Conference rocks::weight_control

    Just what is this approach?  I'm sure it isn't just eating more of
    anything and everything, while lying on the couch.  8^)
    
    -ellie

    Hi,
    
    	I read it.  I tried it for about a month.  I didn't gain any
    weight, but I didn't lose any either.  I tended to have the limited
    foods too often, I think.  I found, though, that when I stopped
    thinking about following the advice there, that I gained weight.
    
    	Can't say that I gave it a really good try.  I didn't stick to it
    for three months.
    
    	When I did stick to it, though, I liked it alot.
    
    			Sorry, that doesn't really help, does it.
    
    					Kath

    I think it has something to do with speeding up the metabolism.  I
    understand if one eats 4 to 5 small meals a day, your metabolism is
    constantly going, therefor it tends to utilize the food faster and
    beter.  Of course there are experts in here that know the answers.
    
    Virginia

    Well, I haven't read the whole book yet but it seems to be saying that
    you should forget the dieting etc that you've learned over the years
    and should not starve your body.  Or semi starve your body either.  You
    should eat when ever your body is hungry---I have and have lost 3 more
    pounds.  Of course I'm not eating fatty foods either.  Pretty healthy
    stuff.  I have to read some more, but so far its posing questions and
    answers that are helpful to me.
    
    
    Donna

    Donna,\
    What is the name of the book?  I might have missed it.   I understand
    the concept of eating when your hungry.  I have been doing it like that
    for a while.  I don't judge by weight, I go by inches and tightness of
    muscle tone.  There has been a difference and I notice I don't gorge
    myself at dinner time because I have been eating like a bird all day. 
    Does that book have a listing of the foods to be eating?
    
    Virginia

    The name of the book is "Naturally thin by eating more" by Jean
    Antonello, rn,bsn.   This book doesn't list menu's or food lists. 
    She's very adiment (sp?) about not including things like that.  I'm
    going to try to finish the book over the weekend and perhaps can put
    together an outline of the book that would explain it better.  Its
    almost time to go home, and I'm not famished.  I really don't plan on
    eating all that much tonight.  
    
    Anyway, let me read more of this book and I'll report in on Monday.
    
    
    Donna

.3> I think it has something to do with speeding up the metabolism.  I
.3> understand if one eats 4 to 5 small meals a day, your metabolism is
.3> constantly going, therefor it tends to utilize the food faster and
    
    If the study I cited in 750.2 is correct, it's the other way around.
    
    Or, it could be that the difference is so small that depending on
    random luck, it could go either way.  In any case, tactics like that
    are a waste of time if all you're going to get is a 10 calorie benefit.

    re .-1
    
    I read the note you entered about this study, and all it says, really,
    is that your process of digestion takes more calories if you eat one 
    large meal rather than several smaller meals totalling to the same amount. 
    While this may be true, the theory behind eating several small meals to
    aid in weight control is that doing so will keep your metabolism from 
    slowing down, as has been demonstrated in people who are fasting or on 
    severely restricted diets; it is not simply concerned with how many 
    calories are spend in the process of digestion.  
    
    

    Seems to me, the *real* benefit of eating more and smaller meals is to
    keep from getting hungry, and therefore be able to keep your wits about
    you more when you *do* eat, so that you can select healthy foods.  If
    you starve yourself all day, you are going to be VERY HUNGRY by the
    time your one meal comes and you will want to gorge...you will not be
    in a mental state to chose foods wisely.
    
    D!

    re .9
    
    Yes, I agree!  If you starve yourself all day and then eat a big meal
    at night, by that time you're so hungry that you don't care WHAT you
    eat!  But, as you say, it helps to make sure that you don't let
    yourself get *really* hungry because then you can more easily make bad
    decisions about what to eat.  "I'm starved!  I'll just eat this big
    chunk of cheese, since that's so much quicker than steaming some
    vegetables...."  I find, too, that "ruining my appetite" as my mother
    would have called it before a meal can be a real help.  For instance, I
    found that as soon as I got home from work, I was famished, and I
    headed right for the refrigerator.  So I've been trying eating a slice
    of plain bread at my desk before I leave work, and it seems to work. 
    Now I can go home and read the mail without even desiring womething to
    eat.  

