5 Weirdest Ways to Lose Weight

Losing weight is tough, and conventional methods don't always work quickly or easily.  So it's not surprising that people will try tricks and tips that promise shortcuts to shedding pounds, even if they sound kinda offbeat.

Me included!

But what constitutes a truly "weird" weight loss approach?

Well, when I googled, many of the "weird but helpful weight loss" tips were ideas that weren't all that strange.

According to Allure Magazine, snacking on whole foods instead of refined junk, and watching less TV are a couple of "weird weight loss tricks."  While eating at home and riding a bike were some of the  "unusual" ways to lose weight  featured by Best Health.

Oooh, what bizarre and strange ideas!!

Nah, today I'm talking about the truly weird weird, the stupid weird, holy crap people really do that? weird.

Here are five of my faves.

Ask the Nutritionist: Bloating Blues and Other Digestive Dilemmas

Today's question involves bloat and other sorts of stomach and intestinal distress.

Why?  Well, for one, Crabby is one of those people who frequently bloats up like a Thanksgiving Day Parade float. She was eager to hear some expert advice: preferably the sort that doesn't require her to give up any favorite foods or seek out professional help or do anything differently than she's already doing.   A handy capsule, she was hoping, featuring some obscure combination of phytonutrients that would not only to solve the bloating problem, but also melt belly fat, increase energy, build better biceps, and whiten her teeth!

Alas, no such luck. Instead all she got was incredibly informative answer exploring all sorts of possibilities and solutions complete with great resources and a fresh perspective that one rarely hears when discussing tummy trouble.  Damn that Marsha Hudnall.

In addition, I've got a brief digression regarding my last mea culpa blog post, but I won't hold up the proceedings too long before we get to the good stuff.

The Alzheimer's Diet! Interview & Giveaway & Mini-Review

 

Good luck clicking.
 Image swiped from Amazon 'cause I forgot (!) to ask for one.

Alzheimer's is one of those tragic diseases many of us don't like to think about, despite how common it is.  I know very few people whose lives haven't been touched by it in some way.

And no lifestyle intervention can guarantee a healthy brain in old age. Let's hope for a cure, pronto.

Hurry Up, 'K? Thanks!

But in the meantime, there is a lot that clever scientists have discovered about stuff that you can do to make contracting Alzheimer's less likely.

Is it worth making a few changes now, perhaps decades ahead of Possible Trouble, in order to lessen your risk?  Admittedly, it's not as sexy a goal as having six-pack abs or buns of steel. So I worry that books like this The Alzheimer's Diet: A Step-by-Step Nutritional Approach for Memory Loss Prevention and Treatment may have an uphill battle in the Diet Marketing Wars.  But it would be great if resources like this found an audience. Plus, many of these suggestions are targeted at memory boosting now, even ahead of dire diseases.

So stick around, we have an interview with the two very thoughtful authors, plus 4 copies of The Alzheimer's Diet to give away.  Note:  one copy I'm going to reserve for Canadians, even if it means confronting my laziness and shipping it myself. And another copy is specifically set aside for Cranketeers who've been participating in the monthly Goal Support Group post,  aka ¡Toma! (And there's a fresh one coming soon!)

Decadent Desserts on a Healthy Diet?

Photo: chotda

Some people don't have much of a sweet tooth. They can pass up ice cream, pastries, cakes, brownies or other goodies without making a big deal out of it. If one of these people gets mugged by a girl scout on the way out of the supermarket, and somehow ends up with a box of Thin Mints? She can arrive home 10 minutes later without having to explain why half a sleeve of cookies is already missing.

However, a lot of us struggle with this issue. I'm one of those folks who, if I didn't worry about consequences, could happily spend my entire day munching on one sweet thing after another. Well, that's not entirely true--to fully appreciate my desserts, I'd blissfully intersperse them with cheeseburgers, nachos, and deep-fried potato skins.

But much as I'd love to, I don't generally eat like that. I am more likely to eat broccoli and salmon than onion rings and whoopee pies. I have way fewer desserts than I would if all of a sudden the nutrition fairy waved her magic wand and said: "The hell with it, let's just say all food is now created equal. Have whatever you want."

Hey thanks nutrition fairy!
Photo: Sarahnaut

However, in the real world (as opposed to the world of television commercials and benevolent nutrition fairies) it is generally understood that eating humongous quantities of chocolate chip cookies or lemon meringue pie or mocha almond fudge ice cream is a bad idea.

So what's the best way to balance the desire for good health with the nearly orgasmic happiness a delicious dessert can bring?

Well, the secret is... there is no one best way. All those diet and self-help books that that say there is? They're wrong. Everyone's different; the trick is to figure out which is your "best way."

Here are some possible strategies. Some of them, in my mind, totally suck and are stupid. Yet they all work for someone. The problem comes when you're trying to use a strategy that isn't right for you.

1. The Black and White Rule.

Some people find sugar (or other sweeteners) to be problematic in the same way alcohol is to an alcoholic. Rather than grapple with constant temptation, they find it easier to have a blanket rule: they don't eat sugar or sweet desserts at all. Except maybe just fake ones like a piece of fruit. (And yes, fruit is wonderful, but I maintain that no, it's not dessert.)

Advantages: Black and white rules are simple to apply! This approach works especially well for people who find their sugar cravings diminish when not toyed with all the time.

Disadvantages: No sugar? Acckk!!!! And for some, "all or nothing" type rules encourage rebellion, or lead to guilt and self-destructive behavior when rules are violated.

2. Heaping on the Healthy Ingredients.

There are two components to this strategy: (1) generally filling yourself up with ample quantities of healthy foods, so you're not feeling constantly hungry and don't have a lot of extra room for junky treats; and (2) using healthy ingredients in desserts along with the Evil ones.

For example, many tasty desserts feature fruits and vegetables, like the carrot and apple cupcakes in Simply Recipes, or Leah's banana pudding pie over at The Goat's Lunch Pail.

Advantages: eating more nutritious whole foods is a good way to improve your general health and mood, and keep you from feeling sick, weak, tired, cranky and generally crappy.

Disadvantages. Even desserts with a few healthy ingredients also usually contain loads of sugar, butter, and refined grains. Despite what many natural bakeries imply, these ingredients don't become good for you merely because they are organic or are snuggled up next to a shredded fruit or vegetable. It's not a great idea to eat large quantities of blueberry danish just because blueberries have some lovely antioxidants in them.

3. Portion Police.

This is one of the most common ways of enjoying desserts, but not experiencing the weight gain or other adverse health consequences of massive sugar consumption. Eat desserts in moderation! Don't consume big-ass slices of cake, or multiple scoops of ice cream, or entire packages of lame grocery store cookies. Have one of Geosomin's mini-cupcakes or Roni's mini-apple pies instead!

Advantages: If you can stick to your plan and eat small portions of your favorite treats, you can enjoy them without guilt.

Disadvantages: If you suck at portion control, there is no such thing as a small portion.

