Blogger Locks Another Low-Carb Blog As 'Spam': Let's Help Get It Unlocked

Now look at the low-carber who's been blocked as "spam"

I am livid right now with the hosting site of my blogs right now and it has forced me to make a decision I really hoped I wouldn't have to make. But Blogger has really forced the issue now and I don't feel like I have much of a choice in the matter all things considered. More about that in a moment.

As you know, my "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb" blog was first identified by Blogger's robots as a "spam blog" back in April this year and it took nearly a week to get it back again. When your blog is locked by one of these computer robots automatically, you have to go through a rigorous waiting period until a real live human being can look at your blog and realize it is not "spam," but actually legitimate. Visitors coming to the blog wouldn't know that it's locked, but the owner is unable to make any new posts or changes until a Blogger representative bothers to take a look.

Adding insult to injury about my particular case is the fact that it was locked for a second time in less than a month AGAIN, although this time I got it to come back MUCH quicker because I had a Blogger employee name that I urged so many of you to write to. Thanks to the efforts of my faithful and dedicated supporters at my blog and on my other web sites, my "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb" blog was restored in just two days.

Now we have yet another low-carb blogger who has been locked out of her popular blog. It's Regina Wilshire at the "Weight of the Evidence" blog who informed me today that she has been identified by Blogger as a "spam" blog. This would be hilarious if it wasn't dead serious because Regina's blog has been a longtime source for quality low-carb research information well before Jimmy Moore was even on the scene. It's such a travesty that genuinely good bloggers are forced to endure this kind of aggravation.

To make matters worse, my "30-in-30" Low-Carb Weight Loss Challenge blog was also locked today, so it looks like Blogger is on the rampage again with the trigger-happy robots. This is utterly stupid if you ask me and I would like to ask for your help yet again. As of the writing of this blog post, it's late on Friday afternoon. So nothing may come of this until Monday. But it's worth a shot for Regina's sake.

The last time I asked for your help with unlocking my blog, I gave you the name and e-mail address of the Blogger employee who was the first one to unlock my blog. His name is Mishka and his direct e-mail address is mishkablogger@yahoo.com. In your e-mail, kindly request that the URLs WeightOfTheEvidence.blogspot.com and 30-in-30.blogspot.com be unlocked since they are not "spam" blogs. Thank him for his prompt attention to this and express your personal experiences reading these sites. If all goes well, then Regina should be back up and running by Monday. And the same with my "30-in-30" blog.

THANK YOU again for your help everyone! You are the best!

So what am I contemplating doing? Right now I'm moving all of my posts from Blogger over the WordPress and will make a decision soon about making my new permanent blog home over there. You never hear about any issues like this over there, so it's looking more and more appealing by the moment. I'll let you know if and when that will happen, so don't worry. THANKS again for your support!

8-2-08 UPDATE: Well, YOU DID IT!!! Both my "30-in-30" blog and Regina's blog are now back...but neither of us is happy with Blogger right now. That's why we're moving to WordPress and you'll be hearing more about that soon. In the meantime, check out Regina's new address at WeightOfTheEvidence.com.

Is Ketosis Necessary On A Low-Carb Diet? Let's Ask The Experts!

One of the most asked about aspects of livin' la vida low-carb has got to the issue of ketosis. There is so much misinformation about there about this very natural state that the body goes through when you are on a low-carb diet (primarily confusing it with a serious condition that diabetics must be careful of called ketoacidosis--NOT the same as ketosis). As such, there may be confusion that lingers out there among my readers who are just learning about this way of eating.

In this recent blog post where I provided some "quickie one-liner" responses to some e-mails, I made the following statement:

Being in ketosis is like being pregnant--you either are or you're not; regardless of what the Ketosticks show you, if you are eating less than 30g carbohydrates a day, then you ARE in ketosis.”

One of my readers named Charles Fred decided to respond to my statement which he disagreed with and it gets to the very heart of this issue about ketosis. Here's what he wrote:

Your statement reflects today’'s informed opinion, but my article in work, “Unified Physiology of the Metabolic Syndrome,” has given me an unusual perspective which for the sake of brevity I’'ll state dogmatically.

Ketosis need not and should not be part of low-carb eating. Low-carb diets should never be labeled as “ketogenic” diets. Ketosis appears to be an “Induction” phase of low-carb eating, but in fact it is a last ditch response to inadequate glucose. As such it is either temporary or avoidable.

Low-carb eating is the evolution-derived diet of humans (unlike other primates). Humans are carnivores, hunters, because human evolution happened pre-fire and pre-agriculture when very few carbs were edible. For carnivores, gluconeogenesis in the liver supplies all necessary glucose.

But if someone abruptly switches from high carbs to very low carbs, gluconeogenesis will be inadequate to supply enough glucose - causing weakness, dizziness and ketosis.

Well if gluconeogenesis is supposed to be adequate, why does it fail? When you eat carbs they are stored as glucose (glycogen) in your glucose fuel tank - your liver. When you manufacture glucose from protein via gluconeogenesis it is stored in that same fuel tank, intermingled with those dietary carbs.

Enzymes, including gluconeogenic enzymes, are expressed only as needed. If your glucose storage is kept full by dietary carbs, expression of gluconeogenic enzymes is reduced. Eventually your gluconeogenic machinery becomes atrophied, inadequate to supply 100% of your glucose requirements.

So, contrary to usual practice, the proper way of switching from high-carb to low-carb is to gradually reduce dietary carbs over the course of about a month, inciting gradual rebuilding of gluconeogenic machinery. Then all those “Induction” woes which convince many that low-carb is not for them are avoided - as is ketosis.

Did you get all that? You'll recall I've explained gluconeogenesis before and it's a beautiful metabolic process that allows your body to make its own carbs (glucose) for the body's needs from the protein you consume through the liver. So, therefore, there isn't a real need for dietary carbohydrate at all.

But Mr. Fred believes eating too few carbohydrates to the point that your body is in a state of ketosis is harmful to your body and that a more gradual progression to lower and lower levels of carbohydrate is needed to keep the body from going through the "shock" of what many describe as the Induction flu. As someone who has gone through this experience and appreciated the benefits of making that "sudden" change, I could not disagree with him more.

What do the low-carb experts have to say, though? I decided to pose this theory put forth by Mr. Fred to several of America's most respected low-carb diet authorities and have them respond:

JACQUELINE EBERSTEIN, RN

Not everyone who suddenly moves from a high-carb intake to Induction will get symptoms. Many make the transition very easily. My educated guess is that at least 50% make the transition easily. Others have only mild symptoms. A few have more severe symptoms that can be managed. I think the transition would be easier for more people if they read the book completely so they know what to expect and how to deal with symptoms.

After years in clinical practice I have only had a few patients that required a slow transition because of such severe symptoms. The Induction phase is important especially to those with a severe carb addiction. It is the fastest way to stabilize the blood sugar, control hunger and cravings and improve many diet related symptoms quickly. It is amazing how many people feel better once they are in ketosis by the 4th or 5th day.

Secondly, the mindset of the dieter is they want progress ASAP to stay motivated especially when having to give up some of their favorite foods. Induction provides that. By slowly lowering carbs many will give up too soon and miss the opportunity to find out how effective low-carb can be.

For people with severe health risks, rebalancing the body with a very low-carb intake can lead to rapid improvements in blood sugar, blood pressure, triglycerides and high insulin levels. Until insulin levels improve some of the other benefits of low-carb can't happen. I have seen many severely disordered insulin and blood sugar results that would take far too long to improve with even 60 or 70 grams of carbs.

Just as one diet does not fit all, one level of carb restriction does not fit all. We are all different. The level of carb intake needs to be the level that works for each person based on what we know about them. Dr. Atkins didn't always start in the Induction phase--some people didn't need it, yet many did and would not have been as successful without it.

Unfortunately, many are still stuck in the mindset that having ketones from fat burning is abnormal and undesirable. We know it is not. Dr. Veech, an NIH researcher, agrees that the negatives about dietary ketosis are misunderstood.

REGINA WILSHIRE

Humans are omnivores--able to survive as carnivore, but thrives as omnivore.

