Menu
Log in
How Much Sugar?

Up the creek without a paddle

  • 04 Oct 2010 7:44 PM
    Message # 438443
    Deleted user

    Dear David,

    I have been sugar free now since the end of July and am getting frustrated as I read how well other people are doing and I havn't lost an ounce but gained.  I am following the Quit Plan to a T but am still finding that I don't know when I am full and probably overeating.

    I am checking the nutritional information on everything I buy and have even read the Sweet Poison book for the third time and will start the Sweet Poison Quit Plan today for the third read.

    On a positive note though I do feel less bloated and I don't know if it is my vivid imagination but think I look a bit less round, my husband agrees with me but I feel he just likes to keep the peace.  I am aiming for 15/20kg loss.  Does age have anything to do with all this as I am 67 and perhaps my metabolism has slowed??????

    Thankyou for the terrific information in both books, I have amassed a wealth of information from these forums from others so will soldier on.

    Cheers and have a nice day

    Margaret

     

     

  • 11 Oct 2010 7:54 PM
    Reply # 442300 on 438443
    Anonymous

    Margaret, it does take some people's metabolisms a long time to adjust.  But over and over people tell me they are glad they stuck with it.  Some (very lucky) people lose weight instantly, some take a month to lose a gram and (one that I am aware of) took 6 months!  The common thing tho is that not only did they all eventually lose wieght they all keep it off as long as they keep sugar out of their life.

    If its bothering you and you want to give it a kick, then you could go low-carb for a few weeks (about as long as I could ever stand doing it).  That will drop some weight (particularly as you are starting from sugar free) and as long as you stay off the sugar when you go back to eating normally, the loss will probably continue.

    Good Luck and stay with it!

    Cheers

    David.

  • 13 Oct 2010 5:25 PM
    Reply # 443608 on 438443
    Deleted user

    Hi Margaret

    I'm not an expert on the fructose free way of eating but there are some common mistakes that I see my clients make all the time (I'm a personal trainer for mainly older women). So this is what I ask them to check:

    Write down every morsel of food and drink that passes your lips for three days. (Food diaries are great but who wants to fill them in for more than a few days? Remember not to change the way you eat until the three days are up - we want to find the problem so you can avoid it.) It makes you very aware of the amount of food you're eating and if your problem lies there. Get someone else to cast an eye over it. Something you think is fine may be blaringly, obviously wrong to a fresh set of eyes.

    Check that you are eating enough protein. Older women seem to have some sort of idea that its not lady-like to eat decent amounts of protein. Oh, and don't just stick to steamed skinless chicken breast (bleh).  Dark meat is dark because that's where all the goodies are (iron, etc.)  Meat also takes more calories to digest than other sources of protein - up to 45% of the calories can be used up digesting that steak you just ate!

    Don't buy low fat anything. David mentioned this in his book - eat the full fat version. It tastes better and is more satisfying. You'll always feel, well, not hungry but "unfull" on low fat.

    Drink your water. As we age we lose the thirst response and we can be dehydrated and not know it. This will stall your weight loss faster than anything. So check that you're doing your two litres daily.

    Hope this helps. I hope you don't mind me putting in my two cents worth but I hate to see people doing the work & not getting the results they deserve.

    Donna

     

  • 16 Oct 2010 8:46 PM
    Reply # 445230 on 438443
    Deleted user

    Wow, thanks for that Donna

    I am well aware of food diaries but have found it tedious but your three day suggestion is a great idea.  I am having a medical procedure on Wednesday and started the required eating leadup for that today so will get back to normal on Thursday.  Thank you very much for your interest and input, every bit of help is greatly appreciated and I so enjoy this forum for this reason.

    Cheers for now

    Margaret

     

  • 18 Oct 2010 4:25 PM
    Reply # 446038 on 438443
    Deleted user

    You're very welcome! :-)

    Good luck with your medical procedure.

  • 22 Oct 2010 12:46 AM
    Reply # 448119 on 442300
    Deleted user
    David Gillespie wrote:

    Margaret, it does take some people's metabolisms a long time to adjust.  But over and over people tell me they are glad they stuck with it.  Some (very lucky) people lose weight instantly, some take a month to lose a gram and (one that I am aware of) took 6 months!  The common thing tho is that not only did they all eventually lose wieght they all keep it off as long as they keep sugar out of their life.

    If its bothering you and you want to give it a kick, then you could go low-carb for a few weeks (about as long as I could ever stand doing it).  That will drop some weight (particularly as you are starting from sugar free) and as long as you stay off the sugar when you go back to eating normally, the loss will probably continue.

    Good Luck and stay with it!

    Cheers

    David.