4. Special Occasion Exceptions.

This is another portion control method, but focuses more on frequency and less on quantity. Special Occasion people go ahead and have that second slice of chocolate layer cake--but only have cake at all when it's their birthday, or a holiday, or a long-awaited get together with special friends.

Advantages: When desserts are consumed only rarely, they stay "special" and don't worm their way into your daily routine and start sneakily escalating into habit-forming entitlements.

Disadvantages: It's tempting to start celebrating more and more "special occasions" like "I finally got my hair cut day" or "the fifteen week anniversary of my middle child going off to kindergarten," or "Tuesday Afternoon."

5. The Calculator Strategy.

If you count calories or carbs or weight-watcher points, and you're also eating enough nutritious whole foods, you can plan for a decadent dessert by cutting out discretionary calories elsewhere.

Advantages: No guilt! You earned your dessert; enjoy every bite.

Disadvantages: Counting calories or points or carb grams or whatever can be a huge pain in the ass. Also, some people get too focused on the numbers and forget how important it is to include food that's nutritious, not just waist-line friendly.

6. Exercise Erasure.

A rich dessert can be "bought" by an additional calorie expenditure above and beyond what is normal for the day. Say you already went to the gym in the morning, but you're craving a special dessert after dinner--so you put in an additional hour on the Wii or treadmill, then enjoy your treat.

This method can also be used as a deterrent to mindless overindulgence. Knowing how many miles of extra walking or running a double-dip ice cream cone represents can help you rethink that cone unless you're really dying for it.

Advantages: if you have the time, and commit to the exercise before having the treat, it's another no-guilt way to enjoy yourself--plus will pay off with all the health benefits that exercise brings.

Disadvantages: Many people overestimate how many calories they're burning when they exercise, and underestimate how many are in most treats.

7. Low-Cal Convenience Desserts

Some people are great cooks and use the best tasting ingredients they can find so that every dessert is a gourmet treat. (For example, The Bag Lady can show you how to make a perfect pie crust, and she's not afraid to bring on the lard.) Others may sometimes opt for convenient low-calorie treats, so that they can eat them more often with committing to an extra ten mile hike after dinner.

The funny thing about reduced-calorie treats? Everyone has opinions about which ones are delicious and which ones are so hideous they should be outlawed. But rarely do people agree on which is which. One persons "delicious" low-cal chocolate pudding will taste like 100 calories of fertilizer to someone else.

Advantages: if low cal treats taste good to you, you can eat them more often than full calorie desserts.

Disadvantages: if you're eating them instead of a "real" dessert, and they're not satisfying you, they may cause you to consume more calories in the long run, with less satisfaction.

8. The "F-ck It, We're All Going to Die One Day Anyway" Approach.

This may be hard for health and fitness enthusiasts to comprehend, but there are many folks out there who just don't give a crap whether their diet may one day kill them. They choose to eat what they want, in whatever quantities they feel like, and they don't worry much about whether gigantic portions of processed, sugary salty nutritionally bankrupt food with make them obese, give them diabetes, or set them up for a heart attack.

When I find myself mentally tsk-tsk-tsking over the contents of other people's shopping carts at the grocery store, or watching what people order and consume in a restaurant, I have to remind myself that nutritional choices are a lifestyle choice, not a moral one. What's it to me if the guy at the next table finishes his large pepperoni pizza and orders a 2500 calorie cake and ice-cream extravaganza for dessert? Why do I judge him for making different choices than I would, if I don't have to live in his over-stuffed and under-nourished body? It's his body and his choice.

(Not that I plan to stop the tsk-tsking any time soon, but I do know I'm being a judgmental butthead).

What strategies do you use when it comes to desserts? Or are you one of those people who doesn't give them a second thought?

[Note: this is also posted over at Blogher, where you can join us for grueling daily fitness challenges at the 10x Club.]

Does Low-Carb Make You Crankier Than Low Fat?

Photo: FL4Y

So scientists just did another study pitting low-carb diets against low-fat diets. They took a bunch of overweight Australians, put some on low carb and some on low fat diets, and followed them for a year. Both groups lost about the same amount of weight (30 lbs), but by the end, who was in a better mood?

Well, looks like the Low Fat team won this round.

Hooray for the Low Fat Team!!
Photo: terrapin

Yep: the low-fat dieters were feeling significantly more chipper after a year of dieting than the low-carb group.

But here's the most shocking result the researchers found:

After the first eight weeks, both groups improved in mood. And while the Low-Carbers went back to baseline, the Low-Fatters remained more upbeat than they were when they started, even a year later.

But wait a minute... isn't dieting supposed to be miserable? Doesn't it make us feel anxious, pissy, deprived, fatigued, and depressed?

Well, apparently not for this group. But the low carbers couldn't hang on to their improved moods, while the low-fatters did.

According to the researchers, “this outcome suggests that some aspects of the low-carbohydrate diet may have had detrimental effects on mood that, over the term of one year, negated any positive effects of weight loss.” They wondered if it was the "social difficulty" of going low-carb, or the impact the diet itself might have on serotonin levels.

(Personally, I'm not in either the low-fat or the low-carb camp: for me, I like a good balance of carbs, protein, and healthy fats. It's the kind of fats and carbs that matter to me--I try to eat the healthy kinds, not the junky kinds).

But it's funny, I hadn't realized how much I'd bought into the idea that "dieting is miserable" until this study reminded me that actually, that's not necessarily true. I've settled into healthy eating patterns and have been at a fairly stable weight for so long, I forgot that deciding to lose weight and succeeding can make you happier! Seems obvious, but so many aspects of the process are annoying that I kinda lost sight of the big picture.

In fact, I remember years ago when the Lobster and I decided to change our eating habits, track what we consumed, and try to lose weight, we refused to call it a "diet." We called it going on a "Thing."

We'd say things like:

"Wow, I didn't realize how small a serving of pasta was until we started the Thing."

"Hey look how loose these pants are, I think the Thing is working!"

Even now, when I start getting a bit sloppy about too many treats I'll say: "if I don't stop eating so much junk, I'm going to have to go back on a Thing."

But when we were on The Thing? I'd forgotten that we were actually pretty psyched about it most of the time. Sure, the tracking and measuring and planning was a huge pain in the ass, but there was a big sense of accomplishment at (mostly) sticking to our plans and (mostly) meeting our goals.

However, we only had about 20 or so pounds to lose. We weren't in a hurry, and we didn't have to do anything drastic. And lucky for us, we both have pretty "normal" metabolisms that respond obediently to increased exercise, fewer empty calories, and more muscle mass. I know many folks can do all the right stuff and not get results, which must be incredibly frustrating.

But it's interesting the way I automatically assume that "dieting" is some sort of unpleasant ordeal, when my own experience was that it was pretty darn rewarding, even though I was certainly happy to stop measuring and counting once I reached my goal. I know restricting caloric intake can be completely counter-productive for a lot of people--but this study reminded me that for other people, it can also lead to a better mood.

