Blood sugar diet !
Options
Replies
-
People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways. The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake. I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own. I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.12
-
We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways.
I have had a profound, positive change in all those aspects myself, by getting in real information and thus being able to make overall better eating decisions. My sugar and carb intake is the same, but nutritional status is much better because my intake is more varied and balanced.The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake.
There are so many different diets. The main feature of this diet is the 800 calorie daily goal. Is that what you do? Why??I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own.
It's just that (and that tires me) we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy their health. We want people to succeed, to live happy and healthy lives. People who invent starvation diets just want other people's money.I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.6 -
kommodevaran wrote: »
We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways.
I have had a profound, positive change in all those aspects myself, by getting in real information and thus being able to make overall better eating decisions. My sugar and carb intake is the same, but nutritional status is much better because my intake is more varied and balanced.The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake.
There are so many different diets. The main feature of this diet is the 800 calorie daily goal. Is that what you do? Why??I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own.
It's just that (and that tires me) we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy their health. We want people to succeed, to live happy and healthy lives. People who invent starvation diets just want other people's money.I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.
Lowering carbs and sugar is NOT damaging to your health. Bring me some proof that it is damaging to lower carbs and sugar and I will then change my view.4 -
THAT was what you got out of my reply? Where did I say that?kommodevaran wrote: »
We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways.
I have had a profound, positive change in all those aspects myself, by getting in real information and thus being able to make overall better eating decisions. My sugar and carb intake is the same, but nutritional status is much better because my intake is more varied and balanced.The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake.
There are so many different diets. The main feature of this diet is the 800 calorie daily goal. Is that what you do? Why??I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own.
It's just that (and that tires me) we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy their health. We want people to succeed, to live happy and healthy lives. People who invent starvation diets just want other people's money.I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.
Lowering carbs and sugar is NOT damaging to your health. Bring me some proof that it is damaging to lower carbs and sugar and I will then change my view.7 -
Naysayers. Its only 800 calories for 8 weeks. Even the 8 weeks is a Mediterraneun diet which is very healthful. I have eaten better and more variety on this diet than any other. Any plan is better than the out of control plan (or no plan) I was on.
I have tried the Diabetes diet and other diets, but the plain truth is I can not lose weight while including starches as per these plans. I've been on so many diets, Dr recommended, Weight Watchers, Atkins, etc. I know what works for me and what doesn't.
I envy that you have enough time to troll sites and offer your negative comments because you feel its your way or no way. I don't have the time for that as I need to focus of my weight loss. You must assume the people on this thread (and diet) as not as well learned as you are and have not done their homework. Congratulations on your weight loss and health gains. That was your journey. Let us proceed with our journey without adding in guilt (which I can assure you we already have for letting ourselves become this heavy) and if you can't applaud our efforts to get healthier and slimmer, then leave us in peace.8 -
kommodevaran wrote: »
THAT was what you got out of my reply? Where did I say that?kommodevaran wrote: »
We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways.
I have had a profound, positive change in all those aspects myself, by getting in real information and thus being able to make overall better eating decisions. My sugar and carb intake is the same, but nutritional status is much better because my intake is more varied and balanced.The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake.
There are so many different diets. The main feature of this diet is the 800 calorie daily goal. Is that what you do? Why??I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own.
It's just that (and that tires me) we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy their health. We want people to succeed, to live happy and healthy lives. People who invent starvation diets just want other people's money.I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.
Lowering carbs and sugar is NOT damaging to your health. Bring me some proof that it is damaging to lower carbs and sugar and I will then change my view.
You are going on up there about CALORIES for one thing which I do not need to entertain because I never mentioned THAT. Second you said " we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy [sic] their health." What part of lowering carbs and sugar is going to destroy a person's health? I spoke strictly on carbs and sugar. You went down all these other rabbit trails that had about nothing to do with what I said. You even said that, "We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".