Gluconeogenesis isn't solely a metabolic process induced by carbohydrate restriction; it is a normal homeostatic process to maintain blood glucose, so even those consuming a high carbohydrate diet will utilize it as needed (usually when engaged in high levels of activity or during the period of sleep).

The idea that if you don't use it, you lose it, is an incomplete view--yes the enzymes will be made in lesser amounts if one doesn't rely on gluconeogenesis to fully supply glucose, but to claim "atrophy" sets in is a bit over the top.

Some people do find this approach to be a gentler way to restrict carbohydrate--slowly lowering their intake over a period of time; others do better just going "cold turkey" and reducing carbohydrate below 40g. Both reach the same endpoint--persistent state ketosis and utilization of gluconeogenesis. The idea that one will not induce ketosis (burning fat) doing the former is physiologically not possible--if your carbohydrate is below a particular threshold, you're going to make ketone bodies.

The result of reducing carbohydrate slowly isn't a lack of ketone bodies being produced, but less of them wasted, thus the less likelihood a person will register ketosis on Ketostix. Those who restrict carbohydrate below 40g initially make more ketone bodies than necessary, so they "spill" the excess in urine, saliva and sweat. But someone reducing carbohydrate slowly is also making ketones--just less likely to be spilling excess ketones.

With time the person who reduced carbohydrate below 40g and stays there will also begin to not see any measurable ketones on the Ketostix as they get more efficient at making ketones for energy. There is less wasted ketones, thus less to see on the sticks, as time passes. But, if one is keeping carbohydrate below 40g, they're burning fat for their primary energy source, which means they are making ketones whether they register on the sticks or not.

DR. ERIC WESTMAN

In most medical terminology, "osis" implies "the abnormal condition of"--like onychomycosis means "abnormal nail fungus," halitosis means "bad breath." Perhaps this is one reason why people unfamiliar with low carb approaches jump to the conclusion that "ketosis" is harmful. If you have no insulin in your body, as in Type 1 diabetes, a potentially life-threatening condition called diabetic "ketoacidosis" can occur. My Duke colleague Will Yancy published a paper looking at the pH in the blood of people on two diets (low-carb vs. low-fat) and did not find low blood pH ("acidosis"), but because the blood bicarbonate was lowered below the normal range we called it a "compensated metabolic acidosis." Another published study by Brehm showed the average level of blood ketones goes down over time.

In our clinic, some people always have ketones in the urine, others never do, other fluctuate back and forth. Dr. Atkins used the phrase "benign dietary ketosis" in his books. I have wondered if it would be better to say: "ketosis without acidosis" or "ketonuria" instead of "ketosis." "Ketonemia", which means "ketones in the blood"
"ketonuria", which means "ketones in the urine."

I don't agree with Charles Fred's point of view. You can see why there might be confusion. If you said "if you are eating less than 20g of carb per day then you are burning fat, or in the fat burning zone, or the 'ketone zone'--apologies to Barry Sears and the Zone Diet--rather than "in ketosis," then this might be technically more correct.

DR. JEFF VOLEK

This does not make a lot of sense to me. Ketone production and utilization and
ultimately blood and urine levels vary along a continuum. So to suggest it is an
absolute yes or no is not accurate. There is also a diurnal variation and many
other factors that influence their metabolism other than diet (e.g., exercise).
There is also a lot of individual variation in regards to the level of
carbohydrate restriction required to see significant accumulation of ketones. So
I don't see it as black and white.

Gluconeogenesis is more than adequate to supply obligatory glucose needs. How
else would you explain the aboriginal hunting and fishing cultures (e.g., Inuit
of the Arctic and First Nations groups in Canada) who survived for millennia
with little if any identifiable dietary carbohydrate intake? I guess I'm not quite understanding the point of it all.

DR. RICHARD FEINMAN

There is a continuum of ketosis. In fact, one of the features of ketone bodies is that, unlike other fuels, glucose and fatty acids, they can be present in plasma over a wide range of concentrations. What is true is that Ketostix measure ketonuria which may or may not give you an accurate view of plasma ketone bodies. If ketone bodies are used as fast as they are made, you may never see ketosis. Also, I personally think there may be more aspecs of normal ketone body metabolism than we know about now. There is the idea, for example that glial cells may supply ketones as fuel for neurons:

Guzman M, Blazquez C. Ketone body synthesis in the brain: possible neuroprotective effects. Prostaglandins Leukot Essent Fatty Acids 2004;70(3):287-92.

Ketone bodies make an important contribution to brain energy production and biosynthetic processes when glucose becomes scarce. Although it is generally assumed that the liver supplies the brain with ketone bodies, recent evidence shows that cultured astrocytes are also ketogenic cells. These findings support the notion that ketone bodies produced by astrocytes may be used in situ as substrates for neuronal metabolism, and raise the possibility that astrocyte ketogenesis is a neuroprotective pathway.

This theory from Mr. Fred seems to assume that ketosis is somehow foreign or not part of normal metabolism. It is true that it may take some time to adapt to it but there is no reason to assume that it is inherently undesirable. Human evolution probably had a lot of starvation. The function of ketone bodies is to keep gluconeogenesis from having to supply all necessary glucose because it can be a drain on body protein.

I don't think gluconeogenesis fails. There is just some period of adaptation. If there is evidence for Mr. Fred's theory, then I would be interested. Practically, it may feel better to adapt to low-carb slowly--I think it depends on how much carbs you start out with--but the idea you can be on very low-carb and not be in ketosis has to be tested. I personally doubt it but I don't know.

Ketone body production is under the control of many factors: glucose, insulin, fatty acids, level of oxidative metabolism, etc. I think there is also a time factor. Many people eat one meal a day, are quite happy with it and they may be in ketosis at some point during the day. So, it may be useful for some people to get into low-carb slowly but I don't react well when somebody tells me didactically the proper way to eat. "Proper" usually means the way they do it.

CASSANDRA FORSYTHE

I don't agree with this man at all. Your body still produces ketones from all the extra dietary fat, and it gets better at doing that and using the ketones as time goes on. In our work at the University of Connecticut, with three months of following a weight loss ketogenic diet all subjects had a decline in urinary ketones over time even though they were eating the same foods and had the same caloric restriction.

What's happening is that the body is getting better at taking up the ketones--maybe ketone receptor unregulation. Also, they all still had ketones in their blood after three months and this was higher than baseline and much higher than those following a low-fat diet. Your body does not have enough metabolic machinery to produce enough of it's own glucose to support all organs (i.e. your heart).

Yes, it's true gluconeogenesis goes up, but most organs don't use it anyway. That's why blood glucose tends to drift up over time.

Now that the experts have weighed in on Charles Fred's hypothesis, why not share YOUR thoughts based on your own experience following a low-carb diet. Did you ease into livin' la vida low-carb and have excellent results doing it that way? Or did you do like most of us did, myself included, and go from a high-carb to a low-carb diet overnight? Did you see measurable results doing it that way despite having some temporary unpleasantness? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Special thanks to all the experts I quoted in this post for sharing their knowledge about this subject of ketosis. On behalf of me and my readers, THANKS SO MUCH! :)

Long-Term Weight Loss Success: Does It Take Willpower Or Something Else?

People assume you've got "willpower" if you lose weight

A fiery conversation has ensued over at Regina Wilshire's "Weight Of The Evidence" blog over a topic dealing with a very important aspect of livin' la vida low-carb that I think warrants your attention. Her blog post entitled "What if Willpower Matters Little in the Long-Term for Weight?" has the comments coming in by the droves and I highly encourage you to leave yours as well.

The main point of the discussion is not over how to best bring about weight loss success, but rather how do you KEEP that weight off once it's gone. The subject of willpower that individuals possess within themselves has been theorized as a reason for those few who are able to keep the weight off. But my opinion is it has nothing to do with willpower at all. More about that in a moment.

Regina says too often we focus on weight loss while practically ignoring the more important aspect of maintaining weight loss.

"Weight loss isn't the problem - keeping the weight off afterward is the really critical issue that we continue to fail to address in a meaningful way to actually see long-term results."

Absolutely, this is the critical aspect of a weight management program that most people who are overweight or obese NEVER think about. Unless you are prepared to know how you will live AFTER the weight loss has subsided, then you cannot possibly be ready when the times comes to start maintaining. So choosing a plan that will not just work for weight loss, but also one that has proven to keep the weight off is ESSENTIAL to this diet debate.