Now I haven't personally noticed my low-carb friends being any more depressed or cranky than other dieters, but now I'm wondering, after this study, if there are any extra mood challenges with that sort of plan. And I'm curious about the "social difficulty" of a low carb plan--I picture hordes of angry pitch-fork wielding villagers chanting "bread, you must east bread!"--but I expect it's probably a bit more subtle than that.

What have you folks found? Does "dieting" or otherwise consciously limiting your food intake make you feel more miserable, or more upbeat? Does low-carb feel any worse (or better) than other plans?

Eat to Live: an apologetic book review

At Cranky Fitness, we don't usually review books, because it's hard to be both polite and cranky. In this case, I thought it was necessary.

I first read about Dr. Fuhrman last year on Diet Blog. And -- I'm sorry if this sounds mean -- I wasn't quite sure if he was legit. Even allowing for the fact that a blog post doesn't allow room for a well-thrashed-out thesis, his talk of Toxic Hunger sounded very similar to catch phrases like Toxic Fat, which have a "marketing to scare people so they'll pay money" sort of feel about it. So I was prejudiced.

And it does seem counter-intuitive that hunger doesn't originate in the stomach but rather in the throat. I haven't experienced that myself -- but you know what? That really isn't relevant to the main point of this book Eat to Live so I'm going to skip over it.

I was impressed with this book. For one thing, it is very, very well researched. Some chapters, it seems like every other sentence has a footnote referring to a peer-reviewed research study that was published in a well-respected journal.

I’ve read diet books where all the references cited lead to other books written by the same author. Fuhrman’s references lead to studies reported in journals that even I have heard of. That’s impressive. One study, or two or three, I could refute/ignore/disagree with out of laziness or feeling contrary. When I find study after study after study all backing up what he’s selling, then it’s a lot harder to disagree with him.

On the other hand, this guy's never going to become a millionaire selling this book.

How not to get rich writing a diet book:

- He doesn’t use the book to promote a lot of His Own Special Brand^TM supplements. He promotes eating fruit and vegetables. Unless he’s got a whole lot of stock in Safeway, he’s never going to make a million $ with this approach.

- He’s more concerned with health than with weight loss. (Yeah, like people are going to go for that. What was he thinking?)

- He’s not taking a few facts and stringing them together into a clever theory embellished with a lot of long, pseudo-scientific jargon. (How can you impress people if you don’t use jargon?)

I have to admit to a certain prejudice against Doctors Who Are Selling Something. This always causes me to go into auto-cynic mode, which is probably not fair since some of these doctors are well-intentioned, and doctors have as much right to make a living as anyone else. The thing is, I want them to sell knowledge rather than Success Pills for three easy payments of $45.99. What Dr. Fuhrman does is encourage you to eat foods that you can grow yourself, or at least can go down the road and buy at the grocery store. His website offers the chance to buy additional stuff, but that's not mentioned in the book.

I think I liked what he wrote because it agreed so much with what I've deduced from what I've read over several years. I don't see why he would limit the daily intake of flax seed to only one teaspoon, but aside from that I kinda like what he's saying.

The bad news

This guy's diet is strict. And permanent. The only way to make it following this lifelong diet is to learn to like vegetables. I'm actually getting there. Me, the confirmed carnivore, who can -- and has-- gone days eating only food that came from the meat and bakery departments, now spends most of my time in the produce section. I'm still not going to say I love vegetables, but I do love not feeling stuffed with saturated fat and greasy food.

How strict is strict?

This diet is more strict that Dean Ornish's diet plan, and he's always been my end-point for Strict.


The basic tenets of the diet

- 1 pound raw veggies & fruit (on my scale, that's 1 apple, 1 cucumber, and 1 cup green leafies)

- 1 pound cooked veggies

- limited quantities of grains and starchy veggies

- sayonara to meat,¹ processed foods,² caffeine,³ alcohol<sup>4

1</sup>That sound you just heard was several people leaving this blog and going to Mark's Daily Apple to complain. Hey, go with what works for you. I'm just telling you what Fuhrman says. Actually, he’s not far from the Primal approach. He figures it’s better to be a semi-vegetarian, i.e. it’s okay to eat some meat if you’re going to eat a whole lot of vegetables as well. (I think he would prefer you not eat meat, but he says it’s vastly better than being a vegetarian who goes around gorging on breads and pastries.)


²There go the Jenny Craig & WeightWatchers-meals groups.

³Ah, just lost the Starbucks crowd.

⁴The last Cranky Fitness reader shuts the door behind him as he leaves.

Um... is anyone still reading this? Fuhrman says that after six weeks or so, unless you're really looking to lose a lot of weight, re-introduce more grains and starchy vegetables. Avoid processed foods like the evil pesticide-ridden plague foods that they are.

Fuhrman himself says this diet is not for everyone. People will say "hey, this diet will make me so miserable that it's not worth it." I'm not sure I agree. Yeah, changing your mindset and getting your body used to a more healthy diet is no fun, but once you've made the adjustment it seems to me you'll be having a whole lot more fun in life. The quality of life is better if you eat healthy and work out.

Ever tried going mostly vegetarian? Did it help or hinder your health efforts?

Carpe Diet! The Recession Diet, Cranky Fitness style

You know that phrase, dance as if nobody's watching?


I've updated it for today: Live as if you've already been laid off.

After reading the daily news, I started thinking what I would do if Crabby laid me off. For starters, I would go 100% vegetarian, grow my own lettuce and kale and things like that.

Then I thought -- why shouldn't I start doing this already? Apparently living as if you were laid off is becoming quite the In trend-du-season. There's even been a catchy name coined for people who do this: Recessionistas. Wiktionary defines this term as "who is able to stick to a tight budget while still managing to dress stylishly."


If I were laid off, I like to think that I'd read a lot of finance blogs, like The Simple Dollar for tips on how to cut back on expenses. Stop using my car to get about -- bicycle, walk, or take the train to get places. I'd read the Escape from Cubicle Nation blog to get enthusiasm for finding my ideal job. I'd eat lots more vegetables.

Hmmmn.
Why don't I do that now? Following this process would be good for me.
I'll save money, feel cheerful about my job, and become extremely healthy.

It's true that were I laid off, I would have a lot more time to do these things. On the other hand, the time to start living this way is while you're still employed.

Why? Because...

Once laid off, based on past experience, I'd probably sink into depression and stay in bed half the time, then go on frantic job searches, forgetting about details such as healthy vegetables and exercise.

Then I'd sit by the phone biting my nails rather than something useful like washing the floor, or polishing the door or trying to ignore some other bore chore. Probably start writing paragraphs that rhymed for no readily apparent reason.

So I figure this is the time to seize the moment. Carpe Diet. Make it a habit while I can. If nothing else, focusing my attention on living this way will take my mind off the daily news. (And does anyone else think maybe they should go on a News diet, just to clean the mind out?)

Judging by what's out there in Internet land, everybody's thinking along similar lines.

The BBC did a video report on the new Recession diet.
[Text for the video-impaired: everybody's eating at McDonald's these days, because it's cheaper.]

Diet Blog wrote about getting a recession-proof body.

Get Rich Slowly wrote about cutting your TV bill in half.

Even the New York Times had a post about their version of the Recession diet -- buying a cheaper brand of marshmallows.

The best advice I saw on this subject was the Recession Diet post written by The Simple Dollar back in April of last year: focus on inexpensive staple foods, keep to your shopping list, "Pay attention to what you like that also happens to be healthy... especially when it's on sale."

Do you have any good Recession Diet tips that you could share? I figure we're all in this together. We can toast that cheaper brand of marshmallows over the fire while we're at it.

Photo credit: mikebaird

Interview With Judith Beck (and Giveaway)

So I'm very excited that today we have an interview with Dr. Judith Beck!

Hi there, Dr. Judith Beck!

Her previous weight loss book, The Beck Diet Solution, was a New York Times Best Seller. And unlike some best selling self-help books that shall remain nameless, it was actually a realistic and sensible plan for losing weight. (Java Chick, for example, documented some of her experiences with it).

Now Dr. Beck has a new book coming out, The Complete Beck Diet for Life.




I got a chance to read it, and I definitely recommend it for people who've been trying to lose weight but have had trouble succeeding. It's based on techniques that have solid research behind them, and it deals with all the common mental pitfalls one encounters when trying to move to a healthier lifestyle. The book includes an eating plan, but also teaches a set of skills, so that you can have a shot at maintaining weight loss over the long haul.

So I'm pleased I got to ask Judith some questions, as though I were an actual journalist and not just a lazy blogger. And we've got a copy of her new book available to send to a Randomly Selected commenter! (Instructions below).

Crabby: So I notice that The Complete Beck Diet for Life has the word "diet" in the title... but you seem to have forgotten to include any gimmicks! There are no juice fasts, no stringent food combinations, no eating bananas all day long, no "detox" potions to drink. Nor do I see the words "miracle" or "magic" anywhere. What gives? Is that any way to market a diet book? Why no extravagant promises or "easy" solutions?

Judith: I’m sorry to say that there is no magic solution to weight loss; there are no magic foods or combinations of foods or supplements. If there were, someone would be a billionaire.

Crabby: Dang! We'd really like to be billionaires. We were thinking maybe "The Cupcake Diet" might sell a few books...

Judith: The truth is that if you eat fewer calories than you burn, you will lose weight. If you eat more calories than you burn, you’ll gain weight. There is a solution, though, to losing weight permanently.

Crabby: "Permanent" is the tricky part, isn't it? I tried to make some suggestions once, but somehow I got off track and ended up talking about Eleanor Roosevelt and Mr. Rogers instead. What's the real solution to losing weight and make it stick?

Judith: First you need to learn a specific set of thinking and behavioral skills, such as how to motivate yourself every day, how to get yourself to use good eating habits, how to cope with craving and negative emotions without eating, and so on.

Second, you need a highly nutritious diet you can stay on for life. That means it has to have a sufficient number of calories and be very healthy so your body doesn’t rebel. It also means it has to include your favorite foods—as often as every day—so your mind won’t rebel.

The Complete Beck Diet for Life fills these requirements, and you can individualize it so you can stay on it for life.

Crabby: "For Life" sounds so darn long. Personally, I'm still hoping the scientists invent a way to turn broccoli, tofu, and lentils into tasty chocolate chip cookies, but you're right--in the meantime, we need a healthy diet and a way to stick to it.

Crabby Again: OK, new question. So your approach is based on Cognitive therapy, which I'm a fan of, because research shows it actually works.

If I were to try to summarize Cognitive therapy, I might say it's the process of learning to substitute more realistic thoughts for ridiculous ones. Like: "Crabby, a half hour on the elliptical machine DOES NOT burn off the calorie equivalent of a full pint of Chocolate Peanut Butter Haagen Dazs ice cream. Put down that spoon!"

But perhaps you have a better description of it, and an explanation of how it helps in the weight loss struggle?

Judith: Cognitive therapy helps you make changes in your thinking so you can make permanent changes in your eating behavior. You need to know exactly what to tell yourself when you have thoughts such as, “That looks so good. It’s okay to eat it, even though it’s not on my plan, because....I’m hungry/ I’m tired/ I’m upset/ I’m happy....Everyone else is eating it...No one is watching.....It’s only a little piece....It’s free....I can’t waste food...I hardly ever get to have it.....I’ll make up for it later....I’ve already exercised today....I’ll exercise later....it’s a special occasion.....I can’t resist.... and so on and so on and so on.

Crabby: I think I've used every one of those. Plus the ever-popular "Oh well, chocolate has tons of anti-oxidants in it."

Judith: You need to remind yourself, “If I want to lose weight permanently, I have to follow my plan. Every time I eat something I’m not supposed to, I build up my “giving in muscle” which makes it more likely that I’ll give in next time and the time after that and the time after that."

Crabby: I've never seen a machine at the gym for exercising the "giving in" muscle. Oh wait, yes I have... the vending machine! But it doesn't sound like a muscle you really want to work to hard to develop.

Judith: It's better to tell yourself "If I resist, I’ll build up my resistance muscle, which makes it more likely that the next time I’ll resist and the time after that and the time after that. The truth is that every bite matters; it’s not just the calories, it’s the habit.”

Dieters also need to remind themselves, “I can either eat whatever I want, whenever I want OR I can lose weight permanently. I can’t have it both ways.”

In addition, they need to change their thoughts about hunger. Many dieters mix up hunger with the desire to eat. And they think that hunger is abnormal, should be avoided, and that it will get worse and worse until they can’t tolerate it. But by doing some experiments, they can see that hunger is okay, it’s only mildly uncomfortable compared to other discomfort they’ve tolerated, and that hunger comes and goes.

These are just a few of the changes in thinking that dieters need to learn. And they need to learn how to motivate themselves to read these reminders daily (and sometimes throughout the day).

Crabby: There are some similarities between The Complete Beck Diet For Life and your previous book, The Beck Diet Solution, in terms of theory and techniques. But The Complete Beck Diet For Life builds on the previous one, adding features like recipes, for example. What else is new or improved?

Judith: The Beck Diet Solution suggested that dieters pick any healthy diet they want, then use the skills in the book to learn how to stick to the diet. Since I wrote the book, I found that few dieters actually eat in a healthy, hunger-satiating way. Diets tend to have too few calories, are unbalanced, and don’t include favorite foods. No wonder a lot of dieters can’t sustain the eating plan they’ve chosen.

