs who are also researchers.

Just my experience as a consumer of medical services and statistician.

I would hazard a guess though, that the continuing ed is mostly medical related. There's more than enough of that to take up all their time. Also, even taking more basic classes doesn't give one a good grip on how to actually APPLY statistics appropriately. That's a major problem, in my opinion.

PS Exercise doesn't make us thinner -- as Volek also points out. It makes us hungrier.

It also allows you to eat more so that is a good trade.

Exercise can build fitness, strength, endurance, flexibility and more. I exercise my core posture muscles so I have fewer trips to the chiropractor.

Amy, not everyone is going to live a totally sedentary life, with arms the strength of an 8 year old girls and little down booties on their cold feet as you claim to do. My great grandma lived like this after she had a stroke and limited mobility.

I want to be strong and healthy and energetic. Not just thin. I hike and backpack, ride horses and do all the associated barn chores. I compete with my dogs in Field trials. I get out with them and walk, run and work with them for hours at a time every week all year long.

Thin is not the only measure or value.