This is why you will often hear me talk about finding a proven healthy plan that will work for you, follow that plan exactly as prescribed by the author, and then KEEP doing that plan for the rest of your life. This kind of perserverance pays BIG dividends over the long-term and explains how I've been able to maintain my 180-pound weight loss over the LONG-TERM! And we'll be doing it for many more years to come by sticking with livin' la vida low-carb for life!

Here was my comment at Regina's blog about her post:

Outstanding topic, Regina! As someone who has lost 170 pounds and gained it back in four months and several years later lost 180 pounds and kept it off for three years plus, I'm happy to weigh in on this issue. And I certainly agree that weight loss is NOT the problem with obesity in the United States. Instead, it's weight maintenance and how to help people better manage their weight once it comes off that should be the focus.

For me, the process of figuring out this thing for myself began back in 1999 when I lost 170 pounds on a low-fat (nearly ZERO fat), high-carb diet. Sure, I lost a ton of weight in about 9 months and looked fabulous. There was only one problem--I was HUNGRY, IRRITABLE and DOWNRIGHT NASTY to be around. It should have come as no surprise to anyone that I rebelled against feeling that way and started eating like gangbusters again--and the weight poured back on.

So when I was ready to give weight loss another try in 2004, I knew ahead of time that I needed to implore a different strategy for dealing with my morbid obesity which had me at 410 pounds. If I was going to successfully lose weight, then I needed to find a plan that would work for me once the weight loss ended. Low-fat diets had already proven they were not sustainable long-term for me, so those were off the table right away. After searching and searching for what to do, I decided to read Dr. Atkins' New Diet Revolution.

Reading the book from cover to cover, I embarked on what I would hope to be a permanent and healthy lifestyle change beginning on January 1, 2004. It was scary at first since the nutritional advice shared by Dr. Atkins went against everything I ever knew about diet and health, but I trusted this cardiologist knew what he was talking about.

It didn't take long for me to experience phenomenal results--30 pounds lost in month one, 40 more in month two, and 100 pounds lost in the first ten weeks! WOW! Screw what anyone says about this diet--IT WORKS and VERY VERY WELL!

And the rest is history...I went on to lose 180 pounds that year, dropped over 20 inches from my waist, went from 5XL shirts to XL, and came completely off my prescriptions for high cholesterol, high blood pressure, and breathing problems. I was thin and healthy for the first time in my life, but I knew the REAL test had only just begun. Could I KEEP the weight off now by continuing to eat this way?

Well, here it is 2008--four years since I began this journey to better health and the weight has STAYED OFF! WOO HOO! People always automatically assume that I have some great willpower or something and I just have to laugh at this. My mantra back to them is this--weight loss doesn't take willpower, but a steadfast resolve to make better choices.

That's the bottom line for me when it comes to long-term success. If you had enough willpower to resist food during your weight loss, then how the heck did you get to become overweight or obese to begin with? Where was your willpower then, hmmm? No, it doesn't take willpower to resist temptation, but rather a constant, conscious effort to always try to choose wisely for the sake of your health. Doing that will put you in a better position to maintain weight loss for many years to come. Or at least it has for me.

I recently did an entire podcast show on this topic about why diets fail most people and what can be done to make you more likely to be successful than not. I think this is a topic well worth pursuing further and I'm happy to see the great Regina Wilshire being the one to bring it up. FANTASTIC WORK as always, Regina! KEEP IT UP!!!

Please leave your comments at Regina's blog post too and get in on a very active discussion. Share your thoughts about what it takes to bring about long-term weight loss success. Does diet have ANYTHING to do with it or is it simply behavioral and about some inner strength called willpower? Of the people you know who have lost weight and kept it off, what's their secret? This is a topic that low-fat, low-carb, vegetarians, and everyone else purporting to be about resolving obesity should be interested in discussing.

Blog-Tag Revelations About Me, Myself, And I

Oh the crazy games we play online to entertain ourselves! Such is life in the fast lane of the World Wide Web. But it's cool because sometimes you need a respite from the day-to-day to slow you down and cause you to reflect for a moment.

That's what my friend and fellow blogger Regina Wilshire from the "Weight Of The Evidence" blog did when she tagged me this week in a game of "blog-tag." Gee, thanks Regina! :-~

If you've been reading my blog for a while, then you know I was tagged back in December 2006 and responded already. But apparently I'm required to do it again after six month has elapsed. Hmmm, didn't read that anywhere in the blogging handbook! :D

Actually, several of my readers had "tagged" me in recent weeks, so I suppose I should at least do it again. If you are unfamiliar with blog-tag, then let me explain it in a nutshell: You tell 8 interesting and peculiar things about yourself that your readers probably wouldn't know and then you "tag" 8 of your fellow blogger friends to do the same. Easy peasy!

So here goes my latest list of "blog-tag" revelations about me, myself, and I:

1. I despise driving in unfamiliar places and easily get lost.

Yep, if I've never been to a place before, then it doesn't take much for me to become frazzled when I get off the beaten path. For example, on our trip back from Indiana earlier this week, we were driving through Louisville and I missed an exit to the interstate we needed to be on. I ended up getting off on an exit in downtown Louisville, stopping in at a Kroger to ask for directions (something else I don't mind doing!), and still struggling to find my way. Good thing my iPhone has directions or we may still be driving around Louisville today! And don't even get me started on how inaccurate those Mapquest directions are. UGH! :)

2. I have to use the restroom--A LOT!

This is a problem I've had since I was a kid. My mom even took me to a pediatrician when I was 10 because I'd have these sudden urges to go when we were at the movies, the fair, or anywhere else in public. He said there was nothing wrong with me. As I've gotten older, the problem has not changed. I still go about 15-20 times a day on average. I've been to the urologist twice in the past five years and even had a cystoscopy to see if there's anything wrong "up in there." Nope! My PSA is 0.9, so I don't have prostate cancer...it's just something that is uniquely me I guess.

3. I sleep with lots of pillows.

I didn't used to be this way, but in recent years I have found it very comfortable to sleep with a pillow between my legs and cradling one while laying my head on another. It's just so relaxing and rejuvenating to my body when I wake up in the morning if I do this. I can always tell the next day if I didn't have the benefit of the pillows because I will inevitably have a crick in my neck, my back will fell stiff and sore, and I won't feel rested. Give me my pillows and all will be well. ;)

4. When I go to the bathroom, I like to play Yahtzee.

My sister Beverly bought me a handheld electronic version of the popular dice game Yahtzee a few years ago for my birthday and I love that thing. It's a nice way to kill a few minutes of time while engaging in some necessary activities. As I previously noted, I go to the bathroom quite a bit during the day. So when nature calls for me to sit, I like to play my Yahtzee game. My best score ever was 714 with four Yahtzees. And, yes, in case you were wondering, everything did come out all right. 8-O

5. I can pop my toes, ankles, knuckles, and everything else.

Again, since I was a kid, I noticed my body cracked and popped quite easily at any movement. I first noticed it in my ankles and then my toes. Just moving them in a certain way would create an audible "POP" sound. I've since moved to popping my knuckles and even my neck from time to time. I'm aware this will likely bring on arthritis at an earlier age than I expected, but I've been doing this for too long now.

6. I can roll my belly.

You heard me right! While you can't see my stomach as well as you used to, I can still make a wave move up and down quite easily. I used to play the saxophone in middle and high school, so I built up a fairly strong set of stomach muscles. Those muscles are what allow me to create the "wave" effect on my belly. The kids get a big kick out of it and I've always had this ability.

7. I enjoy singing...really high!

Both Christine and I love to sing in our church choir. But one thing I like to do is mimic a high voice using my falsetto. In fact, when we're practicing a song with the choir, I'll sometimes sing with the sopranos because...well, because I can. It's fun to sing high, so obviously I'm a pretty big fan of The Bee Gees. "Hi-hi-hi-hi stayin' alive, stayin' alive, hi-hi-hi-hi stayin' aliiiiiiihiiiiiiive!" LOL! I may have to sing that on a podcast show sometime.