So I decided to work with a registered dietician to create a sensible, healthy diet. Basically, you calculate an appropriate calorie level and then choose a protein from a list, vegetables from another list, a grain or starch from a third list, and so on. So it’s very flexible. You also get either 150 or 200 calories a day to spend any way you want. You can even have a candy bar every day. Like the first book, you learn—and master--certain essential thinking and behavioral skills before you change your eating because it’s too difficult to stick to a plan and master these skills at the same time.

The program in the book gives you a choice about changing just one meal at a time, changing all your meals at once, or changing all your meals and snacks at the same time. It also contains a formula and strategies for eating when you’re not home and it teaches you not only how to motivate yourself, but also how to keep up your motivation for life.

Crabby: You used a great analogy when talking about how dieters will compound one slip by going on to make many more, when they'd never do the same thing in other areas of their lives. You pointed out that if a cop stops you and gives you a ticket for running a red light, you wouldn't then think, "Oh, well I might as well run as many red lights as I can for the rest of the day and start fresh again tomorrow!" But that's exactly the kind of thinking dieters often do. What do you think it is about food, dieting, or weight loss that makes rational thought so difficult?

Judith: I think dieters are frequently overly optimistic.

Crabby: That's a coincidence, I think pretty much everyone but me is overly optimistic! But that's why they call me Crabby. In what way are dieters too optimistic?

Judith: They think it won’t matter if they restrict their calories severely, if they spend calories on simple carbohydrates instead of protein and healthy fats, if they decide at the last moment what to eat instead of following a plan, if they eat quickly or while standing up, if they cheat and wait until tomorrow to restart their diet. But it does matter.

And I think at some level, they just don’t understand how essential it is to learn how to follow a highly nutritious diet, without making exceptions. In The Complete Beck Diet for Life, I teach dieters how to get themselves to follow a plan inflexibly at first. After they’ve learned this skill, I teach them how to create a flexible plan that can incorporate last minute exceptions.

Crabby: One possible drawback some might see to the Cognitive therapy approach you describe in your book is that it involves a lot of preparation and practice. Changing the way one thinks seems to involve (gulp) homework! There are lists to check off and experiments to try and decks of cards to create. When I was reading through this, I kept envisioning how tempted I'd be to skip a lot of steps, even though I could totally see why that would be counter-productive.

If someone were say, hypothetically, something of a slacker, what would you suggest they do to keep the skimming and skipping to a minimum and not be too half-assed about it?

Judith: When dieters have the sabotaging thought, “Oh, I don’t need to do all this,” I ask them, “What has your experience been in the past? Has NOT doing all these things led you to permanent weight loss? What makes you think you can get away with not doing them?” I’m honest with dieters. I tell them that I’m certain they can lose weight without doing all the tasks; they have all lost at least some weight in the past without mastering these skills. I also tell them I’m certain that they won’t be able to keep off the weight they lose, not unless they master each skill. But sometimes dieters just have to learn the hard way. They skip some tasks, they gain weight back—and then they’re ready to commit to the whole program.

Crabby: What do you think is the most common mistake most dieters make?

Judith: Not effectively responding to the thought, “It won’t matter if I eat this food I haven’t planned.”

Crabby: As this is a book about dieting, exercise is not the main focus. How important do you think exercise is for weight loss? What sort of exercise do you do?

Judith: Exercise helps weight loss and it’s essential for good health, so everyone needs to exercise, whether or not they’re trying to lose weight. I encourage dieters to follow a set eating plan which is independent of their exercise program. So you don’t get to eat more if you exercise but you don’t have to eat less if you don’t exercise on any given day. Research shows that people who eat pretty consistently from day to day are more likely to lose weight and maintain their weight loss, so I don’t tie food intake with exercise. I go to the gym 2-3 times a week and try to walk on other days.

Crabby: From your books it seems like you have a cheerful, can-do, positive attitude. But since this is a blog called Cranky Fitness, I have to ask: is there anything health and fitness related you'd like to complain about? Any obstacles, attitudes, bone-headed institutional policies, media issues, anything at all?

Judith: I really am disheartened by how so many women (and some men), regardless of their weight, base so much of their sense of self on how they think their bodies look. Appearance is so superficial! Yet they often feel so badly about themselves when the number on the scale is higher than they’d like it to be. They become obsessed with food, diet, exercise, and how they look. It starts to take over their lives. They feel self-conscious and inhibited and don’t enjoy daily activities and their lives in general as much as they could. I wish they could learn how to accept themselves and lead better lives.

Crabby: Anything else you'd like to share about your book, future plans, philosophy of life?

Judith: A strong theme in my books is “no wonder.” No wonder people have had difficulty losing weight and keeping it off. They just didn’t know how. It’s funny; people wouldn’t expect to be able to sit down at the piano and play a concerto without taking lessons. Even after they can play a concerto, they expect that their skills will get rusty and their musical prowess will decline if they don’t continue to practice. It’s really the same with dieting. People need to learn a specific set of thinking and behavioral skills, and then they need to practice them, over and over, so they can not only lose weight but maintain their weight loss. It’s not their fault that they’ve gained weight back in the past. They never learned how to keep it off.

Crabby: Thank you so much Judith! And good luck with your book, it sounds like it will help a lot of people.


So Would You Like to Win a Copy of The Complete Beck Diet For Life?

Just let us know in the comments below that you'd like a chance at a copy of the book, so the Random Number Generator doesn't pick someone who's already ordered one or isn't looking to lose weight or whatever. We'll pick a winner as of midnight (EST) Thursday night, Dec 18th and post who the winner is sometime on Friday December 19th. So don't forget to check back! If you win, please email us with your name and mailing address by Monday night, Dec 22 to claim your copy.

Or, you can order one here (available Dec 23), if Crabby can still remember how to do Amazon links. Let's see:

So, have any of you had any interesting experiences with Diets or Diet Books?

Sears' Toxic Fat: The Man, the Diet, the Controversy

Who is Dr. Sears?

Okay, pop quiz time.

Two out of the following three statements apply to Barry Sears:

1 - He's got a Ph.D in biochemistry.
2 - He's the author of The Zone Diet.
3 - He's the star of a movie that just came out about teenage vampires who sparkle and have a lot of biochemistry.

Warning: if you flunked that quiz, you might be reading the wrong blog.

Barry Sears exemplifies the important role the preposition plays in the English language. People who've read his books either swear by him, or swear at him.

Unless you've been living in a chemically sterilized biosphere for the last 13 years and had earplugs on the whole time you were there, you've probably heard of Dr. Sears' book "The Zone Diet." He has a new book out, called Toxic Fat.

Seeing the word 'toxic' in a title makes me suspicious, simply because a lot of marketing folks have jumped on the bandwagon with this particular word. I know marketing sells books; I still object to it if the words they use have the effect of making the book's actual message unclear or inaccurate. I got so fed up with marketing claims that I wrote an overview of the biology behind the term 'Toxic Fat'.

In this case, I'm not sure if I agree with Dr. Sears' claim about fat itself being toxic. Which is a shame, because there are good points in this book.