Tell me how a person with Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease gets that disease from "demonizing sugar". I am pretty sure the effects of a very high carb and sugar diet will come whether you "demonize sugar" or not. I am also sure diabetes, pre-diabetes, and heart disease also would be a potential danger to a person whether a person "demonize sugar" or not. If all we had to do to neutralize the ill effects of a high carb and sugar intake was to simply not
"demonize sugar" then this site would have a lot less people. I also did not speak on THIS BOOK but rather people coming out to ASSUME that "there is no need to limit your sugar unless you are diabetic." THAT is what I was speaking on. You brought up all these other points which I never attempted to make.
The fact is that not everyone came out of a cookie cutter. There are people who need to place limits on certain dietary component FOR. THEIR. HEALTH.10 -
Naysayers. Its only 800 calories for 8 weeks. Even the 8 weeks is a Mediterraneun diet which is very healthful. I have eaten better and more variety on this diet than any other. Any plan is better than the out of control plan (or no plan) I was on.
I have tried the Diabetes diet and other diets, but the plain truth is I can not lose weight while including starches as per these plans. I've been on so many diets, Dr recommended, Weight Watchers, Atkins, etc. I know what works for me and what doesn't.
I envy that you have enough time to troll sites and offer your negative comments because you feel its your way or no way. I don't have the time for that as I need to focus of my weight loss. You must assume the people on this thread (and diet) as not as well learned as you are and have not done their homework. Congratulations on your weight loss and health gains. That was your journey. Let us proceed with our journey without adding in guilt (which I can assure you we already have for letting ourselves become this heavy) and if you can't applaud our efforts to get healthier and slimmer, then leave us in peace.
You do know the minimum calorie allotment to meet your nutritional needs is 1200? Sorry if you think we are trolls but starving yourself for 8 weeks is really not the healthiest thing to do. If you are only eating 800 you are not eating better. I hope you don't get all the horrible side effects of starvation that can happen to your body from massively undereating. If you don't want to eat starches why not eat 1200 and not include starches. Not sure why this thread is not closed yet as MFP doesn't allow VLCD starvation diets to be discussed6 -
Wow, gotta love getting wooed for telling the truth. Not sure why people believe massively interesting and putting their health at risk is glamorous? Nutritional deficiencies are not cool.
Oh it's not the naysayers who have determined that 1200 is the minimum to meet all your nutritional needs.3 -
This is so sick and disturbed, and sadly enough, not even really out of the ordinary; no wonder the diet industry is a billion dollar business.Naysayers. Its only 800 calories for 8 weeks. Even the 8 weeks is a Mediterraneun diet which is very healthful. I have eaten better and more variety on this diet than any other. Any plan is better than the out of control plan (or no plan) I was on.
I have tried the Diabetes diet and other diets, but the plain truth is I can not lose weight while including starches as per these plans. I've been on so many diets, Dr recommended, Weight Watchers, Atkins, etc. I know what works for me and what doesn't.
I envy that you have enough time to troll sites and offer your negative comments because you feel its your way or no way. I don't have the time for that as I need to focus of my weight loss. You must assume the people on this thread (and diet) as not as well learned as you are and have not done their homework. Congratulations on your weight loss and health gains. That was your journey. Let us proceed with our journey without adding in guilt (which I can assure you we already have for letting ourselves become this heavy) and if you can't applaud our efforts to get healthier and slimmer, then leave us in peace.5 -
No I'm not as learned, smart, sucessful and other parameters you seem to have the time to measure as you, now am I. Are you hired by MFP to troll these sites and police others activities? Are you a scientist? Do you absolutely know what's best for everyone? Do you have control issues? Is there only one way to weight loss? Why not mind your own business and leave the participants on this site alone on their journey?
I've read the posts and the participants seem knowledgable of the path they've chosen, why must you try to force your views on others?4 -
RegardlessNaysayers. Its only 800 calories for 8 weeks. Even the 8 weeks is a Mediterraneun diet which is very healthful. I have eaten better and more variety on this diet than any other. Any plan is better than the out of control plan (or no plan) I was on.
I have tried the Diabetes diet and other diets, but the plain truth is I can not lose weight while including starches as per these plans. I've been on so many diets, Dr recommended, Weight Watchers, Atkins, etc. I know what works for me and what doesn't.
