Listening to Gary Taubes new book. Have not yet finished it but in the first few chapters it sounds like he says NOT to exercise as a way to lose weight
As I am changing my eating habits and also taken up running albeit slowly and a little.

So other people what do you think. Do you think exercise is beneficial to losing weight. Have you had success.

John,
After my bout with breast cancer, I took a long hard look at my overall health, and really didn't like what I saw. I needed to lose weight, build stamina, gain energy. I was lucky in that I had a friend that taught a lot of classes in the aerobic/body sculpting/water aerobic vein, and she let me attend what ever I wanted for free.
I was a couch potato, 38 yr old just gone thru a pounding mom, and I LOVED IT. I started slow, but soon I was going 5 nights a week, alternating body sculpting and water aerobics with regular aerobics classes. I lost over 60 lbs, went down to a size 6, felt great! I have since slowed down, and am pretty much plateau'd at an 8, but I still walk, lift, swim and feel hella better than I did in my 20's. Unfortunately, I moved away from my wonderful friend, she motivated me :(

As Dara O'Briain likes to say, "Science knows it doesn't know everything."

I am not convinced that the all-meat diet that Amy advocates for the first month is good or safe. And the fact that Taubes is suggesting it's better for weight loss to not exercise makes me cringe.

Just sit around on the couch all day and scarf down bacon, and you'll lose weight. Who the hell thinks human beings were designed to do that?

Honestly Taubes seems to be more cautious than his staunch supporters around here. Even he admits that some people can't lose weight eating that way. But Amy decrees that this is the best way for everyone...at times she almost seems to command it.

Although, in fairness to Amy, she's not the one who brought up Taubes this time.

Two points - First I have not finished listen to the book. Second I am wondering if exercise will be helpful since my body / genetics is to be a bit chubby - so I would hate to run and run and after expending time and energy nothing changes.

Actually another point - My diet is right now just cutting out sugar, carbs like bread and strachy vegetables. I still eat vegetables. True the meat consumption has gone up a bit.

Again, I was referring to the diet that Amy advocates for the first month, which is indeed all meat and nothing else.

Lobster used to have hysterical fits every single time I suggested it was an all-meat diet, insisting that no one every said it was an all-meat diet and that I should stop lying. I had to show him a couple of times Amy's own posts recommending to someone what to eat for the first month. Basically any meat, chicken with the skin, eggs, beef, pork, no dairy, no vegetables, no fruit, no nuts.

Do you see any non-meat in that list? Neither do I.

As for exercise, Taubes claims that exercise makes you hungry. Go with that. I do not endorse this way of eating, which I consider declaring all-out war on common sense, therefore I am not going to make recommendations to anyone who insists on eating this way.

By the way, how do you know it's genetics? It sounds like a lot of what I used to hear as a personal trainer. "I have a metabolic disorder," one would say...until I asked him which doctor diagnosed him.

I'm not saying you don't have a genetic predisposition. But I am saying that from my experience, statements like that are usually excuses, not something legitimately diagnosed.

At the risk of the Goddess' ire, I went with Weight Watchers, ate a well balanced diet, and did exercise. Lots of exercise. It's been 12 years, and I have only re-gained 1 size, and that, as I said, is because I do not work out as much as I used to.

Who the hell thinks human beings were designed to do that?

At the risk of being considered a picker of nits....who the hell thinks human beings were "designed"?

Humans likely evolved to eat in a certain way. What way that is, is still open to discovery, but doesn't likely include cereal and pop tarts for breakfast (not that you said it did....)

I tried the WW thing for a while, but then I got tired of being hungry and went back to my beloved low carb. There is no question in my mind: it is what works for me, and has for many years.

As to the Genetic I look at my father who was fat and gained more - now looking at earlier pics he was still a bit chubby. My mother in the other hand can not be used since she was Type I diabetic so skinny. My Sister is short and a bit chubby like me and my brother a bit more healthy but he can bulk out a little. Now I think If I work hard I can loose the weight but it would be very disheartening that after a year I still have my belly.

I do not want to use the genetic thing as an excuse.

Thing is, I was never hungry on Weight Watchers, because I worked out, I ate like a horse and I never had to really *count* my points because I was always ahead. I have a horrible sweet tooth as well, chocolate and sugar cookies with buttercreme icing are my sworn frenemies, but I didn't have to give them up, just learn to moderate. That was the lesson to everything, don't sacrifice, just enjoy things in smaller doses.

John Paulson, Almost 15 years ago, I was the heaviest I'd been after years of yo-yo dieting. I was also a huge couch potato. I had a friend who was very into physical fitness who got me started on the low carb diet. In less than a year I lost 90 pounds which I kept off for about 8 or 9 years. I did exercise though. I ran and did light weight training. After being on the diet awhile it became a very natural way of life for me and I never felt deprived of food. I had oatmeal on occasion before a run but really avoided breads, sugar, cereal, and cakes. It was the healthiest time of my life. I felt great and NEVER got sick.

Fast forward eight years. I had some personal issues that hit me very hard and I consoled myself with food. I was experiencing some health issues and was put on hormones and steroids which led to a tremendous weight gain which considering my previous shape was very hard to take. My cardiologist, neurologist, and internists all told me the same thing. Carbs are a killer, especially on a person with joint disease. I've tried to get back on the no carb thing but have to admit I've been weak when it comes to the carb withdrawal. I will get back into it because I know what a success it was and how great I felt while doing it.

My experience was a little different than Amy because I did exercise and quite frequently. I never thought I'd love running but did. I will never be able to run again but do other forms of cardio. Its important for a lot of reasons though I say that from personal experience and not because I have anyone's book to back up my words. I know what worked for me. Maybe if the friend who got me into the no carb wasn't so into fitness I would have done it without exercise, but he was into exercise and got me into it. I had been a 31 year old obese couch potato who did nothing but watch soaps and go to the kitchen for a snack while my kids were at school. I am so grateful for that friend.

