Just so you know, rewarding weight loss with the same food that made you fat is probably not the best idea :)

On the other hand, have you tried the mission low carb wheat tortillas? They taste exactly like tortillas, except only 4 carbs and 80 cals per. I also have low carb taco shells, which are excellent (6 carbs and 40 cals each, made of real corn).

One thing I've noticed from reading labels and watching carbs...even the "enriched" carbs are so devoid of nutrients it's just not funny! My husband was looking at the package of crackers that came with my soup in the restaurant last night (of course we weren't going to eat it) and he was amazed that the two little saltines had as much carbs as the salad I was planning to have to follow...and how little food value it contained.

Of course, we're talking about refined white flour and water with a little salt...but isn't most of our breads, buns, pasta and cereal the same way?

All attempts to find the ONE nutrient we are lacking are doomed to failure when so many people's diets are deficient in so many areas.

This sort of makes it sounds like Stevia is sold by non-proft companies. :lol:

Well, this would be an extremely high amount of carbs... Just like the "studies" that say Low Carb causes heart attacks, this study probably skews the findings. I think that carbs can be unhealthy if consumed at a ridiculous rate (which unfortunately many people do) but so can anything...

Contradictions
 

What a contradictory article with contributions from a bunch of institutionalised theoreticians. I hesitate in dissecting this article in its entirety and will try to keep it concise by quoting a couple of faux pas.

Sandra Schlicker says that corn etc in the US is fortified which may help to prevent cancer yet in the same breath she goes on to say that in the US breast cancer cases are the highest in the world! Surely the implication is that we should give a very wide-berth indeed to US fortified corn.

The article continues in its self-defeating manner by saying that those who ate insoluable fibre found in whole grains, fruits, and vegetables, had somewhat less risk. Somewhat? Really?

Finally, experts apparently say that more research is needed. Who indeed are the experts? The theoreticians, or the practitioners like those on carb-free diets?

The old adage applies here which says; 'Some people must think I am a mushroom. They keep me in the dark and feed me with bull'!

the whole folate-grain issue is ridiculous. if an item has to be fortified to make it 'healthy', is that any different than any other processed food that may not really be edible at all unless processed in some manner. it only makes sense to eat things that have vitamins/minerals naturally occuring. anyway, if folate is truly the answer to the breast ca issue then why is it epidemic in this country. there are practitioners who have been saying for years that ca loves glucose. it seems to be true!

This statement is typical of the scientific method used by nutritionists. is associated with lower risk. The truth is that the higher the insoluble fiber, the lower the net carbs. So the real association with lower risk is fewer net carbs. This is lost on nutritionists who will undoubtedly tell us that eating fiber lowers breast cancer risk. I expect to see bran muffins being touted as a cure for breast cancer.

I have a lot of cancer in my family. I have lost my mom, two sisters, two aunts and a grandmother to this gastily disease. Since learning about a LC lifestyle I have also studied a great deal about Yeast imbalances. I found disturbing similarites in the way Candidia prevails in the intestine and the way Cancer takes over its victims. :idea: I am not telling my sad story for pity really I am unsure I can be objective anyone have any thoughts on this theroy? ginger

But wasn't the recent report claiming that 2 [female] or 3 [male] ounces twice a week of red meat was "too much" and led to colon cancer, etc., based on entirely the same methodology [people guessing what they eat and filling in a questionaire, etc.]?

Gee, we shouldn't jump to conclusions; we just let the LC-bashers do that!

cjl (Are you now, or have you ever eaten a carbohydrate you didn't like?)

Regarding BC. My late wife passed away 6 years ago with this complaint and a year ago I lost a 45 year old daughter to the same complaint.

My wife ate what she thought was a healthy diet as it was known then. It included unsaturated fats and especially vegetable oils and of course grains and fibers of all kinds. She also had a penchant for soft drinks; had she been drinking alcohol she would have been an alcoholic. She believed that those drinks were healthy. Unknown to us at the time she was probably prediabetic. Whenever her liver was tested it was found to be fatty and the physicians suspected that she was a closeted alcoholic but that was not so. There is little doubt that her diet, which included vasts amounts of processed foods, was the main culprit in bringing about her early demise.

The situation was almost identical with my daughter who as single woman was size 24 and 5' 6" tall. She ate anything and everything from the supermarket that could easily be cooked in the microwave.

Common features of both instances was that they elevated the medical profession to the level of the divine and took their word as gospel, yet, in each case they were initially misdiagnosed! The medics hastened their demise. I tried to advise them but regretfully they would not take heed; to them I was just the 'carpenter's son'!