I envy that you have enough time to troll sites and offer your negative comments because you feel its your way or no way. I don't have the time for that as I need to focus of my weight loss. You must assume the people on this thread (and diet) as not as well learned as you are and have not done their homework. Congratulations on your weight loss and health gains. That was your journey. Let us proceed with our journey without adding in guilt (which I can assure you we already have for letting ourselves become this heavy) and if you can't applaud our efforts to get healthier and slimmer, then leave us in peace.
You're breaking site rules by promoting very low calorie diets.4 -
singingflutelady wrote: »Wow, gotta love getting wooed for telling the truth. Not sure why people believe massively interesting and putting their health at risk is glamorous? Nutritional deficiencies are not cool.
Oh it's not the naysayers who have determined that 1200 is the minimum to meet all your nutritional needs.
Remember the "Get Rid Of The Woo Button" thread that got shut down? This is one reason so many are opposed. There is either (still) confusion about what it actually means because of the double meaning behind it, or people are using it maliciously.
3 -
No I'm not as learned, smart, sucessful and other parameters you seem to have the time to measure as you, now am I. Are you hired by MFP to troll these sites and police others activities? Are you a scientist? Do you absolutely know what's best for everyone? Do you have control issues? Is there only one way to weight loss? Why not mind your own business and leave the participants on this site alone on their journey?
I've read the posts and the participants seem knowledgable of the path they've chosen, why must you try to force your views on others?
Sorry if I see something unhealthy I will speak out about it. The world would be a horrible place if people just say by and didn't say anything ehen they see people hurting themselves. Good luck starving yourself and not meeting your MINIMUM REQUIRED DIETARY REQUIREMENTS needed for bodily functions.5 -
No I'm not as learned, smart, sucessful and other parameters you seem to have the time to measure as you, now am I. Are you hired by MFP to troll these sites and police others activities? Are you a scientist? Do you absolutely know what's best for everyone? Do you have control issues? Is there only one way to weight loss? Why not mind your own business and leave the participants on this site alone on their journey?
I've read the posts and the participants seem knowledgable of the path they've chosen, why must you try to force your views on others?
There is actually only one way and that's eating less than your body burns. How you achieve that deficit is entirely up to you.
Most of the regular posters here are just worried about people doing diets which are potentially harmful, such as VLCD diets (very low calorie diets). The recommended minimal intake for women is 1200 to ensure adequate nutrition (not even proper nutrition, but adequate). The effects of long term malnutrition (which will happen on 800 calories a day no matter how well you plan your food) can be devastating.
What we want (at least what I want) is for people to be successful long term. Such restrictive diets rarely lead to such long term success.
Believe me when I say that many of us have been there and done that. I'm still paying the price for following a similar diet some 3 years ago.
2 -
Eyeswithoutaface wrote: »kommodevaran wrote: »
THAT was what you got out of my reply? Where did I say that?kommodevaran wrote: »
We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".People say there is no reason to worry about sugar if you're not diabetic. These are people who obviously do not understand that for many people sugar and carbs do pose a problem in many ways.
I have had a profound, positive change in all those aspects myself, by getting in real information and thus being able to make overall better eating decisions. My sugar and carb intake is the same, but nutritional status is much better because my intake is more varied and balanced.The difference in my general physical and mental energy levels, my digestive issues, sleep problems, appetite, and weight loss is profound when I am able to lower my sugar and carb intake.
There are so many different diets. The main feature of this diet is the 800 calorie daily goal. Is that what you do? Why??I have never done this specific diet or seen this book, but I assume it can't be much different from what I do on my own.
It's just that (and that tires me) we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy their health. We want people to succeed, to live happy and healthy lives. People who invent starvation diets just want other people's money.I tire of people trying to discourage others from doing what is working for them and restoring them to a well physical state. People who aren't interested in this aspect of dietary approach should just pass the thread by instead stopping to argue. Live and let live people.
Lowering carbs and sugar is NOT damaging to your health. Bring me some proof that it is damaging to lower carbs and sugar and I will then change my view.
