Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I`m talking a low fat diet as we did once before, that seemed to be working great for us, but then we moved, and messed everything up for about 6 months.. meh.
Low fat diet has always worked for me.. Tuna, bread, beans, fruit, veggies, fish, chicken breasts, egg whites, are just a few to come to mind. Cereal.
your carbs in that are mostly from filling, high fiber sources, like fruit, beans - and depending on whether its whole grain, the bread and cereal. Not exactly the prototypical strawman "low fat high carb". Indeed, add tracking to that, and its not terribly different from what DW and I eat on WW (though DW favors dark meat chicken, and we allow ourselves some red meat, low fat cheese, and occasional full fat cheese or eggs with yolks)
We were living the high life, hogging it up on pork rinds, lobster with butter, steak, and spinach in oil and garlic. Just no bread, no white flour, no wheat, no rice, no carbs to speak of, and no restrictions on fat. And I got fat. And so did mom. Conclusion: fat makes you fat *if you are not restricting yourself*. And Pritikin definitely didn't restrict us, and lobster tastes GOOOOOOOOD in drawn butter, and we could eat as much of it as we could afford to buy, so we bought plenty.
That wasn't Pritikin you were on then. That sounds more like Atkins. Pritikin was very low fat. Basically you had to measure the teaspoon of olive oil you were allowed per meal to sautee with. Actually you can lose weight on the diet you were on.
Here's a description. Sounds pretty much like what Brooklynborndad says he's been following.
That wasn't Pritikin you were on then. That sounds more like Atkins. Pritikin was very low fat. Basically you had to measure the teaspoon of olive oil you were allowed per meal to sautee with. Actually you can lose weight on the diet you were on.
Here's a description. Sounds pretty much like what Brooklynborndad says he's been following.
not really. WW you have to measure your olive oil, JUST LIKE you measure your high carb foods, and indeed ALL your foods other than veggies and fresh fruits. You CAN limit yourself to one tsp of olive oil per meal if thats how you to choose to use your points, but you dont have to. Indeed, I try to squeeze in some olive oil whereever I can. WW is positive about healthy oils, just as it is about whole grains.
Cause this is 2011, not 1985, and we have had decades of research on the CVD benefits of PUFAs and MUFAs, on the benefits of Omega 3's, on the benefits of olive oil in particular, and on how the key issue wrt to fat for CVD is (weight loss apart) NOT total consumption of fat, but the Sat fat to MUFA/PUFA ratios.
not really. WW you have to measure your olive oil, JUST LIKE you measure your high carb foods, and indeed ALL your foods other than veggies and fresh fruits. You CAN limit yourself to one tsp of olive oil per meal if thats how you to choose to use your points, but you dont have to. Indeed, I try to squeeze in some olive oil whereever I can. WW is positive about healthy oils, just as it is about whole grains.
Cause this is 2011, not 1985, and we have had decades of research on the CVD benefits of PUFAs and MUFAs, on the benefits of Omega 3's, on the benefits of olive oil in particular, and on how the key issue wrt to fat for CVD is (weight loss apart) NOT total consumption of fat, but the Sat fat to MUFA/PUFA ratios.
But it's a lot closer to your diet than the pork rinds and lobster in butter plan that Anonchick was claiming she followed back then. I did the Pritikin diet and lost about 38 pounds in a few months. Was painful though and my family really hated it. They still talk about it with disdain.
But it's a lot closer to your diet than the pork rinds and lobster in butter plan that Anonchick was claiming she followed back then. I did the Pritikin diet and lost about 38 pounds in a few months. Was painful though and my family really hated it. They still talk about it with disdain.
Its also closer to pritikin (and to Atkins) than eating nothing but grapefruit and gruyere cheese.
Im sure you didnt mean it that way, but it sounds like the same rhetorical trick I hear over and over again on this forum - X isnt low carb/unrestricted fat ERGO its a low fat diet. Which is followed up with how unscientific and harmful straight low fat diets are. With the implication that the only good approach is low carb/unrestricted fat.