Toxic Fat briefly mentions fat cells storing toxins, but that is not the main focus of the book. Not toxins from pollution, at any rate. What this book focuses on is the toxic effect of the 'bad' fatty acid Arachidonic acid (which I abbreviate ArA 'cause there's no way I'm typing that out over and over again).

You may not have heard of ArA, but you've heard of its rivals, the fatty acids that lead to Omega-3 fatty acids being produced in the body.

I've found this book difficult to review for two reasons. One, there's a lot of information in it, and it's hard to condense. I wrote a lengthy, detailed, highly erudite analysis -- you can thank me later for not posting it.

The other thing that made this book difficult to read, for me, was the fact that Dr. Sears' books are considered controversial, so I felt constrained to stop and analyze every sentence.

What is Sears' approach to Toxic Fat?

This is where it gets complicated. I also wrote a long, detailed description of the biochemical processes involved in the production of Omega-3 (good) and Prostaglandins (bad). You can thank me for not including it here.

Instead, here's the short version:


Alpha-linolenic acid is one of the omega-3 fatty acids. (Couldn't fit them all into the diagram.) Prostaglandins are bad. Prostaglandins are responsible for painful menstrual cramps. I do not like them.

I'm simplifying horribly but the main contentions are:

1 - Uncontrolled inflammation screws up the body.
2 - Diabetes, heart disease, obesity are all caused by inflammation.
3 - Arachidonic acid (ArA) plays a large part in the inflammation epidemic.
4 - According to Sears, the Zone Diet is the answer to this problem.

Dr. Sears vs. Cranky Fitness

Uncontrolled inflammation is on the rise
Sears Yes
Cranky Fitness Yes

High levels of ArA lead to high levels of inflammation
Sears Yes
Cranky Fitness Yes

Uncontrolled inflammation leads to heart disease, diabetes, obesity
Sears Yes
Cranky Fitness Yes*


The Zone Diet is the way to alleviate inflammation
Sears Yes
Cranky Fitness Read More

*I hesitated over his claim that inflammation is linked to obesity; a person can be 'fit but fat.' If he means (and he probably does) someone with a lot of abdominal fat has problems with inflammation, then yes.

It is really dangerous when you get so much fat in the abdominal area that the body starts storing fat in the liver. A fatty liver can kill you just as nastily as a liver soaked in vodka.

What's so controversial about Dr. Sears?

Sears' books are controversial because at the heart of all his books is the Zone Diet, and many nutritionists and doctors, such as Joel Fuhrman (Toxic Hunger), disagree stridently with Sears' conclusions.

When is a diet like a restroom?

There are lots of sites that explain the Zone Diet in detail. (The 20-second condensed version: you should eat fats, proteins, and carbohydrates in a precise ratio suited to your size.) In the Toxic Fat book, meal plans are separated by gender -- different ones for men and for women. (Essentially, men have larger portions.) Except that not all woman are small, and not all men are large, so I'm not sure if that works. Maybe he's basing this on the fact that men have more muscle mass?

I can't whole-heartedly endorse this diet, but I can't condemn it either, not 100%. I mean, anything that gets people to pay attention to what they eat, and that helps them lose weight, isn't all bad. (I just know someone will write in to say that this diet has helped them, and who am I to say that's a bad thing?) I will say that I don't think it's a long-term diet and I don't think long term it's healthy and sustainable.

My problems with the Zone diet are based on anthropology and psychology as much as biology. I don't see that the human body was designed/has evolved to a diet that is so precisely balanced.

The other problem is that there is no way that I could follow this diet. I know myself well enough to say that without someone else doing all the weighing and calculating, I'd give up the Zone diet in a day. All that math would drive me crazy. (I know people say "oh, it gets easier... you get used to it..." but in my case I doubt it. I had enough trouble trying to eat 4 or 5 servings of vegetables per day. Much much simpler to go all vegetarian with the occasional night out.)

Toxic Fat: The book

Good: There's a long bibliography listing his sources for the claims made in each chapter.
Bad: Many of the sources cited are from his previous books, which seems a kind of circular logic.
Ugly: The polysyllabic names of the many different fatty acids under discussion. It's like one of those Russian novels where all the characters have names that are twenty syllables long.

One thing about his diet argument that I can't agree with is the seeming contradiction between his claim that ArA is bad (which I agree with, or at least I agree that it's bad in high levels), and his insistence on eating lots of meat-based protein. Sears claims that the high-level of ArA in the typical diet is due to the cheap vegetable oil that is so readily available these days. I don't see that he proves this point. Other sources (here's one of them) claim that the major sources of ArA are meat, poultry, and eggs.

Instead of making sure your diet is a certain percentage of meat, I think it is more helpful to make sure your diet is 100% organic, and as Dr. Weil would say avoid food that has a long list of ingredients you can't pronounce. Avoid food with added hormones, antibiotics, or a long list of unpronounceable chemical preservatives.

To sum up, this book makes some good points as well as some not so good points (points that I don't agree with, I lump into the 'not so good' category automatically). I don't agree that the diet he suggests will help, but I completely agree with Sears' claim that we need to pay attention to inflammation and the dangers it presents.

Other reviews you might like

Diet Blog
Pasta Queen (Half of Me)

Has any one else read this book? Or tried the Zone Diet? If so, what did you think about it? I'd love to hear other people's viewpoint on this issue.

Diabetic? Who cares?

Hear no diabetes, speak no diabetes, get photo from Flickr.

According to the CDC, 1/4 of Americans have prediabetes and don't know it.

Wait a minute. Back up and read that again. 1 out of 4?

Here's another statistic. The rate of people who already have diabetes has gone up by 90%. And WebMD says that may be an underestimate. (They also say the number of people who already have prediabetes is 1 out of 3.)

Type II Diabetes: easy to control, dangerous to ignore

Even though yes, I know, there are tons of people out there who are either at risk or already have the disease and don't know it, this still surprises me.

The trouble is that if you're reading this post, you probably are not one of the people with prediabetes, because you are interested in regular exercise and a healthy diet. But I will guarantee that someone you know -- maybe someone you love -- is one of the statistics.

I mean, damn! In the early stages at least, prediabetes and Type II diabetes are easily controllable disorders. And they can be controlled by the individual; it's not a situation where you have to put yourself in the hands of others and take a bucketful of weird and expensive drugs with powerful side effects.

People who know better and don't bother

It's frustrating. As an example, take this guy I know. Extremely well-educated (well, I assume lawyers are educated, they sure know a lot of words I don't) so you would think he could bother to read about the risks of Type II diabetes, you would think he would bother to find out the minimal steps necessary to deal with the condition. The only concession he made to his condition was to take his medication. (Yes, he did switch to lite beer, and he did minimize the amount of red wine to a couple of drinks a night, but I don't call those concessions.)

The thing is that Type II diabetes is one of those diseases that you CAN do something about: diet and exercise and (definitely 3rd in the list) medication can control the symptoms and progression of the disease.