What I eat impacts my weight more than exercise. I had been underweight until my 20's, when I became overweight, despite being extremely physically active (construction work, hiking, etc.).

When I eliminated wheat gluten, I dropped 20 pounds; when I eliminated refined sugar, I dropped another 20 pounds - without exercise.

I gained 5 pounds between Thanksgiving and New Year's - mostly through alcohol and gluten free desserts. Now that the holiday binge is over, those five pounds are falling off again.

Exercise makes me feel hungry. It also makes me feel happy (especially when it's over) so I do it. It does not effect my weight.

I lost about 20 pounds without any exercising at all, just limiting calories. I wasn't hungry doing it that way, and it worked. I've been too lazy to stick with any particular exercise plan, but I know I feel really good after exercises like yoga and pilates.

In the end, so what if exercise makes you hungry? If you're eating healthy foods and not consuming more than you're burning, and exercise make you feel good, why not?

My partner and I are going to LA in late January, for a week, for the heck of it. We've looked online for what to do (from art museums to archery) but I would love a local's perspective. Aside from the wax museum, we're not interested in star gazing. No amusement parks. Anything else that is low key and moderately priced is a possibility. I would especially appreciate tips on good local eats - my sweetie prefers raw meat; I prefer veggies.

And the fact that Taubes is suggesting it's better for weight loss to not exercise makes me cringe.

When I hit the gym, guess what? my weight goes up. Because I'm hungrier and I eat more. Get rid of the notion that exercise = weight loss. It doesn't.

The correct formula is eating less = weight loss.

gharkness: At the risk of being considered a picker of nits....who the hell thinks human beings were "designed"?

Yes, you're a picker of nits. Whether evolutionary or supernatural forces were the architects, ultimately we're designed...whether by the Almighty or millions of years of successful accidents perpetuating their DNA.

Oorgok the Neanderthal had designs on Oolala the Neanderthalette...and so on and so on and so on...so ultimately, we're very much designed, with some kind of intelligence behind it.

gharkness: Humans likely evolved to eat in a certain way. What way that is, is still open to discovery, but doesn't likely include cereal and pop tarts for breakfast (not that you said it did....)

(Staggering, clutching chest, Redd Foxx impression) Ooooooh, this is it! This is the big one! I'm dyin'! You hear that, Elizabeth? I'm comin' home, honey!

I eat less when I exercise, although my weight may go up, it's muscle not fat (muscle weighs more than fat as it has denser mass), and my clothes fit better. I also simply feel better, as I don't get winded when I go up stairs, etc. I don't like feeling weak and wimpy. Lifting weights is just great for you-it builds bone density among other things (denser bones weigh more too).

I also do lowcarb. Low, not no. I do think the damages caused by blood sugar swings are very real so I just don't eat the things that cause them very often. I do have some rice or pasta or fries on occasion-like Amy with her gellato, these things make my life worth living.

Wow - I needed this thread to happen today!!

I have Taube's new book on hold at the library and cannot wait to get it (hopefully within a week or two).

I am trying to lose 20-25 lbs right now. I initially lost weight about 1.5 years ago by counting calories and keeping my daily total under 1,700 calories. Not only was this incredibly tedious, but I was always starving because I was eating so little. I lost weight, though...but as Taubes discusses, this might actually have been because when I went on the diet I unwittingly cut carbs in the process (as the overall amount of food was cut...not that the ratios actually changed). Eventually I stopped doing this and gained the weight back, plus five for good measure ;-)

Not having read his book yet, I didn't know I wasn't allowed any veggies or dairy. If I don't cut all of these, will it inhibit weight loss totally or just slow it down? Does anyone know if Taubes "allows" dairy after the first month? Is dairy "bad" like does it cause an insulin reaction like carbs? I love dairy. I love bread. I can go without bread/cereal/sweets/sugary yogurt but if I have to give up cheese and butter I think I'd rather just stay chubby.

Also, if calories really DON'T count and I'm supposed to eat until I'm full - what if full for me = the same amount of full for my incredibly muscular husband? ...I can eat the same portions as he does and be thin...?

I need the book b/c I want answers to my questions!!!!!!! If anyone has the answers, or personal experience please share :-)

Finding a lot of dietary advice...and here's mine: "Do what works for you."

If you love low carb, eat low carb. If you prefer Weight Watchers, and the thought of never eating a piece of bread again makes you want to shoot yourself, then do Weight Watchers.

The last time I did low carb, I spent a whole week on it, didn't lose a single pound (not that I have much to lose) and actually gained a small amount, was absolutely devoid of energy as I shuffled through the grocery store like I was only 93 1/2 years old, was constipated and profoundly miserable.

So, I came here and said that low-carb was a lot of crap and Taubes was full of it (if I don't include that, I'm going to be called on it). And you know what Amy said? She wanted me to present scientific studies to disprove Taubes' conclusions.

And I thought Amy had flipped her fucking lid. I spend a entire week moving like a casting extra for "Night Of The Living Dead." But she needs scientific studies to satisfy her that this isn't working. In other words that fact that it's not working is not good enough.

Taubes himself, who had been alerted to my comments by reading Dr. Michael Eades blog, emailed Amy and injected some much-needed common sense into the discussion. He said, referring to me, and I quote, "He's right, you know. He doesn't need scientific studies to know what works for him."

Um, duh.

So, if you cannot do low-carb, don't. If you love it, have at it. Ditto for Weight Watchers or whatever else works for you.

BTW: I lift heavy weights and do crazy kickboxing classes where they make us do a hundred squats, burpees, bear crawls, hit each other, push-ups, kick each other, etc for an hour. I do that not necessarily to lose weight, but to stay sane. If I don't work out my mood is awful. I might be addicted to the chemical high.