My other two daughters are running scared believing that BC runs in the family; it doesn't, but I can't convince them.

I suspect that LC diets, especially those that avoid processed foods, are probably the best for our health, and personal experience and current research findings are lending support to this belief. I hope that this anecdotal experience will be of benefit to some of you.

Thanks a lot DuParc,

your posts are always thoughtful, and also good to read.

Keep em coming!

Hi Ginger, have you considered trying virgin oregano oil to rid candida? It sure is worthy of trying. Other supporting substances are coconut products and olive leaf extract each which is synergistic to the others. Do, firstly, read the side-effects of olive leaf extract which might be disconcerting. The three together make a potent antibiotic.

TBM , thanks for the compliment. There is a nice reassuring feeling in being appreciated.

Duparc
 

Hmmm interesting this combination is actually a natural antibiotic. I am using Threelac now, but I am begining to believe I was mistaken to use this product. Your potion may come in handy next time I get a sinus infection too?
What do you think am I pushing my luck? ginger :q: :idea:

candida/3lac
 

It's been awhile since the last post, but I thought I'd ask anyway...why did you say you believe it's a mistake to use 3-lac? I'm wondering cos I'm using this right now, have been for about a week now, I am trying it due to my (self) diagnosis of possible candida problems myself (symptoms: low body temperature, itchy eyes, itchy anus). Since I've been using this product I've noticed a remarkable decrease in above symptoms, and my body temperature is already up .5 degree in mid-day. I believe I've found the smoking gun, this problem (candida) seems to be a real "hidden killer", and it's incredibly hard not to 'feed' it, even eating low-carb.... ie it's damn hard to live on only meat and vegetables, and even meat can be food for this condition.

any other people have anything to say about this??

Some followup words
 

A lot of subtle info comes from this thread, lots of issues need to rise to the surface:

1) USA has the worst BC rate. Studies have indicted everything from various forms of carbs implying various contrived "good" and "bad" versions, eating fat, etc. "Studies" use dubious methods to achieve likely pre-conceived results by conveniently ignoring variables they don't want any attention paid to.

2) No one mentions the influence of drugs like Premarin and Prempro that have "conveniently" reappeared on the market with low-dose variations and warnings that they are NOT meant to be long-term HRT. Anyone want to venture a guess on a few points:

a) How much of the USA-based problem is actually directly traceable to HRT?

b) How much of a) is in turn worsened by the likes of too many carbs or too much fat or worse too much of both?

I think we can draw a few real conclusions:

A) Studies are funded by companies seeking ball-park results--Their ballparks. Been there too many times on things like the Cyclamates scare that first brought notariety to Dr. Atkins and made him the target of Big Sugar, and this was several years before the Diet Revolution books.

B) It's likely that anything that villifies Fats, especially saturated fats, totally ignores carbs which invariably are unhealthily high in these studies, assuming we can trust the reporting of people likely to be telling anecdotal "fairy tales" because they think they are pleasing the testers, etc. and telling them what they believe is wanting to be heard, etc. I am certain that too much saturated fats in the presence of too many carbs clearly makes BC far worse than if the diet consists of lots of fats and strictly controlled carbs, and the former is what the so-called "tests" actually used because they ASSUMED that it didn't matter.

C) It's likely that all forms of tumors already established do "better" [meaning at killing the patient!] by "feeding" the tumors carbs. The likely best treatment for existing cancers of this category is to go on the Stillman diet, i.e., protein fasts kill cancer.

D) Has ANYONE ever done any study to see whether or not the effects of chemotherapy are enhanced/weakened by diet, meaning low-carb or high-carb? It would seem that combining C) above and chemotherapy should do the best job.


On another, unrelated note: I just noticed perhaps a "final insult" to the craze of the low-carb, meaning the commercialization of fraudulent low-carb claims that are totally off of an Atkins regimen. A local supermarket is selling cheesecake branded as being claimed as the house brand of a well-known local restaurant in Brooklyn, NY called "Junior's". Long well known as a traditional delicatessen-style restaurant in New York, they have followed in the footsteps of other similar area food outfits such as Ratner's and now sell the cheesecake in semi-upscale supermarkets. Here's the nutritional info from the label of Junior's Low-Carb Cheesecake:

Serving size: 85 grams
Servings per package: 8 [It's not a big cake]
Carbohydrates per serving: 58 grams

That's OVER 2/3 carbs!

cjl (Gee, if that's the low-carb version, what would the REGULAR version be?)

ps: Now I'm confused: Isn't cheesecake made from cheese? [Cream cheese.] which is mostly fat?