Clomid works like a charm. Worked beautifully for me in the first cycle itself.
Of course I had nothing else wrong with me but irregular periods. So timing the ovulation was all I needed.

I've heard that low dose metformin (250-500 mg a day)for a few months followed by a couple of cycles of clomid work for most women ... apart from low-carb of course.

Hi Pilili,

I may have said this to you before, but have you looked at the James Wilson book on adrenal fatigue? Or "The Schwarzbein Principle II: The Transition"?

Are your cortisol levels low because you have adrenal fatigue? If so, it is curable, with time and patience being two of the main ingredients. If they are low because of some other pathology, then I am out of my depth.

I diagnosed myself, after reading both of the above books, with adrenal fatigue last summer. My symptoms were worst in about May 2009. Looking back to then and comparing how I feel now with how I felt then, I would say I'm about halfway recovered, so I feel I can confidently say that the advice contained in these books does actually work.

I haven't lost weight since May 2009, on the contrary, (but Schwarzbein does warn her readers that some of them may gain weight on their way to recovery and, in my case, when sticking to her programme properly, I do not gain, I maintain; the gradual gains happened when I went off plan), however, the gains in other area have been more than adequate compensation for the few pounds gained.

If you're interested in my experience, then just pop in my journal!!!

amanda

Thank you, Amanda, vielen lieben Dank

I indeed remember you referring me to the books of Dr. Diana Schwarzbein, and, yes, I have read them a few months ago. And I intend to reread them. Indeed my tests point clearly in the direction of adrenal fatigue. It's no wonder, since I have approximately 7 years of extreme stress, worries and health problems past me. I am still not in a position where I can say that I have peace, but at least at the moment things are going better and looking up somewhat.

I too diagnosed myself, after reading a lot. In June I changed doctors, because I realized if I want to heal myself, I cannot do it without help. Help in the form of a good doctor, who understands what a low carb diet means and who understands about replenishing vitamin, mineral and hormone deficiencies. She submitted me to some extensive tests: blood, urine, mammography, thyroid echo, bone mass scan, … Since last Summer I am supplementing - on her advice - Vitamin B12, Folic Acid, Zinc, Selenium, Iodine, DHEA, Estrogen, Metformin, Melatonin, Levothyroxin and hydrocortisol (compound + tablets). On top of that I continue supplementing Vitamin D, magnesium citrate and a decent multivitamin. I had started these on my own initiative already, before I saw her. I also take one guggul daily since a few weeks.

On 15th October I am visiting the doctor again, and we will discuss the results of my new blood and urine tests (done on 13th September). My diet will also be discussed.
I started in January with Atkins, and after two weeks quickly went to phase 2 OWL. But after a while I seemed to have problems with cravings. That is probably where I went wrong, as I went back to induction, and after a while started eating less and less carbs. My weight did hardly budge anymore. After a lot more reading, I finally landed with self diagnosed adrenal fatigue (the doctor hadn't told me explicitly, but I am certain she diagnosed it too).

So three weeks ago, I upped my carbs again. Upping means mainly: taking vegetables back in my plan. I really love vegetables. So I now eat as many vegetables as I want and don't count the carbs in them anymore. If I want to eat a portion of endives, I eat a BIG (!) portion of endives, because endives are one of my favorite foods. And if I want to eat a good lamb stew with vegetables that are relatively starchy such as turnips, carrots, leek, parsnip, and so on, then I eat that lamb stew and even throw in a bottle of good Belgian dark beer

This appears to work. Since a week or so, I am losing weight again. It is strange that I am allowing myself more now and that I do better. This is indeed as Dr. Schwarzbein says in her books. I should have listened better. However, I am not sure if I could really bring myself to eating as many carbs daily, as she suggests. But as I said, a discussion with my doctor about my diet is imminent. I will see what she proposes, then see what Dr. Schwarzbein says, and finally decide what I feel is the best way to continue my "travel".

No matter what, I have learned this much that I mainly stick to "real food" now. Butter just tastes much better anyway. I have faith in cold pressed and unrefined coconut oil and olive oil. I use celtic sea salt by now when I cook. I try to eat at least 1 (organic, free range) egg each day. Processed foods is still difficult, because I do allow cheese in my diet and I like to eat salami. It's near to impossible to find salami that doesn't contain nitrites. Still, I think there are worse things you can do.

I am not worried over my low cortisol levels. The reason why I asked about it in this thread was, because I wouldn't mind having a good reason for a nice massage . I am working on the low cortisol, together with the new doctor, as I am working on a few other problems. I am confident that when I have the most important problems under control, weight loss will come automatically anyway. So at the moment I am less fixated by the weighing scale and eat what I enjoy most.

Thanks for the advice concerning James Wilson too. I will google around a bit and see what he has to say, perhaps order his book too and read it.

And you can count on me popping in your journal

Hi Pilili,

I've replied to the above post in your journal, OK?

amanda

Haven't all studies that have looked at lower carb and cortisol levels show that as you lower carbs, cortisol is increased (and testosterone drops)?


Combine this with coffee/tea/decaff/chocolate and their caffeine's insulin resistance generating and cortisol increasing effect (and it's abilily to quickly shuttle any sugar to fat) and you have a recipe for cortisol/hormone influenced nutritional disaster.




He needs to eat a potato and not just cherry pick studies that support his way of eating (he was eating low carb before GCBC). This way he can lose "the pouch" and avoid being surprised when he discovers people having good results with high carb ("good carbs") and low fat.

