after losing weight the urge to crossdress becomes unbearable. i already have a sundress picked out for spring.

Regina, do you think Drs. Fine and Feinman would disagree with you?

Sorry to disappoint you, I meant my shirts and pants size only!

Samuel,

What size Freudian slip do you wear?

I've often wondered what size dress I would fit into. What do you think, ladies? I'm 5'8" and weigh 163. (5'10" with heals)

Probably about a size 10 dress for you, give or take a size. Depends on how the dress is cut and how hippy or busty you might be.

Hi Valerie! Love that quote! It's great!

Deb

LMAO! Not busty at all.......34 inches around the hips.

Hmm... small hips, you might get away with a size eight, you lucky thing.

And thanks for the comment on the quote. I got it from someone on another weight loss forum. I really like it, it means a lot to me. Low carb saved my life, I didn't think I would ever be able to be normal weight, ever. I'm living a life today that four years ago I would have thought impossible. I would have thought I had a better shot at winning the lottery. And it wasn't that I suddenly got disciplined or decided to like myself enough to diet or anything like that. I was a pretty emotionally healthy person to start with, I just didn't know my body's physiology. Low-carb was literally a magic key for me. I'm not more virtuous because I've lost weight, I wasn't weak before, I was just uninformed and unaware of the how my body processes carbs.

/end thread hijack

That is a good quote, but I like this one better:



Very beautiful post, Valerie. Thanks for not listening to the "experts".

It has been demonstrated over and over that the lower the carb intake, the more water weight loss you will have up to about 10 lbs. The difference between the small loss of 10 lbs total in a year compared to the other lesser losses could be explained by this phenomenon, well known to body builders who manipulate carbs to hydrate and dehydrate and show weight gain or loss as needed. If you subtract out the extra water weight loss from keeping carbs pretty low on Atkins, there is not a lot if any difference between the four diets, apart from the improved lipids which is not to be sneezed at. And as to them all being on the same calories, the fact is that any studies that rely on self report data have been demonstrated to really not be worth much as self report has been shown to be totally unreliable.

I don't think this study has demonstrated much of anything and was a big waste of money. We already know that there is a larger weight loss due to bigger water loss on low carb, so apart from showing for once and for all that low carb is better for your health (lipids etc.) and not dangerous, I can't see any metabolic advantages being shown. One thing is for sure, as others have pointed out, it is easier to feel full and therefor consume less calories overall on low carbing. Low carbing also is supremely better for anyone with insulin issues.

As I have stated here many times, at age 64 I stalled on Atkins for 2 years as I got closer to goal and had to drop calories and start weight lifting to get to goal. Now at 67 I still low carb for health benefits and for satiety.

And looking mighty darn good too! Congrats!

Deb

i don't think those who have studied lc diets would agree with you on the water loss issue or that there is no metabolic advantage to consuming an lc diet. drs. fine, feinman, volek, and westman, among others, have implied strongly, based on observations and principles of physics, that metabolic inefficiencies occur when carbohydrates are reduced to low levels.

also, if you look at what the women assigned to the atkins diet reported consuming one might argue that they were never actually on a low-carb diet; at least not a ketogenic one.



the best they did was 17.7% CHO at 1381 calories at 2 months, which comes out to about 60 grams/day. at 6 months they were at almost 30% CHO (about 115 grams/day). at 12 months 34.5% CHO (about 140 grams/day). keep in mind it is likely they were under reporting total calorie intake, which would increase further their CHO daily intake.

i think it's important to look critically (even suspiciously) at every emerging theory, but to refuse to even be open to the possibility that a metabolic advantage exists because anecdotal reports and personal testimonies aren't in total accordance with this view just seems obstinate.

I would agree that much of the early weight loss would have been water for the Atkins dieters. But by the 12 month mark, they were eating well over 100g carbs per day. This would be enough to restore the glycogen stores along with the accomanying water. This is why the Atkins dieters lost the most early on, but also regained the most later on. I don't buy the idea that Atkins dieters lost more because they lost more water. Not at the 12 month mark, anyways.