8. I have only owned Ford cars and Apple computers.

When I find a brand that I enjoy, then I am a very faithful and committed customer to that brand. Such is the case in my choice of cars and computers. Every single car I have every purchased has been a Ford so far--an 88 Ford Festiva, a 95 Ford Escort, and a 98 Ford Escort. My next vehicle will likely be another Ford--perhaps a Taurus. As for computers, I learned on an Apple Mac in my freshman year of college and LOVED IT! I've been hooked ever since. I wish I could afford to upgrade more often, but I just got my brand new iMac this week...my third Mac! In fact, even my cell phone was made by Apple--the new iPhone! They just make good quality products, IMHO!

So there you have it...some strange stuff about me! Now, who can I "tag" next to do the same? Hmmmm...OH, I know...

1. BamaGal
2. Breadless Mrs. B
3. Claire
4. Diet King
5. KathyJ
6. Deb Giordano
7. The Low-Carb Bandit
8. Kay and Kelley

I'm off the hook for now...YOUR TURN! :D

Try The $21 Low-Carb Diet Experiment

Low-carb is just too expensive for me. Eating this way is not reasonable for the average person on a budget, so I don't think it's a very feasible solution to my weight problem. Eating healthy will hit you in your wallet!

Have you ever felt this way? I know a few of you have because I've read your e-mails and comments at my blog about it. It's quite logical to believe that being poor can promote pudginess since most of the cheapest foods available in supermarkets today are high-carb, process junk products that don't belong in anyone's mouth. And yet they do.

Somebody recently told me that they have learned how to keep their weight and health under control by doing one thing: when they grocery shop, DON'T BUY WHAT FAT PEOPLE PUT IN THEIR CART! While that's funny, it's also a fact.

But obesity is not necessarily something that just impacts poor people--there are plenty of overweight rich people as well. In fact, the sign of a successful businessman in the past was a big belly.

The connection between weight and wealth is something that continues to interest the media as my fellow low-carb blogger Regina Wilshire points out in her latest post at her "Weight Of The Evidence" blog.

In the column she cited from the Los Angeles Times, the reporter cites a statistic where one million Americans have at their disposal a mere $21 per person for an entire week's worth of groceries. TWENTY-ONE BUCKS! That's it!

Of course, the journalist whined about how impossible it was for her to eat her vegetarian diet on just three dollars a day--the pro-rated daily percentage of the $155/month food stamps per person for somebody on welfare--unless she compromised and ate something she really shouldn't.

A few member of Congress joined in this effort, but Regina wanted to invite people who are livin' la vida low-carb to give it a try, too. Are you willing to try the $21 low-carb diet experiment with you and your family?

"What would be more important - satiety or nutrient-density; could I manage both?" Regina asked on her blog.

Making herself and her family a self-appointed guinea pig with this, Regina has decided to undertake this task of eating on just $3 a day for the next week to see how well she can feed herself, her husband, and that adorable little boy of hers.

"What compromises would I make in my diet to assure his diet was healthy?" she inquired.

Excited about the challenge, Regina has already bought her $63 worth of groceries--that's $21 per person in her family--and is rationing it all out this week to see if she can maintain her low-carb lifestyle on this super-skimpy budget. Remember, this is EXACTLY the amount of money one million Americans have at their disposal for food day in and day out.

Committing to do this for one week, Regina said she is going through this experience "to learn even more about nutrition and provide my readers with insights about how possible it is to maintain a controlled-carb diet while on a tight budget."

Do you think YOU are up to the challenge? If so, then Regina wants to hear from you. E-mail her with any photos or descriptions of how you plan to do this $21 low-carb diet experiment and she will include your struggles and victories in her blog post next week. You can also leave your comments in the post about this challenge throughout the week.

Unfortunately, my wife Christine (who recently started livin' la vida low-carb and is doing FANTASTIC!) and I will not be able to participate in this unique opportunity this week because we are going on vacation in the Smoky Mountains beginning on Tuesday through Saturday with prior plans for meals. However, we have both committed to eating on $42 worth of groceries for the week we get back...hoo boy, we can't wait! :D

If you dare try this, here are Regina's 7 simple rules:

1. The budget for food, all food, is limited to just $3.00 per person in our households each day ($21 per week, per person), so if you're single, you have $21....a couple has $42....each child adds $21. One major caveat - we cannot use anything during the week we already have in the house unless we deduct the cost of it from our budget - so if you're using chopped garlic in a jar already in your refrigerator, deduct the price from your budget for the week! Same goes for spices, cooking oils, and such since it's unlikely we'd have a stocked pantry if we were living life routinely on $21 a week per person!

2. We can shop for, prepare and cook whatever we want to eat, but cannot eat free food at business functions, meetings, work, or other places; but we can sample from tasting stations in grocery stores, and eat at parties we attend, hosted by friends or family (but not business functions!)

3. If you have a child in school, buying school lunch, the cost of the lunch is part of your budget....or you can pack their lunch for the week to buy more groceries. Or you can opt not to include your child in the budget and only do this yourself (and/or with your spouse).

4. We can eat out, but any cost to eat out must come from our $21 a week per person, so if we plan to eat out, we need to plan the cost and keep it within that amount when we do eat out. Friends and family cannot pay for us to eat out during the week, nor can the business expense account pick up the meal.

5. The budget does not include paper products, cleaning products, or non-food items available at grocery stores (lightbulbs, batteries, etc.); the budget does include alcohol, so shop wisely if you want a drink with dinner or use wine in cooking!

6. The budget does include condiments, spices, supplements, and anything you'd consume as part of your "diet," but does not include over-the-counter medications or prescription medications.

7. The challenge includes preparing and eating what you are able to purchase throughout the coming week, and any meals eaten out, since it's one thing to have to shop with a limited budget and another to live with it for a week.

So how about it? Anyone gonna do this? I'm anxious to see how it works for Regina and others who are brave enough to hop on the bandwagon and give it a go. When I return, you can bet I'll post the food I bought for $42 betwen the two of us along with meticulous details of how it went. Can it be done? A $21 low-carb diet?

We shall see, won't we?

Low-Carb Meetup In St. Louis On July 21st

Get ready, St. Louis, "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb Man" is coming!

I'm pleased to announce to fans of the "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb" blog that my wife Christine and I will be visiting the great city of St. Louis, Missouri on Saturday, July 21, 2007 at 12:00pm at the Ryan's Steakhouse located at 3579 Pennridge Drive in Bridgeton. If you live in or around this area, then you are cordially invited to come hang out with us and some special guests for a couple of hours.

We've never been to St. Louis before and know there are quite a few regular readers and podcast listeners from that area. I'll be happy to talk with you about the low-carb lifestyle and share my experiences over these past few years since beginning this amazing journey from morbidly obese to fabulously fit.

But I won't be the only blogger there. Check out who else may show up:

- Amy Dungan from the "Healthy Low-Carb Living" blog
- Regina Wilshire from the "Weight of the Evidence" blog
- Julia Havey from the "Take It Off with Julia" blog
- And anyone else who decides to drop in!

Mark your calendars now for this special "Livin' La Vida Low-Carb" meetup in St. Louis, MO on Saturday July 21, 2007 at noon! We're looking forward to visiting with you and would love to know in advance if you are coming. If you're planning on being there, then please drop me an e-mail at livinlowcarbman@charter.net.

Wilshires: Low-Carb Will Be An Accepted Nutritional Approach By 2040

Dr. Gil Wilshire and his wife Regina are strong low-carb leaders

It's been a long time coming, but I was able to interview two very special people in the low-carb community for my blog today--Dr. Gil Wilshire and his wife Regina Wilshire. These are two names that you will most definitely want to get to know a lot better if you haven't already heard about them yet.

In the battle for the hearts and minds of people nutritionally, both Gil and Regina have put themselves on the frontlines of the dietary debate explaining in clear, understandable language why people should be eating a more "nutrient dense" diet than they are right now.

Prepare to be encouraged if you are already a supporter of livin' la vida low-carb. And if you are skeptical about this way of eating and want to hear from two bona fide experts who really know their stuff, then you will benefit from the wisdom these two have to share with us today. ENJOY!

1. It is my great pleasure to welcome Dr. Gil Wilshire and his wife Regina Wilshire from the "Weight Of The Evidence" blog with us today. I had the pleasure of meeting this amazing couple in January 2006 and spent some time getting to know them a little better. Tell my readers a little bit about who you are and what got you so interested in the subject of nutritional science as it relates to controlled-carbohydrate diets.

GIL: In the late 1990s, I let my weight slowly creep up to over 350 pounds! In the process of my investigations into the plethora of weight loss options, I discovered the Atkins diet and gave it a try. As my weight melted off, I continued to delve deeper and deeper into the current state-of-the-art with regard to nutrition and metabolism. I became increasingly horrified at the total lack of true science that purportedly supports the current low-fat dogma that pervades both government policy and "big name" medical circles.

Regina and I are both peas in a pod with regard to our motivation to make advances in this field. Nutrient-dense diets (as we now prefer to call them) have vastly improved the quality of our lives, and we feel it is our duty to share our experiences and ongoing insights with the community at-large.

REGINA: First let me thank you for the opportunity to share our success with your readers. When I failed to lose the weight I needed to following a popular plan--Weight Watchers--I decided to give the Atkins diet a try and, to my surprise, it worked.

What I didn't understand was why it worked and with all the publicity about low-carb diets came many warnings of dire consequences--I realized if I was going to continue with controlled-carb, I needed to know it was not only a plan I could follow for the long-term, but a safe and healthy way to eat too.

So, I took those studies as a starting point to learn more about nutrition and metabolism to try to understand why a low-carb diet was more effective for me than the traditional calorie restricted or low-fat diets and to see if it might be harmful to me in the long-term. What I learned was that the diet was far superior to the current recommendations and that's why I've continued to eat this way since 2001--it's simply a better dietary approach for health.

2. In 2003, you created the Carbohydrate Awareness Council in response to the growing need to educate the public, doctors, and researchers about the positive role of carbohydrate restriction on health. What progress do you see has been made in bringing about change?

GIL: We're just plugging ahead, doing our part to advocate truly evidence-based nutritional policies. Although I cannot point out one particular success, I can say with confidence that we have shaped the framework and terminology that has been bantered about ever since we became visible in the national arena.

One contribution we have made (particularly from Regina's efforts) is from our promotion of the concept of "nutrient density." Nutrient-dense foodstuffs give the most bang-for-the-buck--that is, they supply the most amount of nutrition per calorie. They also give the most nutrition with the highest level of satiety. This allows fat loss without hunger...what a concept!!!

Carbohydrate-laden foods are all, generally, very nutrient deficient (yes, even whole grains), hence the concept of high-density creates a diet that is naturally low carb; the term "low carb" never has to be mentioned when one creates a nutrient-dense menu.

REGINA: Since January 2004 there have been four major conferences we've either hosted or sponsored as an organization along with a number of conferences where either I've presented or Gil has presented information to attendees. We've seen the greatest progress in education and understanding from within the medical and scientific communities.

Whether you're for or against low-carb diets, it's hard to miss that there has been a slow, but steady adoption of many key concepts that form the heart of carbohydrate restriction--nutrient density, more non-starchy vegetables in the diet, reducing refined grains, starches and sugars, less reliance on convenience foods and the importance of protein and healthy fats/oils.

3. Dr. Wilshire, in response to the low-fat/low-calorie diets that have long been held as the standard for a healthy lifestyle, you issued a very public challenge to the American Heart Association last summer to place a moratorium on all dietary recommendations until enough level 1 evidence could be produced to support such recommendations. What was the response to that challenge and do you foresee anything changing about nutritional advice coming from the AHA or our government in the future?

GIL: As I mentioned earlier, the major organizations now pretend that their advice IS based on Level 1 evidence. Unfortunately, most people (including the important science and health reporters) almost never read the full-text of these studies. Some might read just an abstract, but even then, biased researchers frequently draw illogical conclusions from their own data. It takes determination and a fairly good grasp of experimental design and statistics to really challenge these papers and committee opinions head-on.

Until recently, only Gary Taubes has had the chutzpah and intelligence to even attempt to mount a public challenge against the status quo in a public forum from a legitimate platform (as an investigative reporter at the New York Times). Late last year, Adam Campbell took on the ADA and their dietary recommendations in his Men's Health magazine column.

4. Regina, you certainly caused quite a stir last summer as well with your ambitious $1,000 challenge to anyone who could come up with a one-day menu that met all of the nutritional requirements set forth in the dietary recommendations of the AHA. How did that go?

REGINA: I kept my money; none of the menus, and I received hundreds of them, met the AHA guidelines within the challenge rules. The fact the American Heart Association didn't immediately issue sample menus to show their recommendations were easy to follow and met all micronutrient requirements, well, I think that speaks volumes--with all the professional resources they have on staff, even they could not complete a single day menu that met all micronutrient requirements within the lifestyle guidelines they issued.

On the other hand, I can whip out a carbohydrate restricted menu that meets or exceeds micronutrient requirements in less than 15 minutes. You cannot do that if you're following the AHA recommendations for "healthy eating." And if you try to follow their advice, you're likely to be deficient in essential nutrients.

5. The science behind livin' la vida low-carb is quite literally exploding behind the scenes, including this recent one confirming there are no long-term heart health issues when you eat low-carb. Over the next few years, we will be seeing some more spectacular evidence confirming what so many of us low-carbers already know--that this lifestyle change is a safe and effective way to lose weight and bring about vast improvements in various health ailments. What can supporters of low-carb do to help people within their spheres of influence better understand the ramifications of this research?

GIL: I am optimistic that continued grassroots efforts will eventually filter up. However, it may take an entire generation for the effects to become fully manifested. When the decision makers do not see the concept as strange or foreign, that's when we will see it adopted. This has happened all throughout human history. Just look at concepts like hand washing, sterile technique...even quantum physics. These were originally met with heavy resistance and even hostility. People hold on to failed concepts until they die. This is, unfortunately, human nature.

REGINA: Continue to report on studies and analyze the data from a perspective the average Jane or Joe can understand. Most studies are published to the audience expected to read it--other scientists. So many people either don't have the time or inclination to pick through the data to get to the truth. That's where we and others come in--we take the hard stuff and try to make it easier to digest by writing or talking about it in a way that anyone can understand.

6. Will we ever see the day in our lifetime when the low-carb approach will appear alongside the low-fat diet as a recommended way to shed the pounds and get healthy? Is it possible?

GIL: I think this will happen within 20-30 years. I believe textbooks in 2040 will refer to the low-fat craze of the late 20th century with some amusement. It will also be used as a classic example of the bad things that can happen when evidence-based medicine is not used to generate public policy.

REGINA: I personally don't see an either/or option in the future partly because of our fear of dietary fats--that will take generations to reverse the accepted conventional wisdom.

However, what I do see is a continued, gradual modification of the current guidelines toward carbohydrate restriction without acknowledging it as such with emphasis on acceptable terminology. It's already happening--the DASH diet is now offered with the option of less total carbohydrate, significantly less refined carbohydrate and more monounsaturated fats; the acceptance that protein in the diet offers powerful satiety and has a greater thermogenic effect in the metabolism; and the slow modification of language used to present the concepts of carbohydrate restriction as a valid approach such as found in the last issue of JAMA where we find the term "modified macronutrient diets" rather than low-fat or low-carb as the discussion point.

7. What are the biggest obstacles standing in the way of the public embracing the low-carb lifestyle? Even if we call it something besides "low-carb," what is hindering people from trying what very well could be the answer they have been looking for to treat their obesity and metabolic syndrome?

GIL: I think the biggest impediment is the continued support of the (expletive deleted) Food Pyramid by the government. The way that special interests influence public policy in this country is a shameful embarrassment.

REGINA: Scare tactics went a long way, as did the perpetuation of myths. As the evidence continues to mount, we now see a change of tactics against this nutritional approach. Now it's "well, no one wants to eat that way" or "who can do that long-term?" opinions steeped with deep disdain that ignores the evidence that shows significant risk factor improvements and weight loss with carbohydrate restriction.