    Yes,   . 9 and .10 are correct.  Thats essentially what its saying.  I
    haven't had the time to analyse (SP?) the book yet, but thats the basic
    principal.
    
    
    
    Donna

    Eating 1200 calories in one sitting or eeting 100 calories in 12 sittings
    makes no difference, weight-wise, all other things being equal.
    
    This is just the latest gimmick du jour...

    My aerobics instructor says that you should eat 6 times a day. This
    keeps your metabolic rate up so that you can actually eat more without
    turning it to fat. If your body doesn't get food for many hours then it
    starts to build up reserves because it doen't know when the next meal
    is coming.
    
    He also says you shouldn't eat more than 400 calories at a time 'cos
    the body can't digest more than that and will turn it to fat which you
    then have to burn off. 
    
    I love eating 6 times a day! And I'm losing weight doing it.
    
    Mary
    

    Hang on, how can your body build up reserves if you're still consuming
    the same amount?
    
    I'm sorry, but I doubt your aerobic instructor.

	Never, never doubt your aerobics instructor!!!

	thousands of :-)

	Karen

Sort of on the same lines as this note.  Does anyone know what the "negative"
foods are?  (ie. I'm told celery takes more calories to burn than you get from
eating it)  If we knew what they were and people snacked on these "negative"
foods once in a while instead of some heavier snacks or even added these to 
recipies in which they're appropriate, it would help a bit too.

/T

    re .12
    
    >Eating 1200 calories in one sitting or eeting 100 calories in 12 sittings
    >makes no difference, weight-wise, all other things being equal.
     
    The point being made is that all other things are not equal.  The
    calories in vs. calories out equation was a first approach to an
    understanding of weight gain/loss, but research over the past ten years
    or so has shown that the process is more complex than that.  The rate
    at which calories are matabolized is not constant, and is affected not
    only by factors like age and heredity but also by the very factors
    themselves.  It has been shown by many researchers -- your beliefs
    notwithstanding -- that severely restricted diets, and fasting causes
    ones metabolic rate to slow down.  It has also been shown that increase
    in exercise causes ones metabolic rate to speed up.  So what does this
    mean?  It means that fasting or going on say a 600-calorie a day diet
    may decrease your caloric intake, but it also in and of itself changes
    the overall rate at which these calories are used.  And exercise, on the 
    other hand, not only burns calories while being done, but also in and of
    itself increases the overall rate at which calories are burned.
    
    -ellie

    No, no.  Assumptions are being made about this "diet?" that are wrong. 
    I read the entire book.  First, let me say, that there *is* a list of
    foods that you are free to eat each and every day. Then there is a list
    of foods to be eaten once or twice a week (one of them, not all of
    them, that is) if ever.  Then there is a list of foods you should only
    eat once a month or so.  Of course, the limited foods are the ones like
    chocolate cake, etc.
    
    Now, the idea is that you should not limit your intake of "real foods"
    and that yo will be either in a feast or famine cycle.  If you are in
    the feast cycle (you diet, you get hungry, you lose weight, then you
    start eating again and gain weight back - we all know how *that*
    feels! - that's the feast cycle) you will gain weight.  The trick is
    that you will be telling your body "It's ok, you'll never starve
    again."  Once your body is convinced, your appetite normalizes and your
    body gets rid of the "fat that it no longer REQUIRES" in order to
    survive.  Fat is unhealthy, but starving is unhealthy, too, so we need
    to teach our bodies whether it is likely to starve, or likely to get
    fat.
    
    	In a nutshell, that's what I got out of the book.  The difficult
    part is keeping real food around and saying no to the limited foods as
    often as we need to.  Oh, and being patient.
    
    		Hope this helps!
    
    			Kath