Also, who the hell wants to be weak? If you're strong you're less likely to get hurt doing daily activities like picking up a heavy object (a child or your vacuum). When you're doing really good squats - body weight or with a bar - you're improving your ability to move (flexibility) and gaining an understanding of how your body's power works. No woman who squats weight is going to forget to lift with her (nice, firm) ass...and she'll be less likely to get osteoporosis! As far as cardio: I really hate running, so I don't. But I get in cardio other ways - again, not to burn calories but to maintain a certain cardiovascular capacity. It's nice to know I can get out of my own way if I have to when the zombies break loose.

Just sayin', there's a lot more benefit to exercise than attempting to lose weight. Muscles look much sexier than bones.

I'm guessing this would be a bad time to bring up football... : )

Gretchen, the fat-laden foods that are recommended for Amy's induction phase are very filling and they are slow digesting, so you'll feel sated longer. Hi-carb, low-fat foods are metabolized very quickly, produce a massive surge of insulin, which overdoes its job, clearing out too much blood sugar leaving you drained...and ravenous.

Reminds me of a funny story Amy once shared. It seems at her coffee shop the low-fat muffins were mismarked as regular muffins. She ordered one and because the muffin was low-fat and high carb, she was voracious in no time. She got on the Starbuck's clerk for it, understandably so.

I suggested that Amy should have simply eaten the clerk, which would have solved two problems: her hunger and his incompetence.

Amy replied, "Patrick, believe me. The thought crossed my mind."

I have this visual of Amy glaring murderously at some zit-faced teenaged Starbucks clerk, growling, "I'm startin' to think you'll go good in a stir-fry, fat boy."

Go Steelers!

I had to show him a couple of times Amy's own posts recommending to someone what to eat for the first month. Basically any meat, chicken with the skin, eggs, beef, pork, no dairy, no vegetables, no fruit, no nuts.

This was what I recommended for a friend who has an extremely hard time losing weight. He ended up losing 17 lbs. in a month, his blood pressure went from high to near normal, and his Hashimoto's thyroid condition disappeared.

I just ate three strips of bacon. I'll later have a big clump of Italian parsley, sauteed to death in coconut oil, then two eggs (in the pan I took the parsley out of) sunny side up with shredded cheddar cheese on top, cooked in the coconut oil and a little added bacon grease (on low).

For lunch yesterday, I had three pork chops. During the day, I ate a bunch of Italian sausage (while writing), and some cheese. Yesterday night, I had the other pork chop, some sauteed onions I had in the refrigerator, and a half bag of fresh green beans Gregg left me, cooked in the microwave for 15 minutes in lots of butter. You just dump 'em in a Corningware dish with a lid, throw in butter, and they cook. I like 'em well-dead...wilted, etc. Al dente and my stomach are not friends.

Anyway, this is how I eat every day, pretty much, although I'll have a scoop of chocolate gelato about every week and a half or so. Oh, and I have wine about every night now. Dry white. And I'm extremely healthy, and barely exercise. I lift weights every morning while I'm making my eggs...small hand weights, because I'm a weakling...and do a little cardio on my bike in front of the TV, doing intervals where I really get my heart pumping for 30 seconds and then more normal-fast pedaling.

I'm making this for dinner tonight - would this be a meal you'd consider to be Taubes-Style, or is it bad? Until I'm able to read his book, I am kind of winging it. Since I'm a food lover I need to be able to prepare meals (since I enjoy the process) that taste good.

I will toss together the following:
Chicken, covered in S&P, sauteed in EVOO, cut into chunks
Artichoke hearts
Sundried tomatoes (no sugars added)
Feta cheese
All tossed in a sauce of pesto (fresh pesto: basil, walnuts, pinenuts, EVOO, Parmesan, S&P) with a bit of cream added

I'll probably also have a glass of Pinot Gri, topped with seltzer (to make it last longer, else I'd drink too much...).

"I like when people who bring it up bring it right back down again."

Just being a minor pebble in the threadstream! Second on the Go Steelers. And go Chiefs, beat those Ravens!

I wonder what it would take to get McDonalds to come out with a low-carb breakfast? Seems everything they offer comes with pancakes or is wrapped in a tortilla or an English muffin.

Old RPM: Now they're advertising their new oatmeal with maple syrup, fruit and nuts. I wonder how many people will get that, thinking it's healthy?

I suppose I wouldn't rule out oatmeal for everyone, but I think a lot of people reach for it thinking it's great for you, but with syrup and fruit it'll cause a severe insulin reaction I would think!

I've seen the oatmeal on the menu, but have never gotten it. I figure I can just as easily make up some instant oatmeal in the office. Adding all the glurp to it would make it about as healthful as a bowl of Froot Loops, but I think you can order it on the side.

And if I need to add all the sweet stuff to my oatmeal to make it palatable, why not get Froot Loops in the first place?

"As for exercise, Taubes claims that exercise makes you hungry."

True - but exercise *tends* to make you hungry for the right foods. An acquaintance once commented, 'When I get the urge to start eating ice cream, I know it's time for a run.'

Sure - an hour after a good cardio workout, you will probably be hungrier than you would have been otherwise - but that tub of ice cream will probably be a lot less appealing too.

I haven't read Gary Taubes' book, but I'm curious if it's that he rejects the idea of exercise outright, or just that he doesn't believe it helps with dieting? I've been better about watching what I eat in the last two years, but personally I found exercise really made the difference as far as losing weight. Plus since I tend to be a big bundle of nervous stress, it helps me blow off some steam. But if Taubes' approach works for some folks, then far be it for me to dismiss it.