If anything, cortisol drops on a low carb diet:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortisol#Effects

As we know, blood pressure will drop once we adopt a low carb diet. How can cortisol be higher? It makes no sense.

As for testosterone, it's made from cholesterol which is made from fat. A low carb diet is a high fat diet. How can there be less end product when there's more substrate? It makes no sense.

This links to information about the effect cortisol has on other things. Factors causing cortisol to increase or decrease are here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cortis...cortisol_levels

I don't see low-carb diet listed, but if you google "cortisol and low-carb," you pop up studies indicating cortisol increases (and T decreases) on low-carb. Here's a recent article: http://www.associatedcontent.com/ar...one.html?cat=14



I imagine a number of factors raise or lower blood pressure. It would no doubt be the sum of the factors that would decide whether it raised or lowered.



If I have a load of lumber delivered to my land, I'm not going to end up with a house unless I hire a builder. If I have a load of lumber delivered every day but don't hire a builder, I'm still not going to have a house.

I had several of my hormone levels tested last year. My DHEA was sky high, way outside the normal range. But my testosterone (which is made from DHEA) was low normal, and I was suffering from symptoms of low testosterone. Apparently having more of the substrate doesn't necessarily solve the problem.

A low carb diet is what allowed most of us to return to good health. If that means a rise in cortisol, then that's what it means. It if means a drop in testosterone, then that's what it means. I fail to see how any of those things can somehow diminish the value of a return to good health. Having said that, I doubt that a rise in cortisol and a drop in testosterone is the means by which a low carb diet causes us to return to good health. Considering what cortisol and testosterone do, it makes no sense.

The article referred to in the link was discussed here -

http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=413495

"low carb" was 30% carbohydrate

I've got high-ish cortisol even on a low carb diet. With very, very little stress in my life.

I know I'm late to this thread, but I have a few scattered comments.


If you want to nit-pick, muscle isn't smaller than fat any more than it weighs more. It is denser. Anyway, I'm sure everyone knew that the poster meant weighs less per a given volume.


That's Euthyroid Sick Syndrome. It happens on low calories and possibly also low carbs. It should be reversible, and that's one of the rationales cited for carb cycling, or just periodic refeeds. If you have a high ratio of RT3 to FT3, you should read http://thyroid-rt3.com/.

I think the main part of the confused discussion on corn sugar is that lil' annie said sucrose when she meant dextrose in the first place:




I agree with BW here. While it's definitely true that modern H-G cultures show that carbohydrates don't tell the whole story, and may be tolerable in the absence of refined crap, it still doesn't tell us much about the H-G's we evolved from. I've read that most of the evidence shows that we only started moving to significant plant use at the end of the paleolithic, probably when mega-fauna started disappearing.

Every once in a while I think Taubes had a ginormous brain fart, as sometimes his thinking fails to connect the dots imo. In regards to this quote from a previous poster:

"Taubes did sound burned out in that interview, almost discouraged. Did you notice that he said high carb low fat dieters were having good results, which he found amazing? He said its because they were eating the 'right carbs'. "

In reality I think what Taubes is missing is that not everyone is insulin resistant. There are alternate explanations.

Did anyone listen to the podcast and Taubes' assertion that low fat diets ARE actually low carb. He seems to think low fat dieters eat all the right things and aren't using low fat cereals and cheap low fat grains as part of their diet. I would disagree. I know how I ate on a low fat diet and it was not appreciably lower in carbs. In fact it was higher, because many carbs are fat free which is why dieters favor them.

Yes, as calories reduce, so do all the major macronutrients, but if the carbs are still high in relation to everything else, you're eating a lot of carbs and if you are insulin resistant, your body will not lose weight.

Taubes would do better to realize what is being hyped as a low fat diet is actually carb controlled (think the Biggest Loser diet which is mentioned on another subforum here).

What science is missing is the concept of phenotypes of obesity and also threshold levels. Like, we all know that our tolerance for carbs is individual, well we also probably all have different cut offs for how far calories have to be reduced for weight loss regardless of macronutrients etc.... At some point, if the calories are low enough, you'll lose some weight. Whether or not you'll get to goal without triggering your body's protections against starvation and binging is another question.

Sometimes Taubes goes in weird directions with his thinking. On this stuff, I think he's way off base.

F

In my observation, Taubes is nearly always referring to actual research. Hence, he would not be referring to the slang-culture that chooses to "do-badly" any diet including lowfat, but to the actual tracked intakes within the research to which he was referring. This does not make him confused, it just means his data set is different than what we as individuals might have done on a diet (as you mention) or see other individuals do.

Best,
PJ

Haven't heard him reference a scientist or study yet on that and he's usually pretty good about that, so I am left to interpret this as more his opinion. If anyone has a link, I want to read the study.

Also, my point still stands, that people who lose weight on mainstream nutritional advice are likely not insulin resistant or have some other physiologic trait that makes them an exception to the rule. Taubes discussion here is very narrow, he's missing alternatives. Maybe he's aware and didn't get to articulate them, I don't know, but the omission stands out to me in stark relief.

F

Taubes' opinion on nutrition is entirely based on the science he read. That's how he works. However, he's not perfect and he could very well be missing critical information regarding nutrition and physiology. I mean, nobody knows everything there is to know about it, not even collectively. Having said that, Taubes is still the most thoroughly informed on the subject.