Fascinating dietary statistics

Gary F said:
I don't have the time to explain the biochemical mechanisms of high insulin and glucose levels but I see the consequences on blood vessels every day I'm at work.
Click to expand...

I respect the work you do and recognize your experience eclipses mine.

Still, Mark Crislip, the infectious disease specialist that does the Quackcast podcast, warns of these words from any doctor: "In my experience..."

Sure you see people with maladies that you are convinced trace back to sugar consumption. But doctors are just as prone to cognitive biases as anyone else: confirmation bias, hasty generalization, cherry picking data - that sort of thing.

My assertion is that you DON'T see the 84 year old that has eaten refined sugar for 80+ years and still competes in 10k's and has great numbers. They are out there. That's the "background" data that a clinical study can try to tease out to see if we can really come to conclusions about the ill effects of refined sugar in the diet.

But any time a macro- or micro-nutrient is put forth as either "poison" or a "magic bullet", I see alarm flags.
 
FastEddieB said:
I respect the work you do and recognize your experience eclipses mine.

Still, Mark Crislip, the infectious disease specialist that does the Quackcast podcast, warns of these words from any doctor: "In my experience..."

Sure you see people with maladies that you are convinced trace back to sugar consumption. But doctors are just as prone to cognitive biases as anyone else: confirmation bias, hasty generalization, cherry picking data - that sort of thing.

My assertion is that you DON'T see the 84 year old that has eaten refined sugar for 80+ years and still competes in 10k's and has great numbers. They are out there. That's the "background" data that a clinical study can try to tease out to see if we can really come to conclusions about the ill effects of refined sugar in the diet.

But any time a macro- or micro-nutrient is put forth as either "poison" or a "magic bullet", I see alarm flags.
Click to expand...
It;s not just experience but science. I'd like to counter your pop sci article but I'm on call and don't have time to direct you to the evidence. There are many factors that determine how much you can consume in carbs including sugar and get away with. Genetics, level of physical activity, other things we eat and other factors we are not even aware of. Most of those with insulin resistance got there by consuming excess carbs.
 
RJM62 said:
Okay, in the spirit of generosity, I found a low-carb forum and lifted three links for you. I haven't read them because, as I have said, I think all nutritional studies are nonsense and not worth the effort to read. But they seem to be what you asked for. I suspect you'll almost certainly dismiss them as nonsense, and I will of course agree with you because, once again, I think they're all nonsense.

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/22/us/two-studies-indicate-atkins-diet-may-help-heart.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/PR-CO-20130607-904498.html

http://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=745937

-Rich
Click to expand...

Thanks, Rich. Here's my critique:

nytimes: Two studies mentioned. One for only a year, the other for just six months--not what I'd call "long-term". By contrast, Dr. Esselstyn's first study was for five years with a ten year follow up and continuing reports more than 20 years later. Neither of these studies address disease reversal, just risk markers like lower triglycerides and higher HDL. Well, duh! If you don't eat carbs of course triglycerides go down. But what actually happened in the arteries?? As for increased good HDL, if the purpose of HDL is to mop up the bad LDL and you eat a lot of LDL-causing food what's the big surprise? Did it arrest the disease? Not much here to bother with. Participants must have thought so too, over 50% dropped out by the end of the year. Next..

wsj: Again, just "markers" for possible disease not real, measurable results. Not very long either--just two years not twenty. It's also a "meta analysis" of different studies which introduces far too many variables for my comfort. But the absolute worst thing is what they call a "conventional low fat diet" that their low carb diet is contrasted with: It isn't "low fat"! The goal was to find studies that aimed for less than 30% fat which is three times more fat than Esselstyn and Ornish diets. In a similar study, The women's Health Study (or some such thing) they also had a similar "goal", but when they added up the actual fat percentage it was more like 37% of the calories, IIRC, but still got labeled a "low fat diet". Dismissed, next.

annals: Another short two-year study of "markers" not measurable results. It's not compared to an actual low fat diet either, just the same "goal" of less than 30%. I'm skeptical that was really ever achieved and, of course, they don't say.

Thanks for your effort though.

dtuuri
 
For some people (myself included) simple carbs and sugar are highly addictive. Fluctuations in insulin levels seem to correlate with strong hunger. High insulin is associated with vascular disease.

In recent years, it has become clear that insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction play a central role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Much evidence supports the presence of insulin resistance as the fundamental pathophysiologic disturbance responsible for the cluster of metabolic and cardiovascular disorders, known collectively as the metabolic syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16506274

In people with insulin resistance or full-blown diabetes, an inability to keep blood sugar levels under control isn't the only problem by far. A new report shows that our arteries suffer the effects of insulin resistance, too, just for entirely different reasons. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100504124340.htm
 
Gary F said:
For some people (myself included) simple carbs and sugar are highly addictive. Fluctuations in insulin levels seem to correlate with strong hunger. High insulin is associated with vascular disease.

In recent years, it has become clear that insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction play a central role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Much evidence supports the presence of insulin resistance as the fundamental pathophysiologic disturbance responsible for the cluster of metabolic and cardiovascular disorders, known collectively as the metabolic syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16506274

In people with insulin resistance or full-blown diabetes, an inability to keep blood sugar levels under control isn't the only problem by far. A new report shows that our arteries suffer the effects of insulin resistance, too, just for entirely different reasons. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100504124340.htm
Click to expand...

What kind of diet if any do you follow?
 
Alexb2000 said:
What kind of diet if any do you follow?
Click to expand...
I'm struggling to break my addiction to carbs. I had 4 tequila lime chicken wings and 3/4 oz peanut butter so far today. After a few days of very low carb diet I will start adding in low starch vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower, etc. I get a lot of lean turkey from the deli. Olives. Salmon and other baked fish.
 
Gary F said:
Don't be so sure. If simple sugars are not consumed by muscle immediately as the result of high metabolic demand they increase insulin levels which has several adverse effects. For diabetics increased blood sugar levels have significant long term consequences including kidney failure, blindness and (gasp) erectile dysfunction. I don't have the time to explain the biochemical mechanisms of high insulin and glucose levels but I see the consequences on blood vessels every day I'm at work.
Click to expand...
But the people you see at work may be the ones who are more affected by sugar consumption. I don't think there is a problem for people who consume sugar while maintaining a normal glucose level and normal weight.
 
Gary F said:
I'm struggling to break my addiction to carbs. I had 4 tequila lime chicken wings and 3/4 oz peanut butter so far today. After a few days of very low carb diet I will start adding in low starch vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower, etc. I get a lot of lean turkey from the deli. Olives. Salmon and other baked fish.
Click to expand...

That sounds similar to what I am doing, thanks for the response. I have limited myself to just one beer a couple of days a week. Red meat just one or two days max, lots of fish, and poultry, good veg., etc. I still have fries and a burger once a week or so. I have eliminated things like dessert and soda. Not zero carb, but striving for a healthier balance and something I can stick to with without making it a religion.
 
Everskyward said:
But the people you see at work may be the ones who are more affected by sugar consumption. I don't think there is a problem for people who consume sugar while maintaining a normal glucose level and normal weight.
Click to expand...
I thought I made it clear that not everybody is affected by a problem with sugar but it is epidemic in this country. Sugar can be highly addictive

Gary F said:
It;s not just experience but science. I'd like to counter your pop sci article but I'm on call and don't have time to direct you to the evidence. There are many factors that determine how much you can consume in carbs including sugar and get away with. Genetics, level of physical activity, other things we eat and other factors we are not even aware of. Most of those with insulin resistance got there by consuming excess carbs.
Click to expand...

Gary F said:
For some people (myself included) simple carbs and sugar are highly addictive. Fluctuations in insulin levels seem to correlate with strong hunger. High insulin is associated with vascular disease.

In recent years, it has become clear that insulin resistance and endothelial dysfunction play a central role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis. Much evidence supports the presence of insulin resistance as the fundamental pathophysiologic disturbance responsible for the cluster of metabolic and cardiovascular disorders, known collectively as the metabolic syndrome. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16506274

In people with insulin resistance or full-blown diabetes, an inability to keep blood sugar levels under control isn't the only problem by far. A new report shows that our arteries suffer the effects of insulin resistance, too, just for entirely different reasons. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/05/100504124340.htm
Click to expand...
 
Out of the population which is very likely to be an 80% high sugar, processed food eating people; do you think come down with this syndrome?
 
Gary F said:
I thought I made it clear that not everybody is affected by a problem with sugar but it is epidemic in this country. Sugar can be highly addictive
Click to expand...
OK. But using such words as "epidemic" and "poison" (I know that was not you) overstates reality, IMHO.
 
Everskyward said:
OK. But using such words as "epidemic" and "poison" (I know that was not you) overstates reality, IMHO.
Click to expand...

Tobacco is a poison, too, but it doesn't mean that everyone who fires up a cigarette will die from them. I regularly see men around here who look as old as Methuselah puffing away. Some people's bodies seem better able to deal with it than others.

Refined sugar is also a poison in that the body wasn't built to handle it -- especially in the quantities that people take it in nowadays. I believe this is true regarding many other processed foods created in the 20th and 21st Centuries: They haven't been around long enough for the body to have evolved to handle them.

Refined sugar in particular has both immediate and long-term effects on the body. It contains no meaningful nutrients. It causes a metabolic see-saw effect. It raises cholesterol and triglyceride levels. It causes insulin resistance, which can lead to diabetes and many other diseases. If the liver's already storing as much glycogen as it can, it converts free sugar in the bloodstream to fat, which can damage the liver as well as the heart and circulatory system. It's simply not a food that the body efficiently uses. It's not a natural part of our diets, can never do the body any good, and can certainly do the body a great deal of harm.

In my book, that makes it a poison.

This doesn't mean that everyone who eats a candy bar will get sick. As with tobacco, some people tolerate it better than others. But that doesn't make it any less inherently harmful to the body.

-Rich
 
Last edited:
Everskyward said:
OK. But using such words as "epidemic" and "poison" (I know that was not you) overstates reality, IMHO.
Click to expand...
I don't think "epidemic" is an overstatement at all. I don't have statistics for insulin resistance, but obesity is strongly correlated with it, and obesity is indeed epidemic. In Michigan it's something like 30% (by self-reporting IIRC, so may actually be higher). Some states have even higher reported rates (Mississippi I believe is #1).

It's very true that not everyone is affected by sugar in the same way. Currently I can consume all I want and not get fat, but that's mainly because I don't really want all that much. Also, most of the sweet beverages I drink today are sweetened with aspartame or Splenda. But I was MUCH heavier when I drank a lot of sugary stuff like sugar-sweetened iced tea and Country Time lemonade. Calories in minus calories out will determine whether you gain or lose weight, whether you are sugar addicted or not. Those of us who aren't have a much easier time maintaining a constant weight.
 
Everskyward said:
OK. But using such words as "epidemic" and "poison" (I know that was not you) overstates reality, IMHO.
Click to expand...
If 1/3 of the population had the flu would you call it an epidemic?


  • More than one-third of U.S. adults (34.9%) are obese. [Read abstract Journal of American Medicine (JAMA)]
  • Obesity-related conditions include heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer, some of the leading causes of preventable death.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
 
RJM62 said:
Tobacco is a poison, too, but it doesn't mean that everyone who fires up a cigarette will die from them. I regularly see men around here who look as old as Methuselah puffing away. Some people's bodies seem better able to deal with it than others.

Refined sugar is also a poison in that the body wasn't built to handle it -- especially in the quantities that people take it in nowadays. I believe this is true regarding many other processed foods created in the 20th and 21st Centuries: They haven't been around long enough for the body to have evolved to handle them.

Refined sugar in particular has both immediate and long-term effects on the body. It contains no meaningful nutrients. It causes a metabolic see-saw effect. It raises cholesterol and triglyceride levels. It causes insulin resistance, which can lead to diabetes and many other diseases. If the liver's already storing as much glycogen as it can, it converts free sugar in the bloodstream to fat, which can damage the liver as well as the heart and circulatory system. It's simply not a food that the body efficiently uses. It's not a natural part of our diets, can never do the body any good, and can certainly do the body a great deal of harm.

In my book, that makes it a poison.

This doesn't mean that everyone who eats a candy bar will get sick. As with tobacco, some people tolerate it better than others. But that doesn't make it any less inherently harmful to the body.

-Rich
Click to expand...
Well stated. Thanks again Rich.
 
Gary F said:
If 1/3 of the population had the flu would you call it an epidemic?


  • More than one-third of U.S. adults (34.9%) are obese. [Read abstract Journal of American Medicine (JAMA)]
  • Obesity-related conditions include heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes and certain types of cancer, some of the leading causes of preventable death.
http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/adult.html
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call obesity a disease. And I don't see where it comes from eating sugar. I would say it comes from eating too much of a lot of things.
 
Gary F said:
I'm struggling to break my addiction to carbs. I had 4 tequila lime chicken wings and 3/4 oz peanut butter so far today. After a few days of very low carb diet I will start adding in low starch vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower, etc. I get a lot of lean turkey from the deli. Olives. Salmon and other baked fish.
Click to expand...