What women really want

McD's does have low carb breakfasts-just take the bacon egg n cheese off the biscuit. Or the egg and sausage off the McMuffin. Or you can just order scrambled eggs and a sausage patty, you don't HAVE to order by the number there. I love their sausage, I don't know why.

A nice low carb sweet is eggwhites whipped stiff with truvia, a little REALLY good semisweet chocolate shaved into it, then dropped by spoonfuls onto a cookie sheet and left to dry out in a warm oven all night. Meringues, without sugar. Mmmm.

I read Taubes GCBC in August of 2009 and found it difficult to get through, but I did cut out potato chips, rice and most potatoes and lost 10 lbs.

Last March, I read Eades' "The 6-Week Cure for the Middle-Aged Middle". I understood and believed the explanations of how sugar and carbs affect your cells. There are many recipes in the book which my wife and I still use as well as other recipes we have converted to low carb. We eat lots of vegies, but mainly lettuce, broccoli and cauliflower.

In about 10 weeks, on the 6 Week Cure, I lost 20 lbs and my waist size went from 36 to 32. I had my physical yesterday and my BP is 115/60.

Since I am at my goal weight, I have added some carbs back in to stay there. I'll occasionally have french fries or desserts or a burger with a bun. I don't feel deprived or hungry and I feel better than ever.

If you are thinking of trying low carb, I suggest that you get either the "6 Week Cure" or "Protein Power" to understand why it works and to get some starter recipes. I felt tired and weak the first week, but I expect that was because my body was used to using carbs for energy and needed to get used to using protein. By the second week, I felt much better.

links added by Amy

So here's my question...

I live in a county in metro DC. Some of schools in the county are awesome. Some of them are so terrible, you'd think you were in inner city Detroit.

My friends and I have been discussing the fact that since we are all taxed by the county at the same rate, no matter where in the county we live, we ought to be able to choose which public schools our children attend. It's called intra-district choice, and some school systems already do this, including districts in New Jersey and Michigan.

Belgium also has a similiar system in place, and the money is attached to the CHILD, not the school. Basically, each parent gets 10K a year for each kid, and they can choose to put that kid in any school in their area. And then the school they choose gets that 10K. So good schools get better, and bad schools...well, they go broke.

Thoughts on this system?

Could the proverbial pendulum really be moving back in the right direction?

Here's a very interesting development out of New Mexico. The governor there has fired all of the members of the "Environmental Improvement Board", citing, "Unfortunately, the majority of EIB members have made it clear that they are more interested in advancing political ideology than implementing commonsense policies that balance economic growth with responsible stewardship in New Mexico."

So good schools get better, and bad schools...well, they go broke
Sounds like Vouchers to me, and a good idea.

What women really want
I once told my eldest to marry a rich old man with a heart condition as her first husband. She thought I was joking. Luckily, she did marry a good man, even if he isn't rich. Yet.

All this talk of food is making me hungry. Back in a bit!

Also, it is important to remember that enzyme physiology plays a role in all macronutrient absorption (ie- protein, carbs, fats) and not to mention every chemical activity that happens in the body.

As such, merely consuming proteins is not as helpful as having the corresponding enzyme protease there to break it down to be absorbed by the body. Same with carbohydrates and the corresponding enzyme amylase. And, this is especially true with lipds and lipase.

Professor Grossman's Law of Adaptive Secretion of Enzymes (plus many others) have established the role that enzymes play with regards to the food that is consumed, and since enzymes are very heat sensitive (they die off when heated above 118 degrees F), the standard Western diet equates to what is called the "minus diet": food minus its enzymes.

Merely replenishing half of our current food intake with enzyme rich food may do wonders for the health and longevity that many never thought possible.

One can dream, no?

;-)

Eggs, though high in protein, aren't meat.

What do taubes and co say about alcohol? I'm too lazy to read the actual books so is it mode shifting away from beer to wine and hard stuff, or abstinence only education?

And yeah go football. I don't even watch it, but I love betting on it.

If you're going to use EVOO on low-carb, make sure it's cold-pressed.

I make my mayonnaise with that, even though my recipe says you shouldn't because it separates. Just leave it in the fridge when you're not using it, and don't keep it more than a week.

2 egg yolks
1 1/2 cups cold-pressed EVOO (I like Paul Newman's)
4 tsp Lemon juice
1 tsp coarse sea salt
1/2 tsp dry mustard
dash of cayenne pepper
4 tsp hot water
1 packet Truvia

All ingredients should be at room temperature, except the hot water. Egg yolks need to be FRESH, and I do mean FRESH. I mean then when you take them out of the carton, you'll file sexual harassment charges against them, that's how fresh. You'll slap them TWICE!

Food processor with metal chopping blade or blender, combine egg yolks, 3 tsp lemon juice and dry ingredients. Now combine at a moderate speed for about 15 seconds. Slowly, and I do mean slowly, add 1/4 cup EVOO. When mixture thickens, add remaining oil very gradually, and add hot water and remaining lemon juice 1 tsp at a time.

I like it best with my various salads, such as egg, ham, etc. My mother says it's too tart but her best friend likes it. I like it for my purposes (my mother lost her sense of smell 10 years ago, so take her criticism for what it's worth).

Sam, eggs for the purposes of dieting for fat loss, eggs are considered meat. True, kosher laws don't classify eggs as either meat or dairy, but I've never seen a dietary chart for nutritional purposes that didn't include eggs with meat. Vegetarians certainly see them that way. And the Catholic Church, due to their own dietary rules, did classify eggs as meat.

It is meat in the pre-embryonic stage.

"My friends and I have been discussing the fact that since we are all taxed by the county at the same rate"

Yeah but assessed value differs so the actual bill does vary. I'm a fan of school choice since I tend towards new urbanism but I aint movin downtown unless I can keep my kid at the suburban country club school. I could be bringing up some economically mixed neighborhood but for the schools.

The Daily Show on San Francisco's Happy Meals:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/01/04/BAI01H432O.DTL

As a woman, now 55, who used to do a lot of cardio when I was in the army in my 20's and early 30's, I have some thoughts on exercise, based on my own personal experience and my observational skills. First, when you are young, you can be lazy, and as as long as you are a reasonable weight, your young muscles and bones will do a decent job of holding stuff together and keep you looking pretty good. This natural fitness, depending on your diet, your genes, and your bad habits, will last until you are in your late 30's or even early 50's. At some point though, your muscles get weaker and shit starts to sag, and if you are not exercising at least to the extent necessary to build and keep muscle tone, you are going to look like crap, no matter how thin you are.

@smurfy -
Um, WRONG. My house is worth 450,000. The house three schools over is worth 450,000. We both pay $7000 a year in county property taxes. When we bought, our home was in a 'good' school. 4 years later, the school district redrew the boundaries, and ta-da...now we're in a mediocre school. Why the hell should my kids be punished because of an arbitrary decision made by 5 bureaocrats 4 years ago?
And what about my argument that the money should follow the child? Why are we rewarding schools for failing? You suck, you get ZERO - that's how it should be. If your school is excellent, then you should be getting MORE. Your teachers should be paid MORE.

For Gretchen & others who haven't read Taube's latest book yet - I'm done reading it, and it was super easy to understand. I read it through in about 4 days. The book summed up in a few words: carbs are bad, and nothing else will help you lose weight other than cutting carbs. His take on exercise is simply that it doesn't do much for weight loss, not that it is a bad thing to do for other reasons. He is quite open-ended on exactly how little carbs one should eat. Some people can lose weight by cutting down to about 50-75 grams a day, while some people will not see results unless they eat almost no carbs. It has to do with how sensitive you are to insulin.

Personally, I'm going with the lower carbs but not the zero carbs/all meat deal. I've cut out most sugar (other than what's in stuff like BBQ sauce, which I use a little) and all bread and starches. I eat plenty of dairy and vegetables. I figure that I could always cut down more if I need to. It's only been two weeks, and while I haven't weighed myself yet, here's what I have noticed:

1. I have a lot more energy - I actually FEEL like exercising again
2. I feel much better mentally, more able to focus, and I have a lot less anxiety
3. I haven't been bingeing, usually a big problem for me. In fact, I rarely am hungry for snacks between meals.

So I'm sold, at least so far!

"Be thin and work out a little bit with weights. I use mine when I'm cooking my eggs, watching stuff on TV, etc. You do squats, lunges, arm movements."

I agree, but cardio also provides other benefits, to your heart, blood pressure, blood volume, and general health. You don't need a lot but 30 minutes three times a week will do a lot for your overall health. And, as others have pointed out, and I have experienced myself, cardio may make you hungry, but it is almost always hungry for protein and fat, not for carbs. Also weight is not the enemy, fat is, so if you have 20 pounds extra of lean muscle but your clothes fit, who cares? Isabel

R.I.P. Gerry Rafferty

The Daily Show video was great- I had missed that one. Yes, RIP Gerry Rafferty.

Free Swim- did anyone see those videos from the Captain of the USS Enterprise? I can't recall experiencing such an egocentric asshole. How could this guy have climbed the chain of command to lead a nuclear powered American aircraft carrier?

"Lobster used to have hysterical fits every single time I suggested it was an all-meat diet, insisting that no one every said it was an all-meat diet and that I should stop lying."

Thanks for saving me the effort this time :)

I did low carb without the strict 'induction period', it's not a requirement, and it varies between low-carb diets (they aren't all quite the same) and on a case-by-case basis. Also, if it's only for the first month, is it really a fair criticism to use against the entire thing? The point of low-carb is not a 'crash' diet that you do every now and then when you're getting too fat (as in the main sense of the word 'diet' e.g. 'he went on a diet' - it's not that kind of diet), it's supposed to become your primary way of eating for the rest of your life, permanently (it's the sense of the word 'diet' as in 'The average Asian diet consists of a lot of rice' or 'squirrels subsist on a diet of nuts' etc.). So the induction period, even if you do it, is a once-off.

Also you don't have to be super-strict and follow it all to the letter; that would be horrible anyway, nobody can live like that. Like Amy says you can have the odd desert etc. If you just genetically find it extremely hard to lose weight then you'll have to be stricter, but most people can make exceptions.

I recently got married and went off low carb as my wife started cooking for me :) But a lot of the old problems returned ... I started putting on weight again, and I started feeling a lot more tired and especially lethargic after meals, almost passing out at times. So this past week I've started on low-carb again. I already feel much less lethargic after meals.

"When I hit the gym, guess what? my weight goes up. Because I'm hungrier and I eat more. Get rid of the notion that exercise = weight loss. It doesn't."

Uh, yes, because your sample size of one can absolutely be extrapolated to everyone in the world.

Besides, weight gain isn't necessarily a bad thing, especially for men. I know plenty of guys who hit the gym specifically to gain weight--but they still obtain a lower body fat and better looking physique.

"How could this guy have climbed the chain of command to lead a nuclear powered American aircraft carrier?"

Do you know anybody who knows anything about qualifying to be an aircraft carrier's captain?

Hint: there can be a dozen or so other O-6 officers on board.

I and my buds understand why he's been relieved, but you are talking about sailors, not children. Unless you have some difficulty thinking about their being deployed to kill people at the direction of their commanders...

Kill the enemy - be mortally upset about a video?

-----

And about the diet stuff: don't bother reading, making yourself miserable, etc. Go see a proctologist. They know, the story is short, and the result will surprise you.