8. Regina, you recently stumbled upon a new version of low-carb that incorporates a better ratio of omega-3s and omega-6s. Several people who have tried this Omega Diet have experienced great success, including myself. Do you have any more information to report about this plan, including additional weight loss success stories or confirmations about why it works so well?

REGINA: Well, it's not my version really--it's from the wealth of information from various researchers who've been talking about the effect of omega-3 fatty acids for years. In January 2006, I had the opportunity to actually spend enough time and ask way too many questions of [The Zone Diet author] Dr. Barry Sears, who graciously explained things in terms I understood.

With that information I set out to see how well I was doing with my diet and learned that even though I was eating controlled-carb, my ratio of omega-3 to omega-6 was still higher than the data shows is better for us. So I tweaked and tweaked and played around with the numbers until I was satisfied I'd be eating in a way that was still nutrient-dense and also had a better balance of omega-3 to omega-6.

9. I am just a layman when it comes to discussing the subject of low-carb living after my personal weight loss experience using this miraculous way of eating. Most of what I have learned about livin' la vida low-carb has been self-taught. How did you become so knowledgeable about low-carb? Do you think some people are too intimidated by the scientific jargon that they sometimes miss the message you are trying to convey?

GIL: It has been a long but interesting road to travel! We stand on the shoulders of giants. Drs. Mary Enig and Robert Atkins boosted us all up. We are taking the baton and moving ahead with the best evidence as it is being created. This field is always evolving, and we must always be keeping our collective eyes open for new articles and findings that continue to shed light on the dark edges of our current understanding.

REGINA: Gosh, it's now been five years since I started reading, learning, researching and asking questions of some of the brightest minds in science and medicine--and I still have more questions!

I don't think any one person can know it all--it really takes the collective effort of many to bring all the pieces together and then everyone helps each other from their base of knowledge and expertise while learning from those who know better than they along the way.

That's how I've learned as much as I have in the short time I have--I ask a lot of questions, seek out the experts for answers to those questions, confirm data or things I'm told. And when I understand something, I also have to be willing to share what I know with someone else who is asking a question and point them in the right direction to confirm what I'm saying.

10. THANKS again Dr. Wilshire and Regina for agreeing to be interviewed. I'm sure we will be hearing a lot more out of you in the coming years as low-carb makes a comeback in a big way. Do you have any parting comments that you would like to share with my readers about low-carb?

GIL: You are doing a GREAT JOB in your own way, Jimmy. Bless you and yours!

REGINA: Just keep doing what you're doing - our readers deserve to know what the latest evidence tells us and share what our experience teaches us.

You can learn more about this amazing couple and what they are doing to promote low-carb by visiting CarbAware.org or Regina's outstanding blog "Weight Of The Evidence."

Can Low-Carb Evolve Into Making You Fat?

Eight generations of caterpillars may prove low-carb is for naught

The opponents of livin' la vida low-carb are at it again and this time they've gone out of their way to be just about as absurd in their opposition as I've ever seen them when it comes to interpreting scientific research data in a way that attempts to discredit the Atkins/low-carb lifestyle as a healthy long-term option for weight loss and improved health.

This column in the Texas A&M University student newspaper The Battalion points out a recent study supposedly showing that future generations of caterpillars placed on a low-carb, high-protein diet eventually begin storing fat while the bodies of the ones put on a high-carb diet actually adapt to the increased carbohydrate intake.

Dr. Spencer Behmer, assistant professor of Insect Physiology from the Department of Entomology at Texas A&M University, in collaboration with researchers from Oxford University in the UK, The University of Sydney in Australia, and The University of Auckland in New Zealand, wanted to see what role diet would have on future generations of caterpillars in an attempt to extrapolate information that may be applicable to human beings in the future. Read the PubMed synopsis of this study by clicking here.

They split 400 Plutella xylostella caterpillars into two groups:

1. High-protein/low-carb diet
2. High-carb/low-protein diet

Each of the two sets of 200 caterpillars were provided with 100 blocks of "artificial food" comprising the specified macronutrient level for their particular group. Each of the groups were monitored for how they adapted to their surroundings while eight generations (equivalent to 160 human years) of the caterpillars were observed eating the food that was available to them.

"While one set of caterpillars lived on a South Beach or Atkins diet, the other 200 binged on a high calorie carbohydrate diet, like living on potato chips and Coca-Cola," Dr. Behmer explained.

Dr. Behmer and the other researchers fully expected the high-protein/low-carb diet group to lower their body fat and be skinny by the time the eighth generation of offspring had matured. But instead they noticed the bodies of the caterpillars in this group actually were able to use the limited amount of carbohydrates they did consume to begin storing fat reserves. Conversely, the caterpillars on the high-carb/low-protein diet experienced a change in their metabolism that actually adapted to the higher carbohydrate intake by not storing as much of it as fat.

All I have to say to this, Dr. Behmer, is SO WHAT?! Is this supposed to prove something that maybe I'm just not smart enough to figure out? A caterpillar eating a low-carb diet in a laboratory experiment cannot possibly be used to predict how humans will react to a being placed on a similar diet. Is that what you are saying?

That's exactly what he's saying!

"[Caterpillars and humans] share the same nutritional requirements," Dr. Behmer stated explaining the diet of caterpillars is close to humans because both eat protein, carbohydrates, and fat.

As a result, Dr. Behmer believes we can make the leap of faith that this study should also apply to humans and act accordingly. Basically what he is assuming is anyone who is livin' la vida low-carb right now will eventually see their great-great-great grandchildren beginning to GAIN weight on low-carb so long as they all continue eating that way. How ridiculous is that anyway?! Who expects their future bloodline to eat like they do today anyway?

But not so fast on the side-by-side comparison of caterpillars to humans says Dr. Jeff Volek, low-carb diet reearcher from the University of Connecticut. When I asked him to comment on the relevance to humans this study of caterpillars has, his response back to me was "you have to be joking."

"I look at rat data very cautiously because even with rodents there are so many differences in metabolism and limitations in generalizing to humans (even though its done all the time)," Dr. Volek remarked. "But caterpillars? As John Stossel would say 'give me a break'."

There was an even stronger reaction from noted low-carb diet research scientist Dr. Richard Feinman from SUNY Downstate In Brooklyn, New York and co-editor-in-chief of the scientific journal Nutrition & Metabolism. He adds a rather unique perspective to this conversation that brings a fresh sense of reality back into the discussion.

"Isn't the normal diet of caterpillars all high-carb and high cellulose at that? In other words, I thought they can actually live on fiber that, for humans, goes straight through our bodies. This seems like the worst model for human metabolism. On the other hand, I have not quite gotten over the fact that, late in life, I did not turn into the equivalent of a butterfly."

I think Dr. Feinman is a stand-up comic when he's not researching! :)

Fellow low-carb blogger Regina Wilshire (who I will be publishing an interview with along with her husband Dr. Gil Wilshire very soon) from the "Weight Of The Evidence" blog said "this article doesn't do [the study] justice."

"Dr. Behmer failed to say when the low-carb caterpillar group ate a diet high in carbohydrate again," Wilshire explained after looking at the full text of the study. "Just eating what they'd eaten for generations wasn't making them heavy, it was switching their diet back after generations to a higher carbohydrate load. It was the same with the high-carb caterpillar group which changed their diet and gained too. That's something that was conspicuously absent in the article as well."

Interestingly, Dr. Behmer does admit the high consumption of sugar and excessive starchy carbs that is typical of the Standard American Diet has led to the current obesity crisis in America. But he said there is a psychological component to human obesity that cannot be captured by the caterpillars.

"Obesity is not just a diet thing, it also affects an individual's activity," Dr. Behmer said. "For example, an obese person would rather drive than walk."

So, the fatter we get, the less apt we are to want to get enough exercise for our bodies to burn off the excess calories we are consuming. And the vicious cycle continues. I'm not sure what to think about this whole idea that several generations of family members doing low-carb over a period of time eventually makes the later generations obesity-resistant and inevitable to gain weight on a low-carb diet.

Even if it is 100 percent accurate, is it even realistic to think our ancestors who come after us would even eat the same way that we do. Not likely. Especially when they get in the rebellious teenage years. I can see it now: "No, mom, I'm not going to have that steak and salad supper, I'm going to Mickey D's for a Super Duper Big Mac, and a 1 gallon bucket of French fries followed by a keg of Coke. Take THAT with your low-carb diet!" LOL! It's too far-fetched to even think about.