And to think there are so many Bambis in the U.P. just waiting to be invited to the dinner table. :D
 
I can understand people having problems with their weight and eliminating sugar and carbs in an effort to lose weight. However I have the opposite problem. If I eliminated sugar and carbs, I don't think I would be able to maintain my weight. I would for sure not be able to do it on all vegetables.

It seems like there's always been something you're not supposed to eat. First it was fat, then meat, then eggs, then carbs, now sugar. Then they change their mind.
 
Everskyward said:
It seems like there's always been something you're not supposed to eat. First it was fat, then meat, then eggs, then carbs, now sugar. Then they change their mind.
Click to expand...

LOL! Haha. But I bet they never changed YOURS! At least, they've never changed MINE. Ever since I first became aware of "low carbs vs. low fat", back when Nathan Pritikin and Dr. Atkins had competing books, I knew Pritikin had the better argument, I just didn't practice it well at all. I keep giving the other side a chance to sway me, but, like the cites by Rich above showed, I remain steady on course. I bet most everybody else is the same.

dtuuri
 
dtuuri said:
LOL! Haha. But I bet they never changed YOURS! At least, they've never changed MINE. Ever since I first became aware of "low carbs vs. low fat", back when Nathan Pritikin and Dr. Atkins had competing books, I knew Pritikin had the better argument, I just didn't practice it well at all. I keep giving the other side a chance to sway me, but, like the cites by Rich above showed, I remain steady on course. I bet most everybody else is the same.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

I don't really "side" with any of the experts. I think all the extremists are a bit off the wall in their own special ways.

I tried the vegetarian route for about 10 months back in the late 1990s. I was basically vegan, although not having any ethical basis for the diet, I occasionally deviated when I was a guest at someone else's table. After 10 months I'd gained weight, and my cholesterol and triglycerides went up, not down. So much for that.

I also tried Atkins. I lost weight, but I had no energy, and the regimen was so boring that I drifted off of it.

Then I tried a more traditional low-calorie diet. I was starving all the time and didn't lose any weight.

After I was diagnosed with diabetes, I tried the ADA diet. I was starving all the time and actually gained weight (albeit slowly), and my FBG and A1C continued to slowly rise. In fact, I had been adhering to the ADA diet for a couple of years when my doctor decided I needed to go on Metformin. It initially helped knock both my FBG and A1C levels down, but within about a year, they started to rise again.

The only diet that's worked for me is the one I'm on now, and it really does come down to eating like my grandmother did. The most important part of that is avoiding processed foods. The low-carb component is more incidental to that than something I think much about. Most processed foods are just loaded with added sugar. Even most hot sauces have sugar. How bizarre is that?

The added sugar in processed foods was where practically all of my sugar consumption came from. I've never really had a sweet tooth. Even as a kid I didn't care much for candy, so avoiding intentional consumption of refined sugar is not a big deal for me. It was all the hidden sugar that was doing me in.

Nowadays, I don't really carb-count any more because it's not necessary any more. If you prepare your own food, you know what's in it. So by preparing my own food (and avoiding starchy vegetables and the like), I'm already cutting carbs. The one exception is bread, which I bake myself, and which I do calculate and carb-limit to ~ 30 to 40 grams a day.

As for other people's diets, my opinion is that pretty much any structured diet ever devised is better than the typical American diet. So if being a vegan is working for you, then more power to you. I'd say the same to someone on Atkins, Paleo, Weight Watchers, or whatever. Anything's better than the typical American diet.

-Rich
 
Everskyward said:
I wouldn't call obesity a disease. And I don't see where it comes from eating sugar. I would say it comes from eating too much of a lot of things.
Click to expand...
I guess we all have our own idea of what constitutes disease. If a person is unhealthy then I consider the reason(s) to be disease. If you inventoried what obese people eat the large majority of excess calories will probably be simple carbs.
 
Gary F said:
I guess we all have our own idea of what constitutes disease. If a person is unhealthy then I consider the reason(s) to be disease. If you inventoried what obese people eat the large majority of excess calories will probably be simple carbs.
Click to expand...

How do you define unhealthy vs healthy? To me, if they require regular medical intervention as a result of their diet, they are unhealthy due to it. If we are going to call it an epidemic, lets put a number to it, what percentage of the population requires medical intervention to live? Next question, should they be getting medical intervention? Should anyone?
 