    Hi David and others
    When you say try to go low-carb - can you give a guide as the foods you would concentrate for this period? also do you suggest using the lovely replacement recipes prior to getting to your weight goal or would you wait until you are well on the way. I have been sugar free now for over 3 months and am still not losing weight. Some cm have dropped away but nothing like I thought it would happen - I am interested to see you saying that it can take 6 months for some - especially those like me who have been addicted for many years!! Look forward to your comments. 
  • 23 Oct 2010 7:24 PM
    Reply # 450354 on 438443
    Deleted user

    I agree with most of the advice above, however, I am reluctant to agree with the suggestion "as we age we do not recognise when we are thirsty", and so we must continue to down "2 litres of water/day".  

    Recent studies in the US have once again proven that it is only necessary to drink water "when you are thirsty", and that this "new age" idea that we ALL have to get through 2 litres of water EVERY day is in fact 'unhealhy'.

    On days in mid winter when the temp doesn't rise above 9 degress C, it's also very difficult to drink even 200mls of water let alone 2000mls.  However, it all balances out because when the temperature rises again, (along with our metabolism), our water intake enviriably rises with it. 

    Our bodies have been beautifully created, our job is just to nourish them 'adequately' when we are hungry and 'thirsty'. My grandmother lived till she was 94 and no one ever forced her to drink 2 litres of water every day.  Her daughter (my mother, now 82), after 8 children and still driving her own car, drinks water only when she is thirsty.  On some days she might drink only 500mls, on warmer days she may have up to 1500mls, depending on her level of thirst! And this is what I also do, drink water according to my level of thirst.

    Suggesting people over 60+ have to drink 2 litres of water EVERY day is unnecessary. EVERYONE should drink water according to what their own body and brain signals are telling them, not according to some random "new age research".

    cheers,

    Colleen   

  • 23 Oct 2010 6:55 PM
    Reply # 450394 on 438443
    Deleted user

    I agree with the dictum that we should drink when we are thirsty. It is a sad indictment of our society that every new health theory must be taught as deitary fact. It is not the fault of consumers when we accept these supposed facts. We look to people with knowledge to disperse their knowledge in an ethical manner.

    David Gillespie's well researched theories have been proven and have a scientific basis which is strengthened through practical experience and is even now being given tacit approval by those who not too long ago, were fervent opponants.

    I have long been a sceptic of weight loss schemes...and indeed of the entire weight loss industry. As a journalist, I have spent time debunking the charletans and imploring people to get off the dietary roundabout which, by its very nature, is destined to fail. Such repeated failures are what sustains the industry.

    The whole health food industry is flawed. Consider how it promotes vitamins, supplements, replacement meals (unbelievable!)...and what about the clowns who now promote detoxification diets; and the latest in the long line up of idiot ideas....try a coffee enema for good health. Pardon the pun, but that's crap! 

    Google has provided a pathway for a variety of people from committed professionals to complete ratbags to promote ideas from brilliant to ridiculous; but it also provides a means for consumers to do their own research into the same ideas.

    You can't massage away fat; you can't get fit without exercise; you can't lose weight by eating whatever you want...just as surely as you can't get wealthy by dreaming of a lotto win. But one of the side effects of going fructose free is weight loss....and that is proven to reduce your risk of heart attack, stroke and diabetes....(not to mention that you run the real risk of ceasing to be a fatso).

    When I started the sugar free regime I was not entirely convinced of its benefit, and I would not have been surprised to find David Gillesipie was just another crackpot flogging yet another worthless weight loss 'miracle'. (After all he was a solicitor). I am happy to discover his research is sound, his predictions (as far as health benefits and weight loss are concerned) are accurate and I urge everyone who is visiting this forum to keep faith, follow the guidelines and await the benefits which although they may be more apparent in some than in others, will arrive to make you literally a better person. 

    DF 

     

  • 23 Oct 2010 11:39 PM
    Reply # 450407 on 438443
    Deleted user

    My goodness, I've stirred the possum, eh?

    I'm sorry to burst your bubble folks but the reduced thirst response is as much a fact of aging (of course that's generalising) as slower response time and macular degeneration.

    I agree that thirst is a great indicator of hydration level but it's a sensation that often diminishes with age.  Think of it as someone with no sense of touch being able to pick up a hot poker. They are feeling no pain but totally unaware of the damage being caused. So encouraging older people to keep up their water intake is a precautionary measure, not a fad.

    I'm no spring chicken so I will continue to drink water even if I'm not thirsty - not always two litres, sometimes only a litre - because what I drink is way below the danger level for someone my size.

    And the symptoms of dehydration in the older adult can be mistaken for dementia.  I'm nutty enough as it is without adding that to the mix. :-D

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software