So why are there so many people out there who can't be bothered?

Diabetes doesn't go away if you ignore it!

My anger in this case is all the stronger because if you don't take care of the situation, You Get Worse. Diabetes leads to serious and irreversible problems, especially when you combine it with alcohol. This lawyer is now forced to listen to doctors use phrases like "poor prognosis" and "experimental studies." His younger daughter is seventeen, and he'll be lucky to see her graduate from high school.

I don't know how (or even if it's possible) to get someone to listen when they're risking their life through sheer inertia. Maybe this post will help someone to become 'scared straight' or whatever.

Someone to talk to about diabetes

MyHealthVillage is hosting a series of diabetes chats, starting tonight.

The Chats will be hosted by Cindy Sears (RN, CDE) -- diabetes educator with years of experience working with persons with diabetes at Capital Regional Medical Center and private physician practices in Missouri, who has participated in a research study for rural primary care practices funded by the Missouri Foundation.

To participate in the diabetes chats, simply go to www.myhealthvillage.com and join the Chat on any of the following dates and times.

Tuesday, 11/18 at 8 p.m. ET -- Insulin Myths and Realities

Thursday, 11/20 at 1 p.m. ET -- Medication Know-How

Friday, 11/21 at 11 a.m. ET - Pondering Privacy

Tuesday, 11/25 at 8 p.m. ET -- Here Come the Holidays!

Okay, end of rant

This post was me ranting because someone I know is dying and it could have been avoided. It is inexpressibly frustrating to not be able to help with something like this.

I can't be the only person with friends or family who are digging their grave with their teeth, as it were. Anyone have any good suggestions on how to handle the frustration? I don't think there's much we can do to help people who don't want to change.

Diets & Cults: is there a difference?

I'm a bum.

I was going to post a long, incredibly well-written and irrefutably researched review of Barry Sears' book, Toxic Fat. But I'm going to put that off until next week so I can put this up today.

(Okay, also because I still want to tweak it a bit more. It's not quite right yet.)

I absolutely loved one thing I read in Sears's book. To quote:

"Three things in life are visceral because they are based on belief systems: Religion, politics, and nutrition."

Yep.

Emotions are closely tied in with food

You know how some people get a 'gut feeling'? The gut has such a high concentration of nerve cells that it has been called a second brain. The highest concentration is of course the brain.

No, I don't care what you've heard about some men, it really is in the head brain.

If there's a second brain in the gut, would that explain why people get so emotional about the favorite diet?

Whatever you do, don't disparage the diet

It looks like people develop an emotional attachment to a certain diet, or the philosophy behind it. As an example, take this review that Diet Blog did about Dr. Joel Fuhrman's diet book, Toxic Hunger. It's a pretty straightforward review, but what caught my attention were the comments. People got emotional over whether this diet was, or was not, a good idea.

Putting down a diet plan is a sure fire way to get a ton of comments on your blog. (Ah... the real reason for this post comes out.) The blog Starling Fitness averages a couple of comments on a post; when she wrote a mildly disapproving post about Weight Watchers and the points system, she got 95 comments. People are really into their particular diet.

If this blog were being written by Ms. Crabby, at this point there would be an insightful paragraph or two about why people defend their diet plans like a lioness defending her last cub. Since she ain't here, just imagine that something insightful was said at this point.

Deep, thoughtful moment

Okay, enough already.

Being me, I have to confess that I don't get why this is such an emotional issue. Being healthy is a good thing. Yeah, I got that part. But we're all different, right? So if diet A works for me, and diet B works for Crabby, why should the two of us have a huge argument about which is better?

I think diets are like cults in that people can get really obsessive about them both.

Weight watchers is evil!

It's tempting to disparage a whole lot of diet plans so that the post would get lots and lots of comments. (Weight Watchers is evil! The Zone Diet is followed by Terrorists! Hitler was a vegetarian!) But in all honesty, I don't get it. Why can't we all get along? Or agree to disagree, or something civilized like that?

Update on the Raw Food Diet

Do you have it in a different color? Transparent is so last year...

Did you ever wonder about Cinderella? I mean, did she really think she could live happily ever after with a guy who's got some weird frangible shoe fetish?

Health is not a fairy tale

It's like those shows that celebrate someone losing 200 pounds... but there's never any follow up on these shows to find out what happens next.

Here at Cranky Fitness, we are determined to shun such prevarications. So it seemed like a good time to provide an update on how my body felt after the 30 days of 90% all raw vegetables.

- Because I was on such an extremely low-fat diet, my skin broke out. (I know -- it's supposed to break out when it's greasy. I'm weird. The only time my skin has problems is when I'm behaving like as a teenager, i.e. going on extremely rigid and unrealistic diets.)

- Because I became so used to eating vegetables 90% of the time, it was no hardship to transition after the 30 days into eating lots of cooked veggies. Roasted vegetables, lightly sprayed with olive oil, are much more filling than their raw relatives.

- Because I've gotten so used to eating vegetables, it's -- wait for it -- gotten to the point where I, the most confirmed carnivore on the face of the planet, don't crave 'substantial' food like meat, chicken, or fish. Used to think those were the essential cornerstones of a meal, without which you would have cranky, resentful stomachs. Turns out that's not a basic law of nature. Gravity is a law of nature. Meat with every meal? Not.

- Look, if you're a guy please skip this point and go on to the next. (Are you gone? Good.) Okay, I have to mention that going cold carrot was an incredible help in that it made the cramps much, much, much, much less painful. (I would like to throw in a few more 'much'es into that last sentence, just to emphasize the point, but I think you got the idea already.)

- I put on a pair of jeans and walked around for 20 minutes before realizing that these were my 'skinny' jeans that I'd not been able to fit into two months ago. Still haven't unpacked my scale, but I take the jeans as proof that the raw food helped me shape wise.

A love affair with lettuce? Maybe just a fling

A coach that smells of pumpkin? Actually, I'd prefer a crock pot.

A raw food diet might make a useful transition for someone who wants to eat more healthy food and less saturated fat. I wouldn't recommend having a long-term relationship with an all-raw diet, but as an intermediate step to a more healthy diet? Might be worth a try.

I think I might suggest adding this idea to the Cranky Fitness Diet Book. Every diet book I've read starts out with an intro diet, a two-week section that is supposed to help the dieter lose weight quickly and get motivated to go on to the long-term maintenance diet.

Judging by the comments, everybody here is already into healthy diets. I feel like I'm trying to catch up to the point where you're already at. So maybe you can tell me -- did you all jump straight into eating healthily? Or was there a transitional period, where you went to an extreme version of a diet before settling into more moderate and healthy habits? (Or did you always eat 'good food' and if so were you never tempted into evil ways?)

The Raw (food) Deal

Raw food is all the rage, according to Psychology Today.

(Note the use of the word 'rage' in that statement. Its significance will shortly become apparent.)

