|
|
|
|
leaverbiner
Aug 13, 2003, 8:52 PM
Post #26 of 417
(89892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2002
Posts: 482
|
In reply to: [ And I have a case study for you ... Female Climber. Dramatic loss of weight on Atkins over several months, though climbing performance deteriorates while on diet. 1 year after beginning Atkins her weight is greater than before beginning the diet. So much for case studies. Numerous controlled research studies have shown that extreme diets do not work in the long run. You can lose weight in the short-term on Atkins. The question is can you keep it off? I've yet to see anyone who has. Atkins is no different than any other extreme diet. Research has shown that nearly 100% of those who successfully lose weight on such diets gain all the weight back within two years. The only way to lose weight permanently is by modest caloric restriction and increased physical activity followed by dietary vigilance after your target weight is reached. -Jay
I hear what your sayin', but in this case I think that the dramatic weight loss will maintain . . . the case study I outlined above was always capable of maintaining a particular weight, and believes that once she hits the weight and results she desires that she will be able to return to a balanced diet . . . balanced in the traditional sense of proper vitamins, minerals, carbs v. proteins etc, but also balanced in terms of caloric intake to expenditure . . . we shall see I guess.
The one thing I wanted to point out in my description was that there was, in this case, no loss of strength, power, or endurance, which I think is not always the case for those doing Atkins. I am presuming it had something to do with her continuation of a rigorous workout regimen.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 13, 2003, 10:30 PM
Post #27 of 417
(89892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I think the Atkins diet is awesome for teaching people what food is good and bad...
I agree in one sense: The foods on the Atkins diet are bad. Diets high in saturated fat and cholesterol promote heart disease and possibly some forms of cancer. Atkins is not a lifelong diet unless you don't want to actually have a long life.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 13, 2003, 10:41 PM
Post #28 of 417
(89892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Jay, actually, we are arguing the induction, but check out the 3rd phase of the diet "maintenance" No more refined sugars or flours, and THAT is how people should be eating more or less. At least compared to the truck load of crap most people eat.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 13, 2003, 10:42 PM
Post #29 of 417
(89892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: I hear what your sayin', but in this case I think that the dramatic weight loss will maintain . . . the case study I outlined above was always capable of maintaining a particular weight, and believes that once she hits the weight and results she desires that she will be able to return to a balanced diet . . . balanced in the traditional sense of proper vitamins, minerals, carbs v. proteins etc, but also balanced in terms of caloric intake to expenditure . . . we shall see I guess.
If she's so good at weight maintenance then I wonder what would motivate her to go on such an extreme diet.
In reply to: The one thing I wanted to point out in my description was that there was, in this case, no loss of strength, power, or endurance...
It would be more accurate to say that you didn't observe a loss of strength or endurance. I actually wouldn't expect to see a loss of maximum strength in the short term. However, she almost certainly lost endurance due to lower levels of glycogen storage induced by the low-carb diet. If you didn't observe the loss of endurance, it was likely because she wasn't pushing her endurance. I sure wouldn't recommend alpine climbing on the Atkins diet.
In general, I would not recommend the Atkins for even casual athletes because the combination of low carbohydrate intake and low caloric intake would likely lead to loss of muscle. Furthermore, high protein intake is dehydrating, which alone will lead to decreased performance and possibly health problems.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Aug 13, 2003, 11:10 PM
Post #30 of 417
(89892 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
Alrighty then, you asked for it (part I):
THE ATKINS DEBACLE
The high fat/low carb craze could be more dangerous than healthy
by Steve Edwards
There's always something on the market promising a simple solution to whatever ails you. When it comes to nutrition, theories are so prevalent that if you interview 10 different trainers or nutritionists, you just might get 10 different protocols for “the only diet plan that really works.”
Forefront on many people’s list these days is the Atkins Diet, written by Dr. Robert Atkins way back in 1972. But unlike most diet fads, this one has remained popular. Participants are said to be able to devour fatty foods and still hone their bodies into chiseled works of art. Heck, why wouldn’t it be popular? Pass the bacon!