Rad- I have zero military background. Just after viewing the videos, this guy struck me as one of the biggest asshats to ever step in front of a camera.

UDubGirl: "we ought to be able to choose which public schools our children attend. It's called intra-district choice"

smurfy: "I'm a fan of school choice since..."

You trying to invent some kind of controversy? Sheesh, we agree, what do want from me?

What about the low carb alcohol? Are you going to make me go and read the damn books myself? Also this DUI lawyer claims a low carb diet is one of the factors that can contribute to a false positive breathylizer result. Excerpt: "[the breathylizer]is what we call non-specific for ethanol. Any compound on your breath that contains the methyl group will be detected as alcohol -- and reported as alcohol.

If you had pumped gasoline into your car and inhaled any of the fumes, hours, even days later, you could be breathing out vapors containing compounds with the methyl group in it. If you are a diabetic, or have been on a low-carbohydrate diet, you would be getting high blood alcohol readings."

http://www.duicentral.com/dui/the_dui_exception_4.html

Ever read anything supporting or disclaiming that?

"No, Mr. Bond, I Expect You To Fly"

http://www.rferl.org/content/spying_birds_dolphins_iran/2267799.html

Some interesting perspective on Captain Honors here:

http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2011/01/about-those-videos.html

About the school idea. When I was growing up they had a program somewhat like you are taking about. I mainly know this from people telling me about afterwards. It was mainly only within the district which was huge (to drive from the north border to the south border was/is close to an hour unless the freeway is taken which takes you way out of the district and then back) though a few like myself who lived close to the board of another school district could go to it but had to provide our own transportation. They just started it in the elementaries. So you were assigned an elementary school based on your street address but then parents could ask for a different school and in so doing give up the reservation at the first school. This lead to situations like my neighbors, the oldest got into a school in the NE corner and into the gifted classes, two years latter their daughter didn't get selected for that school and ended up in the SE corner - and a pretty crappy school. The three really desirable schools got filled to the brim and there scores started to sink. The undesireable schools still got enough students because everyplace was full. Fund raising also became more difficult presumably because parents couldn't know if their kid would be at the same school the next year unless the kid was at the originally assigned school. The private schools did well during this time. The program was greatly restricted when I was in about the 5th grade so kids where only allowed to change schools for a "good reason."

The low or even no carb diets have not worked well for me. Tried them several times. I loose all my energy but very little weight.

What has worked well for me is an all green diet, basically only eat green plants - spinach, broccoli, etc. I can eat enough to not be hungry and still loose weight - and fairly rapidly.

I suspect there is another factor that is not being accounted for in the research being done. Perhaps genetic.

Exercise is something I have to be careful of...I start doing much and I want to eat a lot more...and it is usually simple carbs I crave after a workout.

Lobster: Thanks for saving me the effort this time :)

Actually, I was pointing out that you're an idiot, which you are. I was referring to Amy's all-meat induction phase, and you insisted (apparently not reading Amy's posts, in which she mentioned her all-meat diet that she put her friend on...twice.

SHREEEEIK! "There's no all-meat diet! Stop lying! Waaaah!" wails Lobster.

Uh, it's right there. See it this time?

The Seattle Seahawks...proving that social promotion has made it to the NFL.

Regarding Captin Honors, four years since the videos were first made and not a single paper has reported on one, not even one of tens of thousands, sailor or soilder filing a complaint over them.

Nope it was the intervention of the PC moral outrage brigade swooping into action after the paper broke the story.

People who have never served their country telling people who risk their lives how they need to behave in order to releive stress.

My Ball pythons are purely carnivorous, and I believe they are doing just fine, therefore a pure meat diet has been proven healthy in one instance at least.
There, now we can talk about something important, like Kim Kardashalots Kornrows.

Dear Kim,
You are not the first white girl to pretend to be black. Both Britney Spears and Christina Aguilera did it WAY the hell before you, but at least Brit can dance, and Christina can sing. (boy can she sing, I'd give my right arm for her pipes!) You on the other hand, can do neither. Go back to hawking shoes on the internet.
kthxbai.

Sorry, had to do it.

"Rad- I have zero military background. Just after viewing the videos, this guy struck me as one of the biggest asshats to ever step in front of a camera."

And you'd be right.

But the guy can describe every nut and bolt and operating principle of the aircraft he qualified on and the carrier he commands, including reactor physics. They are not picked for ability to coddle others, and being politically correct is both a burden on the individual and on the Navy, because of the ridiculous notion that a professional killer, however technical his post, should be "a good person".

There is a HUGE gap in knowledge between civilian and military societies.

because of the ridiculous notion that a professional killer, however technical his post, should be "a good person".
I take issue with this, because a professional soldier is not one and the same as a professional killer. One is an honorable bulwark against those who would do harm to the innocent civilians of his country, and one sends permanent messages for people named Don Corleone. A soldier had damned well better be an honorable, intelligent, capable and by any other measure good person, or they are not a good soldier.

Kat - you're a fine person, sure. But you're making a ridiculously sanitized situation up so you can feel good.

The job of a soldier, sailor, airman, Marine is to kill people and destroy assets.
That they do this for a President, as opposed to a mobster, doesn't change the job. You might notice that there are battlefield situations where the morality of warfare isn't so clear.

Brace yourself: there's no such thing as "fair play" at sea, or on enemy territory. The best possible scenario is that your opponent dies instantly, without warning of any kind. Stab him in the back. Sneak up with your submarine and blow him into atoms. We have this damned idiotic idea about "fairness" that won't go away because so many people have never been in the serious jam of combat - or even prepared for it. In a way, that's OK, because it means that the public hasn't been affected. But wow, do we have a buncha dreamers making shit up about what "military" means (why do we care about what some celebrity thinks about "don't ask, don't tell"? They just do not count!).

I was on a nuclear missile submarine. What do you call the guy who launches a hundred megatons?

"A good person"? No. Somebody who understands "duty" - a word in quotes because most of the people who read this blog have no clue what it means. "Duty" means your task comes before family, time off, friends. You endure ridiculous misery because you made a promise you would. You do what the CO says because you promised you would. Guess what? He can tell you if you get any sunshine this month. I bet you don't believe that, but it's true.

Do you pick fighter pilots for how sensitive they are to the needs of inner-city youth? No. You want the most amazing physical specimen you can get, who can think in 3-D while his plane is literally trying to beat him to death as he maneuvers away from missiles... they're rare. "He's an ass, but he can fly." Done deal. He flies!

Maybe I have to be blunt.

Hey, STUPID! When you're picking people to go and be shot at, you don't get Casper Milquetoast or Elton John to go sing lullabyes!

I want assholes that will kill the right people and destroy the correct assets for the proper reasons, those being the defense of the country that they swore an oath to protect.

That being said, I don't give a flying, flaming rats' ass what this guy said in his off time, as long as his ship does exactly that.

Sorry Kat but a professional soilder is a professional killer. Some soilders may be cooks, clerks, supply distributers, paper pushers; but all of us were trained to kill other people if need be.

Sorry Kat but a professional soilder is a professional killer. Some soilders may be cooks, clerks, supply distributers, paper pushers; but all of us were trained to kill other people if need be.
I don't disagree with the fact that soldiers kill people and break stuff. I disagree with the premise that the 'profession' of a soldier is to kill people and break stuff. Their profession is to protect and serve, and in order to complete that mission they kill people and break stuff. To demean the sacrifices that the people, like yourselves, had to make, in order to fulfill that duty by being able to kill people and break stuff by labeling it in such a way that it is easily confused with Don Corleone's hitmen, that is what I disagree with. I disagree that being able to kill a person is inherently "bad", when the person in question is trying to kill innocent men, women and children and unquestionably deserves to die.
I understand exactly what you are saying, I am sorry that I am not getting my point across to you. I guess what I am really trying to say is Thank you for your service, I deeply appreciate, and respect you for it.

I undertand the distiction you are trying to make, but the problem is that it isnt a real distiction. Its one wrought of desire to belive that you are good person and therfore would never be party to sending a fellow good person to kill someone unless they really, really, really deserved it.

I mean, sure the bad guys 'deserve' to die, and while I've never had to kill anyone personally I have no moral reservations about doing it; problem is the bad guys often veiw us as the bad guys.

And sometimes the 'bad guys' are deluded, brainwashed children.

And sometimes the intel is wrong and the bad guys blown to bits by the bomb werent bad guys after all.

Kat: "I don't disagree with the fact that soldiers kill people and break stuff. I disagree with the premise that the 'profession' of a soldier is to kill people and break stuff. Their profession is to protect and serve, and in order to complete that mission they kill people and break stuff. To demean the sacrifices that the people, like yourselves, had to make, in order to fulfill that duty by being able to kill people and break stuff by labeling it in such a way that it is easily confused with Don Corleone's hitmen, that is what I disagree with. I disagree that being able to kill a person is inherently "bad""

+1.

"Actually, I was pointing out that you're an idiot, which you are."

Ah, you can't refute my points, so you call me an "idiot". I'm sorry, but I have better things than debate with someone who thinks that calling someone a "idiot" when you get caught in a lie, is a form of debate, I think I evolved past those strategies at around age 7 or 8.

"I was referring to Amy's all-meat induction phase, and you insisted (apparently not reading Amy's posts, in which she mentioned her all-meat diet that she put her friend on...twice."

I could go dig up those old posts, but you were NOT referring to the induction phase, you were making the claim that low-carb diet = all-meat diet. In fact even in THIS VERY THREAD you misconstrue low-carb dieting as, and I quote, "Just sit around on the couch all day and scarf down bacon ... Who the hell thinks human beings were designed to do that?". Seriously. This very thread. Who do you think you're fooling?

"problem is the bad guys often veiw us as the bad guys.

And sometimes the 'bad guys' are deluded, brainwashed children."

That's all academic when someone is trying to kill you. You only exist thanks to a very long line of those people whose virtue you question, stretching back hundreds of thousands of years, who risked their lives so that you and your ancestors could survive.

There really is such a thing as a "better side" and a "worse side", there really are valid distinctions that can be made between aggression and defense, and it really is a virtue to want to defend the people in your civilization from aggression; it is an amazing cause. But if you want to believe in all that relativist crap, and just assume that "all killing is bad", fine, but it really a belief that CAN only be held when you're safely thousands of miles away from the front-lines of the defense of civilization, when you're safe and sound at night only thanks to those people, and the attacks are just abstractions to you. I've spent enough time around the 'frontlines' between where the forces of civilization and the forces of chaos clash to know that civilization, however robust it may seem from the inside, is extremely fragile and ephemeral, and will always need protection from people who are willing to give their lives. Civilization is but a tiny clearing in a dense, dangerous jungle, and without constant work to hold it back, the jungle would overwhelm the clearing quickly.

I undertand the distiction you are trying to make, but the problem is that it isnt a real distiction. Its one wrought of desire to belive that you are good person and therfore would never be party to sending a fellow good person to kill someone unless they really, really, really deserved it.
I may be a good person, only time will tell. But if I had been in charge on 9/11, the following would have happened.
Israel would have been given 48 hours to evacuate their people.
The Middle East would have shortly thereafter become a glowing glass parking lot, and the oil companies would have to have perfected their "sideways" drilling technologies.
Period, end of story. Anyone who objected would have been given a one way ticket to said glass parking lot. I'm sick and tired of the BS, PC pussy assed coddling of terrorists. If you think there is a shade of grey involved, then you are part of the problem. Sorry, there is NEVER a reason to kill innocent people over a political difference. Defend yourself from terrorists however you have to, and if it means taking them out at the source, so be it. the people that are around them know who they are, do nothing to stop them, and even actively support them.
I'm reading Nomad by Ayaan Hirsi Ali right now. If I were to *ever* have to deal with even a quarter of the shit she did, I swear I would have gone postal and taken the entire scum-sucking bastard tribe of sumbiches out. She is ten times the classy lady I can ever hope to be.
So, no, I don't reserve the killing for just those who "reallyreallyreally" deserve it, I think that if the case can be made for "this person is on the battle field, probably trying to kill us, or aiding and abetting the enemy" then it sucks to be them. They should have made better travel arrangements.
I also support the death penalty, but not abortion, would you like to debate that too?

Lobster, I have no moral qualms killing someone trying to kill me, but that doesnt mean I cant understand and empathyse with their position. The way I see it, it sucks for them growing up in a cluture that cares more for protecting its mass ego then its future and its children - but thats a choice they have to take responsibility for sooner or later.

Truth be told I dont even think I'd have any moral qualms about killing some random person on the street for no reason whatsoever.

I cant see a reason why I'd ever do such a thing, but the thought of it doesnt really fill me with an emotional revulstion as it would someone with a normal childhood.

Kat, personally I'd like to see the death penalty expanded to include a few other crimes, as to your reasons for not supporting abortion, as long as it isnt 'because god says so'(being a former mormon I doubt you're that stupid) and you dont spend your time harassing people going in the building,(I doubt you'd do that either) I dont care.

And most of life is shades of grey, but, there are a number of absolutes - I do agree with you there.

It was you who said you were raised mormon right? I'm pretty sure that was you

Yes, I broke free of the cult , tho I had a hard time keeping a straight face thru services for many years before I was old enough to saw through the chain. My favorite line to get them going was "So, tell me again how Joe Smith hit his head on a rock and saw angels, I love that story!"

Unfortunately my father is still a member, I have to tred lightly at family functions because as he gets older he forgets our truce.

and no, I don't Disagree with abortion because the Gods decreed it. I just really don't believe that an innocent person should be sent to death for my mistake, your lack of a condom, or Paris Hiltons gangbang video fetish. We are adults, we know the risks involged, if we do not properly prtect ourselves, then that innocent child is not the one who should pay with their life.It's about *my* personal responsibility, I step up if I make a mistake. Un like a lot of my peers that have never met a weasel they didn't like, I am unable to avoid, sidestep, handoff, or otherwise ditch my duty, so I make the most of it. Usually ends up being pretty cool.

Then there is the fact that Planned Parenthood was founded by an avowed Eugenecist, Margaret Sanger, who did on several occasions refer to minorities in very desparaging tones and say things like On the extermination of blacks:
"We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population," she said, "if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." Woman's Body, Woman's Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon
And
On respecting the rights of the mentally ill:
In her "Plan for Peace," Sanger outlined her strategy for eradication of those she deemed "feebleminded." Among the steps included in her evil scheme were immigration restrictions; compulsory sterilization; segregation to a lifetime of farm work; etc. Birth Control Review, April 1932, p. 107

*shudder* she just gives me the chills.
Now, in my view, she *is* a professional killer.

I used to sleep thru sacrement meeting, I couldnt stay awake to save my life. Apparently I asked too many questions durring the scripture study lessons as well - I was told I acctually drove some of the teachers crazy enogh that they went to the bishop and quit

As far as eugenics goes, I'm all for a passive variant of it. I dont see a need to murder people, once that starts noone knows where it will end.

But if, for example, two people have the genes that gaureentees their kids will all have cystic fibrosis, they shouldnt be having kids.

Its mmors of a cost/benifit analyisis for me then an emotional stance.

My freinds sy that makes me amoral, but I dont know if thats a good thing or a bad thing

"As far as eugenics goes, I'm all for a passive variant of it."

Biologists are pretty close to letting you select the features your baby will have: gender, musculature, hair, eye and skin color...

Wouldn't it be cool to have zebra fur?

Think there won't be a stink about that?

Now thats active eugenics, I'm all for prevcenting the birth of people with massive genetic and physical defects. But if you start selectivly editing our species you might wind up with a population that one day gets wiped out entirely by the common cold.

Genetic diversity is key to the long term survival of humanity, editing out 'undesirable' traits entirly is just as damaging as propogating gentic defects in ever greater numbmers.

I'm not advocating that people with rececive genes never have kids with anyone, I'm just suggesting that they dont have kids with another person with recevie genes when those kids will be born with a serious disease.

I was reading a story out of England, some guy and his wife had this condition where their children were born with the skin lacking a nessecary protien.

I dont recall what it was callled, but the skin hardened and lost all elasticity, their skin looed waxy and doll like, skinleasion were a daily occurance and new skin would take days to form only to harden and split again. I think mental retardation was on of the effect of this disease as well.

After their FIRST child they were genetically tested. Accroding to the wife giving the interview they were told they had a 5% chance of having a child born without this condition.

At the time of this interveiw they were trying for a fourth baby, all three of their live children had this diseas and the woman said they'd keep trying until they got a, and I shit you not, "real baby"

So yeah, it might have been england, but thats 4 kids with not real capability to care for themsevels with one of the most painful conditions I can even imagine who with proper care and treatment could make it to their 80's

So yes I'm all for passive eugenics.

lujlp, I got the most *delish* revenge the day the Bishop that was my arch nemesis got excommunicated. Seems he was a little to fond of his second-in-commands wife, wink-wink. I soooo wanted to walk up to him and ask him how that moral superiority was working out for him.
Meh, you want a hypocrite, walk into an LDS church, they got'em by the dozen.