Anonchick apparently was doing some kind of unrestricted fat thing. Pritkin apparently was a genuine low fat (NOT calorie restricted, NOT low Sat fat, but actually low fat period) plan. I find it interesting that it took going back to the time when the USSR was around to find such a plan that was actually somewhat popular.
I am NOT on a low fat plan. I am on WW. WW, including WW as I have implemented it (with a tendency to avoid sat fat) is NOT a low fat plan in any meaningful sense of the term. Calorie restriction/portion control is NOT low fat per se(even if its not as positive toward fat as low carb/unrestricted fat is) Low sat fat is NOT low fat. Because Fat /= Sat fat.
The implication that all plans other than low carb/unrestricted fat plans are "low fat plans" a al pritikin, is misleading, and, IMO, harmful.
To be fair people mischaracterize low carb/ketogenic diets as well. The purpose of a low carb diet is to put you in a state of ketosis so that your appetite is supressed. I average about 1500-1800 calories a day on a ketogenic diet. Being on a ketogenic diet doesn't give you the free reign to eat a pound of bacon for breakfast.
I`m talking a low fat diet as we did once before, that seemed to be working great for us, but then we moved, and messed everything up for about 6 months.. meh.
Low fat diet has always worked for me.. Tuna, bread, beans, fruit, veggies, fish, chicken breasts, egg whites, are just a few to come to mind. Cereal.
Sounds like my meal plan. I am trying low fat and low carb. Whole grain oatmeal with fresh blueberries for breakfast, yogurt mid morning, whole grain tortilla with morning star veggie crumbles and veggies folded in it for lunch, piece of fruit and fat free cottage cheese mid afternoon, salad with tuna and veggies and hard boiled egg (no yolk) for dinner, sometimes I will substitute steamed chicken in the salad. But then the weekend comes and we eat out and I forget my meal plan lol
Its also closer to pritikin (and to Atkins) than eating nothing but grapefruit and gruyere cheese.
Im sure you didnt mean it that way, but it sounds like the same rhetorical trick I hear over and over again on this forum - X isnt low carb/unrestricted fat ERGO its a low fat diet. Which is followed up with how unscientific and harmful straight low fat diets are. With the implication that the only good approach is low carb/unrestricted fat.
Anonchick apparently was doing some kind of unrestricted fat thing. Pritkin apparently was a genuine low fat (NOT calorie restricted, NOT low Sat fat, but actually low fat period) plan. I find it interesting that it took going back to the time when the USSR was around to find such a plan that was actually somewhat popular.
I am NOT on a low fat plan. I am on WW. WW, including WW as I have implemented it (with a tendency to avoid sat fat) is NOT a low fat plan in any meaningful sense of the term. Calorie restriction/portion control is NOT low fat per se(even if its not as positive toward fat as low carb/unrestricted fat is) Low sat fat is NOT low fat. Because Fat /= Sat fat.
The implication that all plans other than low carb/unrestricted fat plans are "low fat plans" a al pritikin, is misleading, and, IMO, harmful.
I will repeat this as often as necessary.
Actually I asked about Pritikin because it's one I used fairly effectively so was curious if it was still in use. I wasn't trying to lump you in with it but to suggest that it wasn't as extreme as Anonchick claimed or even resembled what she described. If I remember correctly it was calorie driven as I recall 1,500 a day being the magic number. I believe it started at a lower level (1,250 maybe?) and worked its way up but it's a bit hazy now.
I don't think low fat diets are harmful. I just think they can be difficult for people to follow and stick with. I also have no issue with WW as I know a lot of folks who do well with it. Sorry if I made a bad comparison.
Low carb. It's the only diet I've ever had any real success with. I tried getting on a calorie counting diet earlier this year and had minor results after two months; went back to low carb and dropped the same amount of weight in a week and continued losing steadily thereafter.
I typically get a decent amount of veggies in my low-carb diet. In a typical day, I have green beans at lunch and a salad and side veggie with dinner.
Not only do I have better results with a low-carb diet, I feel better overall. The biggest thing I notice is my improved mental clarity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