Henning said:
How do you define unhealthy vs healthy? To me, if they require regular medical intervention as a result of their diet, they are unhealthy due to it. If we are going to call it an epidemic, lets put a number to it, what percentage of the population requires medical intervention to live? Next question, should they be getting medical intervention? Should anyone?
Click to expand...
This subject is too involved to discuss in this forum but I will be glad to sit down with you or any other POA members and explain my perspective over a few beers. I hope to be at Oshkosh for a few days. Maybe then.
 
Gary F said:
This subject is too involved to discuss in this forum but I will be glad to sit down with you or any other POA members and explain my perspective over a few beers. I hope to be at Oshkosh for a few days. Maybe then.
Click to expand...
For me, beer is orders of magnitude more unhealthy than sugar. Maybe even a poison. :eek:

But that's because of my own physiology. I don't claim that it's a poison for other people. Maybe sometime over another beverage. :)
 
RJM62 said:
I tried the vegetarian route for about 10 months back in the late 1990s. I was basically vegan, although not having any ethical basis for the diet, I occasionally deviated when I was a guest at someone else's table. After 10 months I'd gained weight, and my cholesterol and triglycerides went up, not down. So much for that.
Click to expand...

Here's three case studies of men who had much better luck: http://cardiologyacademicpress.com/?p=20690

Like the link in the opening post, I ran across this while looking for something else.

dtuuri
 
Everskyward said:
For me, beer is orders of magnitude more unhealthy than sugar. Maybe even a poison. :eek:

But that's because of my own physiology. I don't claim that it's a poison for other people. Maybe sometime over another beverage. :)
Click to expand...
It might be if you have issues with alcohol, otherwise not a chance. Beer can be a very healthful beverage when consumed in moderation.

This article summarizes the results of the latest studies on the health benefits of beer while referring to our recent results, which demonstrate the preventive effects of beer and its components on lifestyle-related diseases. A series of studies using animal models have shown that beer may prevent carcinogenesis and osteoporosis; beer provides plasma with significant protection from oxidative stress; and isohumulones, the bitter substances derived from hops, may prevent and improve obesity and type-2 diabetes, improve lipid metabolism, and suppress atherosclerosis. Further studies are needed to clarify the components in addition to isohumulones that are responsible for these beneficial effects of beer, and the underlying mechanisms must be addressed. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15630301


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...-fibre-low-sugar-good-hair-benefits-beer.html
 
Gary F said:
It might be if you have issues with alcohol,
Click to expand...


I do. I lack the enzymes to metabolize it. It's common with Asians. I can feel it with a few swallows of any kind of alcohol. And no, it's not just feeling drunk.
 
All of these diets, no matter what your flavor, are like charging windmills when discussing the population at large. The issues is one of cost and convenience. You can pull into a drive through, get a $5 meal, and be on your way in less than 5 minutes most of the time. Alternatively, you can go to the grocery store, spend $10 on healthier ingredients, go home, cook it, clean up, etc. Fast food is so very efficient and low cost it is virtually impossible to match it at home on a low carb diet. Besides, let's not B.S. here, fast food tastes good. It is much more compelling than a bowl of broccoli and brown rice washed down with a glass of water.

This is our real problem.
 
dtuuri said:
Author information: Research and Development Department, Kirin Brewery Company... Japan

Likewise, the health benefits of peanuts are brought to us by: "This study was funded by a grant from the National Peanut Board."

Of course, I'm not saying drinking beer with your peanuts isn't good for you... :)

dtuuri
Click to expand...
I'm performing an uncontrolled study of one. I'll let you know how it turns out in 20 or so years if I'm still around to report the results. I love anything made with peanuts too so I'm pretty sure they are healthful as well. :)
 
In the Nutrition block of my Personal Trainer course, it was emphasized to encourage clients to just make "better bad choices".

Kind of like not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

On the road, Karen and I will often hit Waffle House, Taco Bell and Burger King as staples. Each have decent, though far from perfect, vegetarian choices.

For instance, BK makes a pretty decent "BK Veggie". Waffle house has pretty good hash browns (smothered, covered, diced, peppered and capped! :yes:) - and pecan waffles - and $1 egg and cheese biscuits. Taco Bell has those 7-layer and fresco bean burritos.

IOW, don't worry about fast food in moderation, and just try to make the above mentioned "better bad choices" - and watch portion size!
 
It only costs one dollar a day to eat better. Anyone that eats a bag of chips has no right to complain about the cost of good food. But yes I agree the problem is people are stupid, lazy, and weak. Now if only we could stop hemorrhaging so many health care resources on the overweight the problem might fix itself.
Alexb2000 said:
All of these diets, no matter what your flavor, are like charging windmills when discussing the population at large. The issues is one of cost and convenience. You can pull into a drive through, get a $5 meal, and be on your way in less than 5 minutes most of the time. Alternatively, you can go to the grocery store, spend $10 on healthier ingredients, go home, cook it, clean up, etc. Fast food is so very efficient and low cost it is virtually impossible to match it at home on a low carb diet. Besides, let's not B.S. here, fast food tastes good. It is much more compelling than a bowl of broccoli and brown rice washed down with a glass of water.

This is our real problem.
Click to expand...
 
Eating low carb on the go is a pain. It seems like I am limited to....
Pork Rinds
Meat sticks
Nuts
Cheese
Sometimes a gas station will have hard boiled eggs.

I've heard In and Out does a lettuce wrap burger. Have not seen that option round here. I wish the KFC "DoubleDown" was not breaded.

Panera's chicken cobb with avacodo is about the best I have found, but tough to eat in the car. Same for subway - any sub can be a chopped salad, but tough to eat on the go.

(I am in sales and have a long commute when I do go into the office. lots of time on the road)

I've taken to pre-make HBEggs, preslicing a summer sausage, and having those pre-wrapped real cheese sticks in the fridge so at least for breakfast I can grab and go (2 eggs, 3 1/4"slices of SS, one cheese stick)

Oh, and heavy cream in my coffee... boy is that nice....

Down about 20, but plateaued and I need to exercise more.

Any other tips out there from low carb / paleo dieters?

I did buy some sil pads and have made some parmesean "crackers". I love making fresh bruschetta with garden tomatoes and basil, but, since going low carb, I can't put it on bread. These are a good substitute and easy to make.
 
FastEddieB said:
In the Nutrition block of my Personal Trainer course, it was emphasized to encourage clients to just make "better bad choices".

Kind of like not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good.

On the road, Karen and I will often hit Waffle House, Taco Bell and Burger King as staples. Each have decent, though far from perfect, vegetarian choices.

For instance, BK makes a pretty decent "BK Veggie". Waffle house has pretty good hash browns (smothered, covered, diced, peppered and capped! :yes:) - and pecan waffles - and $1 egg and cheese biscuits. Taco Bell has those 7-layer and fresco bean burritos.

IOW, don't worry about fast food in moderation, and just try to make the above mentioned "better bad choices" - and watch portion size!
Click to expand...

You're right it is possible to eat fast food well. I made the comments just watching the people in line order. When I'm in a hurry I'll eat a McD's grilled chicken, with apple slices instead of fries, and an unsweet iced tea. If I have the bun it's about 450 calories BUT no bun/mayo it's only 115 calories. Eat a 115 calorie low carb lunch and you will lose weight.
 
Bananas, too many won't help, but I eat at least two a day. Larabars are OK for prepackaged food, yes they sneak sugar in them, too many is easy to eat and they will not replace a meal. Asking for extra lettuce on a burger then not eating the bun works at fast food places, but I wouldn't try it while driving. If you have low carb dialed in try a 24 hour fast, that can kick off a few pounds that stay off.
jhausch said:
Eating low carb on the go is a pain. It seems like I am limited to....
Pork Rinds
Meat sticks
Nuts
Cheese
Sometimes a gas station will have hard boiled eggs.

I've heard In and Out does a lettuce wrap burger. Have not seen that option round here. I wish the KFC "DoubleDown" was not breaded.

Panera's chicken cobb with avacodo is about the best I have found, but tough to eat in the car. Same for subway - any sub can be a chopped salad, but tough to eat on the go.

(I am in sales and have a long commute when I do go into the office. lots of time on the road)

I've taken to pre-make HBEggs, preslicing a summer sausage, and having those pre-wrapped real cheese sticks in the fridge so at least for breakfast I can grab and go (2 eggs, 3 1/4"slices of SS, one cheese stick)

Oh, and heavy cream in my coffee... boy is that nice....

Down about 20, but plateaued and I need to exercise more.

Any other tips out there from low carb / paleo dieters?

I did buy some sil pads and have made some parmesean "crackers". I love making fresh bruschetta with garden tomatoes and basil, but, since going low carb, I can't put it on bread. These are a good substitute and easy to make.
Click to expand...
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top