You are going on up there about CALORIES for one thing which I do not need to entertain because I never mentioned THAT. Second you said " we try to discourage people from things that aren't working, things that distroy [sic] their health." What part of lowering carbs and sugar is going to destroy a person's health? I spoke strictly on carbs and sugar. You went down all these other rabbit trails that had about nothing to do with what I said. You even said that, "We understand that, and most of the problems come from misinformation and demonizing of "sugar".
Tell me how a person with Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease gets that disease from "demonizing sugar". I am pretty sure the effects of a very high carb and sugar diet will come whether you "demonize sugar" or not. I am also sure diabetes, pre-diabetes, and heart disease also would be a potential danger to a person whether a person "demonize sugar" or not. If all we had to do to neutralize the ill effects of a high carb and sugar intake was to simply not
"demonize sugar" then this site would have a lot less people. I also did not speak on THIS BOOK but rather people coming out to ASSUME that "there is no need to limit your sugar unless you are diabetic." THAT is what I was speaking on. You brought up all these other points which I never attempted to make.
The fact is that not everyone came out of a cookie cutter. There are people who need to place limits on certain dietary component FOR. THEIR. HEALTH.
Seems clear to me. You aren't encouraging exceedingly low calories so much as you are saying that lowering carbs/sugar can be beneficial and possibly necessary for some people. And that is true. I don't understand why people want us all to consume so much sugar. Healthy limits will not hurt you. Not pretending to know about a diet book you have not read is a good idea. Don't speak on it if you haven't read it.
Exactly. I was careful to stick to what I actually meant here. I also made a point to say that I have not read the book or heard of the specific diet mentioned so as to avoid anyone thinking I was supporting said diet. I support people doing what they need to do for their health. I would never promote a diet or product that serves to harm.1 -
I enjoyed this thread.....all the discussion regarding whether someone who went to medical school and then specialized in Psychiatry is not a scientist and thus not worthy to present a diet that others perhaps hypothesized first. I've had a lifelong struggle with weight and thus have probably got a Masters level education in nutrition. If anything, I've learned that bodies are unique, or at least they fit into numerous different types. On top of that , we have personalities who related differently to different types of regiment. I think that if a new diet (like the blood gludcose diet) captures my attention and gets me engaged enough to get me to stop bad habits just long enough to try out some new ones, and get some self-awareness in the process, then it is of value. There is HUGE contribution by anthing that helps one confont INERTIA1
-
haha after writing my previous post re the blood sugar diet. I followed a link and did a quick review. I don't care about the science.....I happen to know that NO diet at 600 calories a day would be of interest to me!
2 -
It's 800 calories and only for 8 weeks and it includes healthy carbs and lots of veggies and adequate protein and it makes you feel great and you lose weight quickly. That'[s not to say, I don't occassionally exceed 800 but that is my goal for the first 8 weeks. I happen to be someone who is motivated by the quick weight loss. I don't intend to do 800 calories for life.1
-
I have been over at the site for this diet reading up on the program. I wouldn't follow it because I just don't follow diets in general so much as I try to implement a healthy diet. Lately I haven't been doing so well at that. But I digress.
This 800 calories a day aspect is a temporary part of the diet. I have heard of medical doctors putting patients on such extreme restrictions temporarily. Usually obese people or people with some specific health condition in order to get whatever the condition is under control. Then they were increased to a higher calorie diet with restrictions placed where the doctor saw fit. On the other hand I have had doctors tell me they would never place a patient on such a low calorie plan.
Here is my take in that regard. Doctors are said to "practice" medicine for a reason. There is no instruction manual that will suit every single person out there. One doctor will tell you "this" while another tells you "that". Unless we take a poll of all medical doctors as what they would advise we can't speak on the majority of the medical community. However I do think if a person wants to do a very low calorie plan for a length of time doing so under medical supervision is a good idea. Some people have abused their bodies until their only hope is something medically extreme. I know that not everyone has the cash flow to be hitting up the doctor's office on a regular basis, or can afford to pay a nutritionist or dietitian. At the very least checking it out with your own trusted doctor is a good idea. Get their take on it and go from there.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 934 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions