One of you mentioned a book--help? :)

elly1979

In a recent thread, one of you mentioned a BOOK that put all the em2wl stuff into perspective for you (no, not new rules). I feel like it had science in e title, or steven as an author?

Ring any bells? Maybe it was jyska who mentioned it. i would really love to read this if anyone gets a ding ding in the head over what this is

Thank you!

MeDoula

No idea but I want to know too.

mommamuscles

My must read list:
New Rules of Lifting for Women
Lean and Hard
The Smarter Science of Slim
The Eat Clean Diet (ignore diet plans)

KarinFit4Life

Burn the fat feed the muscle? By Tom Venuto?

crystalwelshroberts

I think jyska recommended The Smarter Science of Slim in a thread recently... Or someone recently recommended it because I thought, 'oh I'll get that' but haven't yet

Zylayna

I know jyska recommended The Smarter Science of Slim in a thread recently...

Actually, that wasn't me....I'm trying to remember just exactly who did.....eek...my brain is in TOM mode and I can't remember...
The one I read recently was Leigh Peele's "The Metabolic Reset Manual". However, I didn't necessarily recommend it....the method she uses is different than EM2WL's version (not necessarily wrong...just different). It does provide another resource though for those just trying to glean as much information as possible on the subject.

LaurnWhit

I read Ultrametabolism and it said the WHO wrote the women starve under 1800 calories a day but I cant find it on the WHO website... good book...bought it at Goodwill for $2!

zukkiz

Someone mentioned a book, and someone else thought they meant a book that was about EM2WL. She was actually referring to the New Rules book.

watergirl626

I read Ultrametabolism and it said the WHO wrote the women starve under 1800 calories a day but I cant find it on the WHO website... good book...bought it at Goodwill for $2!

Found the WHO report. ftp://ftp.fao.org/docrep/fao/007/y5686e/y5686e00.pdf

From section 5.3:

"The PAL values that can be sustained for a long period of time by free-living adult populations
range from about 1.40 to 2.40. This consultation agreed that a desirable PAL includes the regular
practice of physical activity at work or in spare time with an intensity and duration that will reduce the
risk of becoming overweight and developing a variety of non-communicable chronic diseases usually
associated as co-morbidities with obesity. As discussed in section 5.6, this corresponds to PAL values
of 1.75 and higher. On the other hand, a minimum “maintenance” energy requirement was not
defined, reaffirming the position of the previous expert consultation which stated that “any figure
chosen would reflect a value judgement on what levels of activity above the minimum for survival
could be appropriately included in the term “maintenance” (WHO, 1985)."

"Extremes of low and high PALs. Extremely low levels of energy expenditure allow for survival, but
they are not compatible with long-term health, moving around freely, or earning a living. Such levels
have been reported, for example, in elderly mental patients (Prentice et al., 1989), adolescents with
cerebral palsy or myelodysplasia (Bandini et al., 1991) and resting adults confined to a whole body
calorimeter (Ravussin et al., 1991; Schulz et al., 1992). The mean PAL of 1.21, which is similar to the
baseline energy need of 1.27 estimated in the 1985 report, is suggested for short-term survival of
totally inactive dependent people in conditions of crisis (WHO, 1985). The present consultation felt
that such a value is too low and should not be used in emergency relief programmes, as people are not
completely inactive in situations of crisis and the various stresses that impinge on them may increase
their energy demands. The consultation hence suggests that food supplies to satisfy a PAL of 1.40,
which represents the lower limit of the sedentary lifestyle range shown in Table 5.3, would be more
appropriate for short-term relief interventions."

The 1.4 PAL comes out to just over 1800 cals. So while they say they will not state a minimum so as not to offend anyone, they do say that for times of crisis, food supplies should be adequate to provide 1800 cals per day. the 1.27 they mention in the 1985 report for short-term survival comes out to 1638.

According to table 5.8, I should be eating around 2300-2500 cals per day depending on which multiplier I use. Explains why I continue to lose weight eating 2200/day.

elly1979

Thank you all!
It was the Science book. But some other goodies in here, too nice report, watergirl!

elly1979

The one I read recently was Leigh Peele's "The Metabolic Reset Manual". However, I didn't necessarily recommend it....the method she uses is different than EM2WL's version (not necessarily wrong...just different). It does provide another resource though for those just trying to glean as much information as possible on the subject.

I have the peele book. Part of what makes me question it & her methodology is she has *another* book, released about the same time, related to fatloss. It pretty much advocates a VLC diet [1200 rangeish]. Gives examples of clients who were eating more than they thought they were (e,g, 1600-1800), working out, but them eating over wasn't creating enough deficit for loss. I read it before finding this group, and it was disheartening!

Thank goodness for you all

Zylayna

The one I read recently was Leigh Peele's "The Metabolic Reset Manual". However, I didn't necessarily recommend it....the method she uses is different than EM2WL's version (not necessarily wrong...just different). It does provide another resource though for those just trying to glean as much information as possible on the subject.

I have the peele book. Part of what makes me question it & her methodology is she has *another* book, released about the same time, related to fatloss. It pretty much advocates a VLC diet [1200 rangeish]. Gives examples of clients who were eating more than they thought they were (e,g, 1600-1800), working out, but them eating over wasn't creating enough deficit for loss. I read it before finding this group, and it was disheartening!

Thank goodness for you all

Yes, and she also had her clients immediately drop back into a 35% deficit....:noway: Plus there are some findings out there that say she found many of the women had to do the reset twice.... I'm sticking with EM2WL that's for sure..

harlanJEN

Think that was me .

Smarter Science of Slim by Jonathan Bailor

LaurnWhit

Thank you watergirl!

danipals

I just finished reading The Smarter Science of Slim book and found it very interesting. I found it very disturbing when the author shared that companies such as Hershey and Coca-Cola have a place within organizations that are supposed to be telling us how to be healthy! I thought the book was well-written and full of good information. Basically he shares study after study that show that it is about the quality of food you eat over the quantity and that the calories in vs. calories out idea is a myth. He also suggests that the same quality vs quantity issue applies to exercise as well. After not losing even half a pound after training for a half marathon I have to say I think he has something there as well. The hardest thing for me is that he isn't low carb but is another no grain person. It is hard to alter my diet that much after all these years! Especially when trying to get in enough calories.