A recent cover of New York Times Magazine showed a photo of a steak with a melting cube of butter on top, with a bold headline stating, “What if Fat Doesn’t Make You Fat?” The article that appeared in the magazine earned its author, freelance journalist Gary Taubes, a reported $700,000 advance for a book on the subject. It asked questions such as, “What if it’s all a big fat lie?” about whether or not the world’s nutritional experts have been bamboozling us over the years in stating that things like fatty meats, butter, cream, and cheese might be bad for our health.
But an article on the cover of Nutrition Action, sarcastically titled “Big Fat Lies,” shed some more compelling light on the subject suggesting that it may have been Taubes, and not the experts, who’s been doing the bamboozling.
Nutrition Action is a small circulation, science-based, non-glossy magazine that is somewhat of an insider’s trade publication. In general, its stories use studies to state the latest facts and trends in the nutrition industry. This article, however, took a slightly different slant, mainly because the author, Bonnie Liebman, interviewed each person quoted in Taubes’ article in order to “validate” his story. What she found was that virtually every claim made by Taubes was out of context from its original statement.
“He (Taubes) knows how to spin a yarn,” stated Barbara Rolls, an obesity expert at Penn State in Leibman’s piece. “What frightens me is that he picks and chooses his facts.”
Taubes’ major claims were all refuted in Liebman’s story. Not by her, but by the experts whom Taubes had used himself to support his article. Gerald Reavan of Stanford summed up his feelings on how Taubes misrepresented his quotes by saying, “I was horrified.”
Below are the main points of Taubes’ article (NYTM) and what Liebman (NA) found out about his claims on the Atkins Diet:
#1
NYTM: The experts recommend the Atkins Diet.
NA: But they didn’t. Reavan, Harvard’s Walter Willett and Stanford’s John Farquhar are all huge names in the field of nutrition. And while Taubes cited them and others as a “small but growing minority of establishment researchers who have come to take seriously what low-carb researchers have been saying all along,” this was far from the truth. When Willet was asked point blank, his answer on Atkins was, “I certainly don’t recommend it.”
#2
NYTM: Saturated fat doesn’t promote heart disease.
NA: Taubes stated that saturated fats will elevate both bad cholesterol (LDL) and good cholesterol (HDL) levels and cause “a virtual wash” in the body, which is absurd according to every expert Liebman could track down.
#3
NYTM: Health authorities recommended a low-fat diet as a key to weight loss.
NA: Taubes claimed that “everyone from the Surgeon General on down” has recommend low-fat diets to lose weight when, in reality, it’s only stated that eating too much fat is bad. “The Surgeon General’s report doesn’t say that fat causes obesity,” said Marion Nestle, chair of the nutrition and food studies department and New York University, who also was managing editor of the report. “Fat has twice the calories of either protein or carbohydrates. That’s why fat is fattening…”
#4
NYTM: We’re fat because we ate a low-fat diet.
NA: “It’s hard to believe this claim passed the laugh test at The Times,” wrote Liebman. Studies show that Americans eat roughly 500 calories per day more than we did in 1980, which is a pound a week alone, regardless of what type of food it is. This claim is “preposterous,” according to Samuel Klein, director of the Center of Nutrition at the Washington University School of Medicine. “There’s no real evidence that low-fat diets have caused the obesity epidemic.”
#5
NYTM: Carbs, not fats, cause obesity.
NA: This is the--now almost standard--claim that carbohydrates cause an insulin spike that raises hunger so that you will eat more, but it’s hardly fact. “It’s not proven at all,” says Rolls. “We have no firm data that glycemic index affects body weight or how full people feel after eating.” Says Columbia’s F. Xavier Pi-Sunyer, director of Obesity Research Center at St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York, “Insulin crosses the blood brain barrier and turns off food intake… If anything, insulin should lower food intake.”
Taubes did use a study that showed weight loss from eating lower glycemic indexed foods but according to Rolls, “It’s hard to tell what led to the weight loss in that study because calorie density, fiber, and glycemic index all go hand in hand,” meaning that it was more likely due to type of foods eaten then just their glycemic index.
#6, 7, 8
NYTM: The Atkins Diet is the best way to lose weight, The Atkins Diet works because it cuts carbohydrates, Low-fat diets don’t help people lose weight.
NA: “It’s silly to say that carbohydrates cause obesity,” said George Blackburn of Harvard. “We’re overweight because we overeat calories.”
“Low-fat weight loss diets have proved in clinical trials and real life to be dismal failures,” claimed Taubes. But his piece did not cite any studies and, across the board, studies that have shown weight loss have one thing in common: a reduction in the number of calories consumed. A diet that helps you cut calories will help you lose weight, no matter what those calories are.
#9
NYTM: The Atkins Diet is safe.
NA: Even the Atkins web site claims that the diet isn’t nutritionally sound without supplementation, which is suspicious for a diet touted as “perfectly safe.” Studies have linked excessive red meat consumption to certain cancers, and there is no disputing that excess protein leads to acidic urine.
“…acid urine leaches calcium out of the bones,” stated Blackburn. “You can buffer the diet by taking a couple of Tums a day, but now we’re into medical supervision of people on the diet.”
Also, studies on the Atkins Diet showed that LDL levels didn’t go up, which seems good until you consider that they should be dropping when weight is being shed. “The harm caused by saturated fats could be overcome by weight loss,” says Samuel Klein of Washington University’s School of Medicine. “But what happens once people stop losing weight and start trying to maintain the loss? Will their LDL climb? We don’t know.”
#10
NYTM: Taubes examined the evidence objectively.
NA: This claim is not even close. Taubes seemed to ignore anything that didn’t fit within the realm of what he wanted to say, such as Willet’s claim that red meat is associated with higher risk of colon and possibly prostate cancer. “The New York Times isn’t the National Inquirer,” wrote Liebman. “Readers expect The Times to run articles that are honestly reported and written. Yet in August, The Washington Post revealed that Taubes simply ignored research that didn’t agree with his conclusions. For example, he didn’t use anything from Pi-Sunyer because “he just didn’t strike me as a scientist.” And if Taubes is willing to ignore the words of someone who’s served as president of both the American Society of Clinical Nutrition and the American Diabetes Association, we’d probably do just as well to ignore him also.
Conclusion: My own research and trial and error methodology shows that using the Atkins Diet can be effective to lower the body’s overall fat percentage. However, having done it myself (for short periods) and interviewed and worked with hundreds of people who’ve tried it, I cannot recommend eating this way in order to even lose weight effectively and definitely not for a healthy lifestyle. Massive protein consumption has a diuretic effect on the body, so in the initial stages you tend to lose a lot of water weight. You also flush your electrolytes making chronic dehydration, a dangerous condition, highly likely without careful replenishment.
A review of the Atkins site and articles like the one analyzed above do nothing to change my opinion. On their own web site, wording is carefully constructed so that an educated reader feels there is something that they aren’t being told. Such as where it’s stated that you can get all of your vitamins on 60 grams of carbohydrates per day. This is qualified by showing an example of an exact ratio of foods you need to eat in order to do so, which is a highly unlikely scenario, since anyone that fastidious about their diet is unlikely to even have a weight problem to begin with. My experience at their site was that it had the feel of someone peddling snake oil.
Bottom line is that there are just too many health professionals saying that the diet isn’t safe to justify its use. Supporters cry conspiracy, but I find this scenario highly unfathomable. Atkins has its supporters, but every single professional that I’ve found was somehow connected to making money off of it. I haven’t found even one exception over the years, which is reason enough to remain very skeptical and stick to a more sensible eating plan.
Part II (next month): If not Atkins, then What?
Gary Taubes original article can be found in the July 7, 2002 issue of The New York Times Magazine
Bonnie Liebman’s piece is in Nutrition Action, November 2002, Vol 29/ #9
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Aug 13, 2003, 11:20 PM
Post #31 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
Here are a few more things. Incidentally, I wrote the article and am the "fitness advisor"
http://beachbody.infopop.net/3/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=528299664&f=8682956296&m=4542931417
http://beachbody.infopop.net/3/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=528299664&f=8682956296&m=9822986296
and this one is another angle:
http://beachbody.infopop.net/3/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=528299664&f=8682956296&m=9072921907
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Aug 13, 2003, 11:30 PM
Post #32 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
SO I hate to poo poo your site, dude, but all those testimonial people look exactly the same, they just have better angles or outfits. :?
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Aug 13, 2003, 11:32 PM
Post #33 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
Perhaps both the root of the problem and the reason that Atkins has become so popular lies in this next article. When I first heard about this, I could not believe that even the soft drink and candy companies were powerful enough to "squelch" this info, so I did my own research. Sure enough, 5 years later this program is working better than ever. And the reason it's not yet common knowledge is, sure enough, those companies working on keeping this out of the news until they've had time to get ready. If you start looking into large junk manufacturers, like Coca-Cola, you'll see they now operate many subsidiaries that promote heathier lifestyles (Dasani and Minute Maid are owned by Coke, for example).
http://www.beachbody.com/jump.jsp?itemID=147&itemType=NEWSLETTER_ISSUES
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 13, 2003, 11:40 PM
Post #34 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: #2 NYTM: Saturated fat doesn’t promote heart disease. NA: Taubes stated that saturated fats will elevate both bad cholesterol (LDL) and good cholesterol (HDL) levels and cause “a virtual wash” in the body, which is absurd according to every expert Liebman could track down.
Definitely absurd. Compared to carbohydrate, saturated fat does increase both LDL and HDL, but it raises LDL more. The ratio of LDL:HDL, which is one of the best indicators of heart disease risk, therefore increases, indicating an increase in heart disease risk. This is well documented.
In reply to: Also, studies on the Atkins Diet showed that LDL levels didn’t go up, which seems good until you consider that they should be dropping when weight is being shed. “The harm caused by saturated fats could be overcome by weight loss,” says Samuel Klein of Washington University’s School of Medicine. “But what happens once people stop losing weight and start trying to maintain the loss? Will their LDL climb? We don’t know.”
Actually, the one controlled study I have seen that tested a eucaloric (sufficient calories to maintain body weight) Atkins-type diet did in fact result in an increase in LDL.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Aug 13, 2003, 11:42 PM
Post #35 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
It's not my site. I just work here but...
I've monitored some of the test groups and, I guarantee you, they are NOT the same. And it's a lot more than just how they look. During the final testing during one group I was getting hugged, kissed, and cried in front of so much that I felt like Jesus. But most affecting was the mid-50's guy that looked like Grizzly Adams. He's lost about 20 pounds in 6 weeks, which was great. But when I took his blood pressure it had dropped from around 190/115 to 135/90-ish (I was wary in letting this guy even start the program). He couldn't believe it, telling me his doctor told him he'd never be off of medication. I told him to keep exercising and he would. As I said this, the guy started to cry. Now I can be pretty cynical, but this was really moving. Sure enough, two weeks later he went off.
I tell ya, when I'd leave work those days I'd tell everyone, "I've got the best job in the world."
Course, it ain't always that way. But that's another story...
|
|
|
|
|
the_dude
Aug 17, 2003, 4:59 AM
Post #36 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2003
Posts: 221
|
Sorry to beat a dead horse here and bring back up this thread. I noticed that a few people on this thread have said that their doctor told them (this and that)..... I am in nursing school and from the nutrition classes I have taken, I've learned that doctors do not have to take ANY nutrition courses. This may have changed, so correct me if I'm wrong. But, remember, when asking your doctor about nutrition, ask them about their background on the subject before hand. They may not always know what they're talking about. It's always a good idea to see a registered dietitian (RD). They should be able to recommend I diet that suits you best.
I was also wondering about increased protein. At what point do you need to worry about the production of Ketone bodies? Does increased fluid always flush them? I'm still fairly new on this subject but want to know more!
The Dude
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 18, 2003, 4:40 PM
Post #37 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
ditto that. when i asked my mom about nutrition (shes a pediatrist) she said she would call a nutrition expers since she really doesnt know a lot about nutrition for adults. and the she gave a real good nutrition/activity planner. it really helps me to control my weight (i can calculate how long do i have to run for that 1liter (2 pint) of beer i had last night).
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Aug 27, 2003, 2:21 AM
Post #38 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
hey, I just read over this thread; interesting stuff. One thing I neglected to find in it, though, Jay (maybe I missed it). Is there any rule of thumb concerning how many grams of protein your average male climber should shoot for per day?
|
|
|
|
|
histai
Aug 27, 2003, 3:35 AM
Post #39 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 18
|
This is one of the most informative threads I have read on this site, EVER.
Thanks jt512 and hasbeen.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 27, 2003, 2:42 PM
Post #40 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: hey, I just read over this thread; interesting stuff. One thing I neglected to find in it, though, Jay (maybe I missed it). Is there any rule of thumb concerning how many grams of protein your average male climber should shoot for per day?
When you are eating normally (ie, to maintain your current body weight), protein should constitute roughly 13 - 20% of your daily caloric intake. Let's use 15% to make the calculation. If your total caloric requirements are say 2500 kcal/day then 15%, or 375 kcal should come from protein. Since 1 gram of protein contains 4 kcal, then you should consume something in the neighborhood of 375/4=94 g of protein a day. Shoot for 90 - 100 g/day.
The problem is, though, that when you are on a weight loss diet, your protein requirements in grams increases because more protein is needed to offset the breakdown of muscle induced by dieting. I have not seen any studies that attempt to quantify the amount of the increase. I have assumed it is on the order of 20%, so let's say that if your drop your caloric intake down to 2000 kcal/day that you should shoot for 120 g of protein per day.
The way I recommend calculating your protein requirements is to pick a target total caloric intake that results in a moderate caloric deficit. If you are an active male, then 2000 kcal/day is probably a good number to shoot for, and then to try to consume 25 - 30% of those calories in the form of protein. 25% of 2000 kcal = 500 kcal or protein. Dividing by 4 to convert to grams gives 125 g, which is in reasonable agreement with the 120 g above.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
papounet
Aug 29, 2003, 7:15 PM
Post #41 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2003
Posts: 471
|
Very interesting information.
Do you have some info regarding the impact of age on metabolic rate, and how much the caloric input should go down as we age ?
I have had medical tests (blood) evey year for 5 years.
I am at loss to understand since turning 30 why I am gaining 1 kg a year, and HFL LDL both go up while I am under the impression to be more and more careful. (I am now 38)
regarding exercise,
running 1 Hr at 12km/h for 78 kg is reported to burn 1000 cal/hr, assuming heartbeat of 80% max
if reading a book was ?? 300 cal/hr
how much weightloss can one assume for the 700 extra cal burned
(I guess some study were done on longdistance runners)
(whenever I think here is one gram of my lovehandles gone, I run easier ;-)
(let's disregard the impact on metabolism of building muscles) .
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 29, 2003, 8:24 PM
Post #42 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: regarding exercise, running 1 Hr at 12km/h for 78 kg is reported to burn 1000 cal/hr, assuming heartbeat of 80% max if reading a book was ?? 300 cal/hr how much weightloss can one assume for the 700 extra cal burned (I guess some study were done on longdistance runners) (whenever I think here is one gram of my lovehandles gone, I run easier ;-)
1 pound of fat contains about 3500 kcal. Convert pounds to kg, and that should answer your question.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
climber49er
Aug 29, 2003, 8:38 PM
Post #43 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2003
Posts: 1404
|
I was overweight a bit. Maybe twenty-twenty five pounds or so. I like to climb. I don't like to drag lard up a wall. I decided to lose weight with my handy dandy super secret diet that I invented...
Every time I eat, I eat a little less than I used to. Portion control. Eat slower. I don't feel any hungrier and I am dropping about 1/2 lb per week. Magical huh? Eh, It also helps to avoid the donut store and pop machines.
I'm halfway to my goal and its amazing how much stronger my arms and fingers have gotten! :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
papounet
Aug 29, 2003, 10:48 PM
Post #44 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2003
Posts: 471
|
is 1 pound (454 gr) = 3500 cal, I though I remember 1 gr of fat = 9 cal
anyhow, we are talking about 1 hr o running roughly between 1/5 pound of fat (90 gr) or 80 gr.
I had computed those number before, but was hoping for a better answer,
oh well, I'll go and run again this WE.
The issue of course, is that for the last 9 months at the same time I have burned off fat, but got some muscles instead.
As a sidenote, as I didn't know about the acronym, I looked up HIIT
http://www.wsu.edu/~strength/hiit.htm
|
|
|
|
|
poiboi
Aug 29, 2003, 10:51 PM
Post #45 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 29, 2003
Posts: 29
|
Try throwing up every thing you eat, that oughta help. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
vertical_risk
Sep 1, 2003, 1:17 PM
Post #46 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2003
Posts: 98
|
I find that slow and steady is the best for long term weight loss.
As a previous poster said "canned tuna". This is one of the best foods for replacing a meal, low in fat and high in protein.
What always works for me is, low fat low card high protein meals, lotsa water, lotsa activity; i.e., mountain biking, running, swimming and climbing.
Eat most of your carbs in the morning. Stay away from sugar, beer, bread, butter, salt and fast food.
Try to eat at least 4 - 6 meals a day, keeping them small.
Sorry if I repeated anything anyone has already mentioned.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Sep 3, 2003, 5:59 PM
Post #47 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: You can lose weight in the short-term on Atkins. The question is can you keep it off? I've yet to see anyone who has. Atkins is no different than any other extreme diet. Research has shown that nearly 100% of those who successfully lose weight on such diets gain all the weight back within two years. -Jay
About 5 years ago, I went on the Atkins diet and lost 20 pounds. I've kept it off since. Initially, I improved my climbing by a full number grade, by weight loss alone.
I think low carb diets can be a beneficial jump start. Also, as previously stated, you learn to really pay attention to what you eat and to cut out things that almost every one agrees are bad, refined sugars and processed carbohydrates.
While the other, potentially bad, aspects of low carb diets, ie. high fat etc. are currently being studied and debated, I don't view them as a long term characteristics of such diets. After reaching a target weight, people should gradually introduce good carbs, such as whole grains, to a level that they can maintain.
Long term, I think of it as a reduction in sugar and processed carbs. Also, learning to not be afraid of potentially beneficial fats.
|
|
|
|
|
maculated
Sep 3, 2003, 6:10 PM
Post #48 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2001
Posts: 6179
|
Yes, but did you stay on the low carb diet all that time? Or did you just do induction, then end?
|
|
|
|
|
tommyf
Sep 3, 2003, 6:30 PM
Post #49 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2002
Posts: 75
|
Hey,, thanks for the info too,,, but I was wandering what is a good ideal weight for someone the is 5’11
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Sep 3, 2003, 6:34 PM
Post #50 of 417
(89889 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
In reply to: Yes, but did you stay on the low carb diet all that time? Or did you just do induction, then end?
I'd say lower carb, in line with the lessons I mentioned above. Probably best way to describe it is that I cut most of the crap out of my diet to maintain what I initially lost with low carb.
|
|
|
|
|
|