The results of this study were published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science.

You can e-mail Dr. Spencer Behmer at s-behmer@tamu.edu.

Another Week's Worth Of My Low-Carb Menu

After the tremendous feedback I received from posting a week's worth of my actual menu from when I lost 6 1/2 pounds on Regina Wilshire's omega-focused low-carb plan, I decided that perhaps I should post another week's worth of my low-carb menu for you.

I did lost another 3 pounds last week for a total of 9.5 pounds lost in the first two weeks on this "tweak" of my low-carb lifestyle. I haven't lost this much weight over two weeks since the early days of my original 180-pound low-carb weight loss in 2004.

Okay, so what about this past week? Here's the menu of what I ate.

First of all, my supplement intake did NOT change at all:

3 teaspoons of liquid multivitamin (no iron)
1 brick men's multivitamin (no iron)
200mg Co Q-10
200mcg Chromium Picolinate
250mg Acetyl L-Carnitine
1 brick B Complex Vitamins
6 tablets Shaklee Super Calcium Magnesium Plus
2 caplets Fibercon
2 softgels 1000mg each Flax Oil
2 softgels 1000mg each Fish Oil Concentrate

I again drank about a gallon and a half of water daily along with Splenda-sweetened soft drinks. During this new omega diet I have strictly refused to drink anything that contains aspartame in it at all. Splenda only!

Here is my second week's menu and exercise routine:

MONDAY
8:00AM - Atkins Shake
8:30AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
4:15PM - 1 cup spinach greens/cheese w/Ranch, 8oz steak w/A-1
7:30PM - Sugar-free chocolate pudding w/heavy whipping cream
9:00PM - 2 Tablespoons walnuts, almonds

EXERCISE: 45 minutes elliptical

TUESDAY
8:15AM - Atkins Shake
10:45AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
1:15PM - 1 cup of almonds and walnuts
3:00PM - La Tortilla wrap w/turkey, cheese, mayo
8:15PM - Sugar-free chocolate pudding w/heavy whipping cream

EXERCISE: 45 minutes elliptical

WEDNESDAY
8:30AM - Atkins Shake
10:45AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
1:15PM - 1 cup of almonds and walnuts
3:00PM - La Tortilla wrap w/turkey, cheese, mayo
5:30PM - 5 eggs with cheese
9:00PM - Sugar-free raspberry pudding w/heavy whipping cream

EXERCISE: 40 minutes elliptical

THURSDAY
9:30AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
1:00PM - La Tortilla wrap w/turkey, cheese, mayo/raspberry pudding
3:15PM - 1 cup of almonds and walnuts
5:45PM - 1 cup spinach greens w/Ranch, 8oz steak w/A-1
7:45PM - Atkins Shake

EXERCISE: 30 minutes elliptical

FRIDAY
7:30AM - Atkins Shake
9:30AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
12:15PM - 2 hamburger patties with cheese, 1 hot dog, tomatoes, pickles, mayo, 1 1/2 cups salad greens w/Ranch dressing
6:45PM - 8oz grilled salmon, 2 cups salad greens w/Ranch

EXERCISE: 45 minutes elliptical

SATURDAY
9:00AM - Atkins Shake
12:00PM - Salad greens w/Ranch, 4 eggs, 3 sausage patties, 1 smoked sausage
8:15PM - 2 grilled chicken strips w/cheese, 1 cup spinach leaves w/Ranch

EXERCISE: 40 minutes elliptical

SUNDAY
9:30AM - Atkins Shake
3:30PM - 8oz steak w/A-1, 1/2lb turkey breast, 2 cups spinach leaves with eggs, cheese, sunflower seeds, pepperoni, Ranch dressing, 1/2 cup cantaloupe w/whipped cream

EXERCISE: None

As you can see, there were some changes from my previous week's menu. There were days when I had special occasions and events where I simply had to choose from the foods that were available to me. When that happens, you adjust your eating schedule to fit with those times.

You may also notice that I had some huge gaps between meals and even survived on just one meal like I did on Sunday. I'm trying to listen more to my body to see if I really need to eat or not. If I'm satisfied on the fat and protein I am consuming, then why do I need to eat? The answer is I don't, so I won't. This menu resulted in a 3-pound weight loss for me, so I am pleased.

I definitely increased my calories this week and my vegetable consumption as well. I added back a few more low-carb dessert options that I enjoy and increased my nut and egg intake substantially.

Questions or comments anyone?

Is There Anything Fishy About Taking Fish Oil?

Dr. Hotze eases your worries about taking fish oil supplements

Many of my readers have written to me thanking me for posting my menu from last week when I suddenly dropped 6.5 pounds on this new low-carb plan from low-carb blogging friend Regina Wilshire.

However, a few people have expressed concern over the safety of fish oil supplements. It seems that because there is a general fear created by the constant media accounts of harmful toxins including mercury and PCBs found in them, people are apprehensive about taking this important supplement to their diet.

But one man says the benefits far outweigh the alleged dangers.

Dr. Stephen F. Hotze, M.D. is the founder and lead doctor at the Houston, TX-based Hotze Health & Wellness Center. He's one of America's leading pioneers in alternative health treatment options and even wrote a book about some of his methodology called "Hormones, Health And Happiness."



It seems Dr. Hotze also has a blog to help educate people regarding their health. One of my faithful readers pointed me to this recent blog post entitled "Fish Oil: Helpful or Harmful? that Dr. Hotze wrote addressing the concerns about their safety.

What is his response to these concerns?

"The extreme health benefits of fish oils beat out the drastically low risk of toxins from consuming fish oil supplements," Dr. Hotze wrote at his blog, which included references to health journals backing up his assertion that fish oil is extremely healthy for people to consume.

Because of their high omega-3 essential fatty acids content, fish oil helps bring balance with the omega-6 fatty acids that are overconsumed in the United States. Dr. Hotze also noted that fish oils helps blood clotting, keeps your heartbeat from skipping and lowers triglycerides (WOO HOO!).

Regarding mercury levels in fish oil, Dr. Hotze pointed to a study that showed "negligible amounts" in the five samples and explained that most mercury is found in the fish tissue which is removed when they make fish oil. Additionally, Consumer Reports tested the top 16 brands of fish oil in the U.S. and there were "no significant amounts of PCBs, dioxins or mercury."

I have previously blogged about a study linking fish oil and exercise to weight loss and Dr. Hotze corroborates this information explaining that fish oil also helps burn excess nutrients in the body for energy which then leads to fat-burning and weight management. Also, fish oil cuts down on your cravings for food and increases seratonin levels for good brain health.

At the end of his post, Dr. Hotze assured people that taking fish oil supplements will provide more benefits to your body than harm.

"You can rest easy that your fish oil supplement is giving you wonderful health benefits without the worry of toxins, even if you are taking higher therapeutic doses of fish oil for certain health concerns," he concluded.

I think I'm gonna like reading more from Dr. Hotze. Be sure to keep an eye on the Dr. Hotze blog for more great information from a doctor who gets it!

On the subject of fish oil, Regina Wilshire also has some great tips for people wanting to know what kind to get. Here's her advice.

"I only recommend Carlson's brand for fish oils due to the rarely reported rancidity found in other brands," she said. "My first preference is liquid Fish Oil (not the cod liver oil - that's switched to later in the year as vitamin D from sunshine is limited/non-existent in most of the US); then my next option would be the concentrated fish oil capsules."

I've tried finding Carlson's fish oil in my area and just couldn't locate it anywhere. Regina said you may want to check your health food specialty stores and look for it to be refrigerated. It's a little more expensive, but is supposed to be the purest and freshest form of fish oil on the market.

Regarding the fish oil you see on pharmacy shelves, I've also previously blogged about Regina's concern that those have gone rancid and do you no good as a supplement.

"If you're using the capsules you have to be aware of signs of rancidity -- fishy burps or weird tasting burps after taking them (and it could be hours later). That's a sign that the capsules are bad."

Regina advises that if you are going to get fish oil, make sure it is kept refrigerated to "prevent spoiling" and it is definitely worth throwing them away if the expiration date has passed.

Those are some EXCELLENT words of advice from both Dr. Hotze and Regina Wilshire regarding fish oil supplements. Does anyone else have any experience or knowledge about fish oil that was not already shared? Click on the comment link below.

9-7-06 UPDATE: One of my readers e-mailed me with her experience with fish oil.

This is purely anecdotal, but I've noticed that when I use generic fish oil, my ears ring. I had never had the problem before I started doing Atkins, and it took me a while to figure out what caused it. I also noticed that when I ate canned tuna, my ears would start ringing even more noticeably a few hours afterward.

About a year ago I started using Nordic Naturals Omega supplements, which are independently tested for freshness and purity. After about half a year, the low grade ringing in my ears stopped. It will come back if I eat too much fish, but otherwise the problem is solved. Unfortunately Nordic Naturals costs much much more than fish oil capsules from Sam's.

Again, this is only anecdotal, but it does seem to indicate that people need to pay attention to what their bodies tell them when they take fish oil supplements. It's possible that not all fish oil supplements are created equal, and some of them may cause harm as well as good.

I've not had ringing in the ears yet, but that's an interesting side effect to taking conventional fish oil. Anyone else?

9-8-06 UPDATE: One of my knowledgeable readers provided information about where you can get the Carlson's fish oil that Regina Wilshire recommends.

You can order Carlson's Fish and Cod Liver oil from Vitamin Shoppe. You can call them toll-free at 800-223-1216 or visit their web site at vitaminshoppe.com.

A Week's Worth Of My Actual Low-Carb Menu

One of the funniest questions I get from people who first discover that I'm on the low-carb lifestyle is "What do you eat?" My smart alleck response that is only said in my mind is, "Food, ya idiot!" But I'm much more civilized than that and generally respond with a sampling of what I have eaten for that day.

So, with my 6 1/2 pound weight loss last week on this new twist on low-carb living from Regina Wilshire, people are asking what I did differently to lose so much in one week. As a service to you and to possibly help you get some ideas about what to eat on your low-carb lifestyle, I will list a sample one-week menu that I ate last week to lose the weight.

Before I get into the foods I ate, here are my supplements:

3 teaspoons of liquid multivitamin (no iron)
1 brick men's multivitamin (no iron)
200mg Co Q-10
200mcg Chromium Picolinate
250mg Acetyl L-Carnitine
1 brick B Complex Vitamins
6 tablets Shaklee Super Calcium Magnesium Plus
2 caplets Fibercon
2 softgels 1000mg each Flax Oil
2 softgels 1000mg each Fish Oil Concentrate

As for what I drank, I had liberal amounts of water and Splenda-sweetened soft drinks. The water intake was right around a gallon and a half a day and I averaged about 6-8 cans of diet soda daily as well.

Now, without further wait, here is my menu and exercise routine:

MONDAY
7:45AM - Atkins Shake
10:00AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
1:00PM - La Tortilla wrap with turkey, cheese and mayo
3:00PM - 1/3 cup of almonds and walnuts
5:30PM - 8oz steak w/A-1, 1/3 cup spinach leaves w/avocado oil
8:30PM - Heavy whipping cream w/DaVinci Syrup

EXERCISE: 35 minutes walking

TUESDAY
7:45AM - Atkins Shake
10:45AM - 3 eggs, salad greens w/Ranch, 2 tbsps walnuts
1:00PM - La Tortilla wrap w/turkey, ham, roast beef, cheese, mayo
3:00PM - 1/2 cup of almonds and walnuts
5:45PM - 8oz steak w/A-1, 1/3 cup spinach leaves w/avocado oil
8:15PM - Heavy whipping cream w/DaVinci Syrup

EXERCISE: 30 minutes elliptical

WEDNESDAY
7:45AM - Atkins Shake
9:45AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
12:15PM - La Tortilla wrap w/roast beef, ham, cheese, mayo
3:00PM - 2/3 cup of almonds and walnuts
5:30PM - Grilled chicken w/cheese, 3/4 cup spinach leaves, Ranch
9:00PM - Heavy whipping cream w/DaVinci Syrup

EXERCISE: 30 minutes elliptical

THURSDAY
8:45AM - Atkins Shake
9:30AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
2:00PM - 10oz steak w/A-1, 6oz BBQ no sauce, salad greens with eggs, cheese, sunflower seeds, pepperoni, Ranch, 1 bite of sugar-free pudding and 1 swallow of Coca-Cola (I accidentally sipped my wife's drink! UGH!)

EXERCISE: 30 minutes elliptical, 45 minutes volleyball

FRIDAY
9:30AM - Atkins Shake
10:45AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
1:00PM - 1/4 cup of almonds and walnuts
3:00PM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
9:00PM - 8oz steak w/A-1, 3 eggs, salad greens w/Ranch

EXERCISE: 45 minutes elliptical

SATURDAY
9:30AM - Atkins Shake
11:15AM - 4 organic eggs with cheese
3:30PM - Salad greens w/Ranch, 3 eggs, 3 sausage patties, 1 smoked sausage
8:15PM - Heavy whipping cream w/DaVinci Syrup

EXERCISE: 50 minutes elliptical

SUNDAY
6:30AM - Atkins Shake
8:30AM - 4 eggs with cheese
12:00PM - 3 eggs, salad w/Ranch, 8oz steak w/A-1
8:15PM - 4 organic eggs with cheese

EXERCISE: 45 minutes elliptical

Well, whaddya think? Isn't this doable? I think it's AWESOME!

9-6-06 UPDATE: One of my regular readers was appreciative that I posted my menu from this past week online and had a few excellent questions for me:

“Jimmy, thanks for posting your menus. How different is this week’s menus different from the previous weeks?"

To be honest, not a whole lot.

"How specifically did you incorporate Regina’s tweaks aside from organic eggs and fish oil?”

There were some specific changes I made, including CUTTING OUT ALL ASPARTAME AND MALTITOL products (I still had Splenda-based ones, though!), switched to eating SOME organic eggs and meats, drinking ONE Atkins shake a day, and including those supplements that Regina recommended I start taking. Other than that, the rest is what I've been doing.

Anyone else have any questions?

Low-Carb Tweak Makes 6.5-Pound Weight Loss Week

My weight loss MORE THAN DOUBLED this week on "30-In-30"

After seeing modest weight loss during the first month of my "30-In-30" Low-Carb Weight Loss Challenge which began on August 1, 2006, I tried something a little different from what I was doing to see if it would result in greater and faster weight loss. The results were nothing short of a miracle--6 1/2 POUNDS LOST IN ONE WEEK! WOWsers!

When I was losing weight on the Atkins diet back in 2004 starting off at 410 pounds, I regularly had weeks when I lost 6-10 pounds early on. But I had a lot to lose and it stood to reason that would happen. But this weight loss over the last week is much more significant because I've been low-carbing for nearly three years and haven't seen a jump like this happen at all. It's as if I released something inside of me that had been dying to get out and now it is free.

Just in case you are wondering, it's not counting calories (UGH!) or eating smaller portions, less fat or any of that other complete and utter nonsense that people try to tell you is the "secret" to losing weight.

In fact, do you wanna know what my average daily caloric intake was this past week? Would you believe it was 2350 a day?! My fat intake was 69 percent, protein was at 28 percent , and carbs at just 3 percent. How can this be with such a large weight loss in one week? I'm sure this will baffle all those low-fat/low-calorie/portion-control advocates out there for a very long time.

But I'm not done with this little experiment which I still can't tell you about yet. I'm going to keep going with it to see if the result I got this week will continue. If they do on my way down to 210 pounds, then you will hear about it in due time. Patience, my friends, patience.

The good thing is the scale is moving rapidly again and I'm enjoying the ride. Won't you join me on this challenge? Come visit the "30-In-30" blog!

BY THE WAY, don't forget about tonight's LIVE online chat at WeightLossBuddy.com starting at 8PM EST. SEE YA THERE!

9-5-06 UPDATE: Okay, no more secrets! CLICK HERE to read about how my weight loss got kicked into high gear this week. You are encouraged to try it, too, to see if it works for you. I'd love to hear your experience after trying it for a week. Let me know at livinlowcarbman@charter.net.