I know that this diet has the advantage of having been around for a long time. Since before humans discovered fire, if I'm not mistaken. And it does have the advantage of being the fastest fast food possible. Grab and chew is as good as it gets. But why is it such a big deal now?

I was curious, so I thought I would look into it.

I've been following the standard PGD, or Pretty Good Diet. You know the sort of thing -- making sure I've eating 5 daily servings of fruit and veggies -- well, 3 or 4 servings is still pretty good, and hey I'll eat more fruit on the weekends to make up. It's kind of like the Pretty Good exercise plan. Doesn't really hurt you, though it's not going to help you lose weight or get into good shape.

The trouble I've found with this diet is that it's too easy for it to degrade into the PAD, or Pretty Awful Diet. You find yourself rationalizing all kinds of bad food decisions "just this once." (No, Merry, carrot cake does not count as a daily veg serving.)


So I figured I'd give this raw deal a try. I went cold carrot: eating whole-grain stuff and green leafy things and some fruit thrown in for dessert.

The main problem at work was all the eyebrow-raising that went on. "You're going to eat all that?" was a typical comment. But if you've ever tried it you'll agree that even after eating a whole cup o' green leafy things, you can still be hungry.

Very hungry.
Every day, I dutifully chomped my way through several cups of salad, bell peppers, oatmeal-with-fruit-and-flaxseed, the works. And invariably, by 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I was so hungry I was ready to chew plastic. Felt like a junkie needing a fix. (Um... I'm assuming this is how a junkie would feel. Not talking from experience.) I was irritable enough to kick innocent little kittens. I was angry.

Really angry.

The 'fix' for this problem was a quick piece of chicken. Within 20 minutes I had resumed my placid, agreeable demeanor. Or as close as I get, anyway.

How the heck am I supposed to be good when eating right makes me want to tell the world to go screw itself?


It's been a long time since my ancestors lived in caves and had names like Ungh. My ancestors have been in America long enough for the intestinal flora to adapt to a diet of hamburgers and fries. After pretty faithfully following this raw diet for a month (i.e. 90% of my diet = raw vegetables), my innards let me know how they felt about it.

- I felt much lighter. Apart from some ground up flax seed, I ate almost no fats. (90% of my diet was fat free.) As a result, I never felt weighed down.

- Since I was eating food that my innards weren't prepared for, I was also generating enough gas to make me a subject of interest to Exxon Mobil. (TMI? What TMI? That's just another TLA, isn't it?)

- In the evening, I inevitably had a dinner with some lean beef, chicken or fish. Not a lot, percentage-wise, but a couple ounces. I couldn't go all day and night without 'food.' (Somehow vegetables do not equal food, at least not to my subconscious.)

- I'd never heard that raw vegetables were like Chinese food, but it's true. Even though I ate veggies almost every hour on the hour, I was always hungry 30 minutes later. (I totaled up the number of calories I was consuming on a daily basis, and by late afternoon I usually ended up consuming about 900 calories.)

I don't care what they say about roughage and fiber, you have to eat a lot to equal the amount of calorie-satiation found in one hamburger or one Krispy Kreme. The trouble is that now I can't go back: just the thought of a fast-food burger makes me feel greasy.

I would have thought my body would have become accustomed to this diet after a month, but noooo. I'm screwed either way: good food makes me ravenous and bad food makes me sick.

Has anyone out there, a fellow confirmed carnivore, ever tried going cold carrot? If so, how long did it take? Enquiring minds (and innards) want to know!


Note: These pictures have absolutely nothing to do with raw food. (Oregon aficionados might recognize Cape Perpetua and Cannon Beach.) I wanted to keep alive the spirit of the Cranky Fitness photo competition. (This week: east coast vs. west coast.)

Ditching your Diet?

The Decline of Dieting?

A couple of weeks ago, a survey came out suggesting that fewer folks than ever are on diets. A market research group asked 5,000 people about their eating habits, and found 26% of US women and 16% of men were dieting--the lowest it's been in more than two decades. By contrast, in 1990 39% of women and 29% of men were dieting.

As a nation, we're certainly no slimmer now than in 1990. So is this decrease in dieting a good thing, or a bad thing?

Reading two articles about this, one in the New York Times and one in the Boston Globe, I found myself with, as usual, mixed feelings.

"Positive" Eating

The New York Times (which may require registration) takes an upbeat approach. Their article focuses on the movement towards "positive eating." What's positive eating? It's "shunning deprivation diets and instead focusing on adding seasonal vegetables, nuts, berries and other healthful foods to their plates."

Hooray for this approach!

They cite sensible healthy trends like the slow foods movement, eating locally grown produce, choosing whole foods instead of the processed stuff, shopping at farmers' markets and spending more time in the kitchen cooking things from scratch.

These all seem like really cool things to do. And it sure seems like in the health/fitness/weight-loss/body image blogosphere, you see a lot more focus on health and nutrition, and a lot less on dieting.

(Check out, for example, Limes and Lycopene, among many others. Hell, just click on any blog in our blogroll, and you'll probably find lots of information on healthy eating and a move away from processed crap and toward nutritious whole foods.)

I'd say the "positive eating" approach is the one I take 90% of the time... when I'm not too busy cramming cupcakes in my mouth.




(It also seems like lots of exercise is part of the equation--a topic that seemed weirdly de-emphasized in both these articles).

Anyway, from the "positive eating" perspective, the decline in "dieting" seems like a great thing.

On the other hand...

Are People Really Just Saying Screw It, I Give Up?

I love this "eat healthy" stuff, and it's awesome news if it's getting to be more popular than dieting. But if I step outside of the world of health bloggers and the New York Times, and instead visit random food courts or chain restaurants or supermarkets... um, well, really?

People aren't dieting because they're eating so much healthy food now?

Maybe I've just shown up on the wrong days, at the wrong times. But seems to me there are still lot of people out there eating a LOT of crap.

Hey! You talkn' to ME?!

The Boston Globe article, however, mentions a few other factors that might have something to do with folks giving up on diets. Like:

Experts noting that "dieting is simply too hard" and that diets are "notoriously ineffective." Or that "a lot of people are saying I don't have enough money to spend on a diet, or I'm going to try surgery."

Or that there simply isn't an "exciting new diet" like South Beach out there now. According to the editor-in-chief of Publishers Weekly, "one of the real challenges for the diet book industry is - surprise - coming up with new diets."

Hmm. This is not quite as upbeat.

Is There a Place for Dieting?

It sure seems like there are a number of folks out there in blogland who were overweight and not happy about it, who then changed their lives for the better by dieting and getting serious about exercise. I find these success stories really compelling-- folks like Pasta Queen and Diet Girl and Roni and Mousearoo.

So I don't know what to think about the fact that there are fewer people attempting to do what they've done.

Is that a good thing? A bad thing? What do you guys think? Are any of you on "diets?" Or is the word getting so stigmatized no one wants to use it anymore?