Gluten. Dairy. Sugar.

Yes, after 30,000 years, suddenly gluten, dairy, and sugar are poisonous to humans. Makes perfect sense.:huh:

Well, I can see why milk would be a problem.

Studies have shown less then 40% of people retain the ability to digest milk properly once they grow up. No other animal out there drinks milk after becoming an adult. So though it is delicious and has benefits. It is not exactly natural.

Sugar was not in our original diets the way it is today, aside from fruits and the little found in vegetables. So again, it is not something natural in our diets.

And gluten...no clue. Cause I am still looking into that since I may have that intolerance myself it turns out.

**Meanwhile, in my fortress of evil**

I'm glad you've had success but the weight loss isn't purely because you cut those three things. It's because by eliminating those things from your diet, you created a calorie deficit. I wish you the best but have no intention of ever giving up these things. Especially the dairy...ice cream.... Also, 30 lbs in 2 months seems ridiculous and not healthy for most people, so...

Not always true. I cut those same things, and replaced it with other whole food calories. I did NOT create a larger calorie deficit. And I'm losing weight...

These threads boil my blood b/c there are so few people out there who give inflammation reduction any credit for weight loss. I had one HELL of a deficit going - eating 1500 calories a day, watching macros, working out a minimum of an hour a day, strength training.. I can count on ONE HAND the number of pounds I lost in TWO YEARS doing that. I cut gluten, I cut sugar and I cut dairy and 55 lbs fell off in a matter of 8 months. Fast forward to the holidays, reintroduce dairy, sugar and gluten, 26 lbs climb onto my frame in only 2 months, counting out the same number of calories and working out just as much as I did when the 55 lbs fell off. Fast forward again to January 6, when I again cut gluten, dairy and sugar... 9 lbs gone in a month. Same 2000 calorie diet. Same run schedule. Nothing changed but the food...

If all else stays the same, calorie deficit, workouts, sleep, etc, with only changing the types of food I put in my body, and the weight falls off, I'm inclined to believe it's the type of food that matters.

Your diary shows you eating between 1200 and 1400 calories. Not 2000 calories. And missed days logging.

You are losing weight because you have a significant deficit going on the days that you logged. Your habit on not logging regularly is probably what got you during the holidays, not because you decided to eat (too much) of foods with gluten, dairy and sugar in them.

Yes, the last two days I have eaten less - just not hungry. Check back to last week.

I use a notebook to log my foods. I enter them here when I have time...

Additionally, I am METICULOUS about weighing, measuring and reporting even SPICES in my recipes. You don't know JACK about what I do or how I log so how can you make these claims?

If you are going to make exorbitant claims, be prepared to back them up. I went back in your diary a ways. You seemed to have stopped logging altogether until Jan 22nd, where at first you were somewhere in the neighborhood of 1700 to 2000 cals. A few days of that, and now you are at 1200 to 1400 (with all of those being your EXPECTED ranges - you keep twiddling with your expected intake - why is that?). If you really were just 'not hungry' then you should show a much larger deficit, since according to you, your target is 2000. But that is not what your diary shows. I think you went back to logging after the holidays and the weight wasn't coming off as planned, so now you have dropped your calories. It is disingenuous to claim you are losing on 2000 calories when your OWN data does not support that.

I was not able to drop much weight until I quit these three evils. Then it came off fast, and without even exercising.
30 lbs in two months, bam, gone!
After years of struggling and sweating and counting calories, only this was truly effective.
Have kept it off 6 months now too, it is not coming back. Try it.

great! so while cutting out these items that can add alot of additional calories to the day, you were able to be in a deficit, and lose weight! thats great! i lose weight eating all these things, just in moderation, but, whatever works for you! congrats!

In...

...late, but in.

50 years ago smoking was good for you
100 years ago cocaine was a cough medicine,
100 years ago TB had an astronomical mortality rate.

right now we don't KNOW anything, but we have no hard scientific proof that food is good or bad for us intrinsically. The wheat you eat today is not the wheat your grandparents ate, and the milk you drink today has been exposed to stuff that didn't exist 50 years ago. There is a lot of stuff I don't know, I go with what works for me, when my doc tells me my blood pressure is down and things look great I know I am on the right track. It would sure be nice if we could allow everyone to express themselves, I hope we can trust that people can filter out the good from the bad.

Cigarettes, cocaine and TB are not evil either. None of them are intentionally malevolent. YOu choose to pick up a cigarette and smoke it and to snort cocaine. TB is a disease but it's just a byproduct of human weakness to that disease process, not an intention to do harm.

The word evil was not used in that post.

What I was implying is that we may in fact find out that gluten sugar and dairy are in fact poison ( they aren't as far as I know) but I am suggesting people (probably myself included) are prone to "knowing" things. When really all we really know is what works for us, which is exactly what the OP stated.

Yes, after 30,000 years, suddenly gluten, dairy, and sugar are poisonous to humans. Makes perfect sense.:huh:

30,000 years ago man was eating einkorn which is a natural wheat grain that had a bare fraction of the gluten that exists in our wheat today, the gluten levels in todays wheat spiked after the late 60s when we started intensive cross breeding programs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug here was the man resonsible.

sugars were natural prior to the industrial age and the average population only got a fraction of what they get now. Mostly from honey, which at the time was not homogenized. Some suggest that natural honey is a super food, I have no idea.

And milk is different now as well. We don't have to go milk cows to get it, we get it by the gallons. When taking into account the volume of milk drank now, and potential hazards to the milk in process. ( as I stated above I don't know anything about the actually content) but I do know how we use milk has changed.

No I do not think that anything is completely bad, but I am not willing to suggest that everything is completely harmless.

Diabetes and obesity are on the rise, we wouldn't be on this sight if foods we ate did not have the ability to hurt us. While I will NOT dismiss our complicity in the rise of these conditions among others. I am not willing to dismiss that the changing nature of the food itself and how we use it, may have changed its beneficial and harmful effects on the population.

Diabetes and obesity are on the rise, we wouldn't be on this sight if foods we ate did not have the ability to hurt us. While I will NOT dismiss our complicity in the rise of these conditions among others. I am not willing to dismiss that the changing nature of the food itself and how we use it, may have changed its beneficial and harmful effects on the population.

Because humans are much more sedentary and eating is considered a hobby and social activity.

and you, as a doctorate who has done trials and lengthy study are absolutely sure that this is the only possible answer, no doubt, no spectulation, your just certain?

good on you, omnipotence has arrived

Diabetes and obesity are on the rise, we wouldn't be on this sight if foods we ate did not have the ability to hurt us. While I will NOT dismiss our complicity in the rise of these conditions among others. I am not willing to dismiss that the changing nature of the food itself and how we use it, may have changed its beneficial and harmful effects on the population.

Because humans are much more sedentary and eating is considered a hobby and social activity.

and you, as a doctorate who has done trials and lengthy study are absolutely sure that this is the only possible answer, no doubt, no spectulation, your just certain?

good on you, omnipotence has arrived

Didn't you just say you would not dismiss our complicity in the rise of these conditions?

btw: skittles are not evil.

well... they came out with a limited edition seahawks bag this week, so they're a little bit evil.

btw: skittles are not evil.

well... they came out with a limited edition seahawks bag this week, so they're a little bit evil.

I heard when you open the bag, all the Skittles fall on the floor and the bag yells "DON'T OPEN YOUR MOUTH OR I'LL SHUT IT FOR YOU! DON'T EVER TALK ABOUT ME. LEGION OF BOOM"

btw: skittles are not evil.

well... they came out with a limited edition seahawks bag this week, so they're a little bit evil.

The green apples ones are evil. BRING BACK LIME SKITTLES.